Salmond v Sturgeon round 4. What next?

[Cismyfatarse]

New thread.

What next, a panorama looking into tory contract sleaze executively produced by a the daughter of someone that won one of contracts? Bit surprising of the BBC!

Just watched NS on the news refuting the leak from the committee and saying "lets wait for the Hamilton findings" (paraphrasing)

@StatisticallyChallenged

I note this is specifically that she misled the inquiry - not parliament. There's not much detail but I'm taking this as her testimony was misleading rather than being about the original possible code breach of misleading parliament?

The Sky News report said that as the Inquiry is a Parliamentary body it counts as misleading Parliament.

They could be wrong though!

@fandabbydoozy

Its the Hamilton enquiry that matters though, isn't it?

Does this outcome matter much?

She gave her evidence under oath so if the Inquiry Committee decide she has not speaking the truth, is she at risk of perjury?

Yes you're right re the committee being part of parliament - I was trying to distinguish between that and the original "Lying to parliament" allegations

I find it very frustrating that because it has marginally gone against NS its automatically been decided since the beginning...... Well why waste more time and money then?
Whilst I am in no doubt the torys will have always voted against NS I don't believe the other parties would (given their refusal to back the tories on some of the no confidence votes).
Will be interesting what the line taken if the independent enquiry into ministerial code finds similar though......

@Scottishskifun

I find it very frustrating that because it has marginally gone against NS its automatically been decided since the beginning...... Well why waste more time and money then? Whilst I am in no doubt the torys will have always voted against NS I don't believe the other parties would (given their refusal to back the tories on some of the no confidence votes). Will be interesting what the line taken if the independent enquiry into ministerial code finds similar though......

I think it might actually have been quite a clever leak.

NS has now played her hand - she’s going to deny the legitimacy of the inquiry, she doesn’t accept its verdict.

Like she made herself judge and jury with Jim Sillars’ recent complaint that she breached the code by attacking Salmond during a covid briefing.

It’s not a good look for the First Minister to be placing herself beyond all criticism. It’s a bit Trump-y, in fact.

Watching Question Time on BBC1.
Jess Phillips has wiped the floor with Kirsten Oswald SNP with regard to Nicola Sturgeon’s ‘performance’ in front of the committee and made the point that women have been let down.

Ian Hislop on the panel also challenged the SNP narrative.
Finally, some proper scrutiny of the SNP and Sturgeon.

Just watched that bit on QT too. Jess Philips visibly angry with the way women have been let down by the failings of the SG, for which no-one has been held accountable, and the spin the SNP machine is putting on it. She's absolutely right. At best its incompetence, which should in itself mean heads roll, but the SNP is more interested in saving NS's neck. Also noticed the audience behind clapping vigorously when she was saying this.

Just caught Question time too. Thoroughly unimpressed with Kirsten - and quite rightly she was pulled up on "but Boris" because it has fuck all to do with the issue being discussed.

I noticed Fiona Philips did step in with "found not guilty" which was interesting and felt like a slight change in tone perhaps, or at least a noticeable arse covering, from the BBC.

It is so annoying when the Nats all pile in with what about Boris/Hancock/Patel
2 wrongs don’t make a right and if that’s all the mitigation they have then I think she is in trouble

Well exactly it's not as if any of us thinks tory contract scandals or bullying of home office officials, or anti semitism in the Labour Party is ok, or that we have to pick our poison...the SNP's constant presentation of Nicola as a victim is pretty wearing in itself, a mirror of how they see Scotland.

I don’t often see Private Eye these days - has it had much coverage of the issue so far? Hislop won’t think much of the attempts by the Crown Office to censor the press (Spectator and the Guido website), could get interesting!

I’ve just watched the QT clip with Jess Phillips and she is right those women’s case has been politicised and it paints a very bleak picture for women in Scotland.

It is interesting that the only time women are worthy of mention by the SG is when they’re being used as a weapon in their crusade against AS.

They also don’t seem particularly interested in believing any of the men who have brought allegations of sexual assault - the young man who says he was groped by the Westminster SNP Whip and the man whose penis was allegedly photographed without permission by an ex-SNP staffer (case now before court.)

It’s just these 9 women who must be believed.

I've just caught up with events - turns out that the statement I linked to earlier on the anonymous complainant defending LL against the accusation of 'interference' in the civil service Salmond investigation was sent by RCS who didn't redact the name of the complainant from the metadata on the document sent out.

The knee jerk reactions from RCS are just as farcical as the absurd levels of incompetence of scotgov's handling of the whole salmond complaints.

The committee leaking the decision on sturgeon & her misleading them/parliament is also farcically undermining their work & feeds into the SNP/sturgeon's knee jerk response to the findings of the committee that she was previously content to allow to do their job & accept their findings.

It all hinges on James Hamilton being able to haud his wheesht until his investigation & findings have been completed. Is it too much to hope that this will be an independent & reliable report?

Watched the panorama program too - so many attribute the conspiracy theory to Salmond when he's I think the only person who didn't say that. And the appalling situation that civil servants are left in limbo over with the farce of the salmond investigation & outstanding complaints, leaving no one able to be confident they can make a complaint & know it won't be weaponised for political purposes.

This entire spectacle is just an embarrassment to witness. They should all be bloody booted out.🤦🏻‍♀️

She won't resign. regardless of what the Hamilton enquiry says. She knows the SNP faithful will continue to vote for her and don't know (or care) what's going on.

Some are so blinkered, so set on independence, that nothing else matters, and some don't bother paying attention to the news.

SNP might lose a few seats, but they will still be the majority party. And Nicola will get away with it.

That's what she's banking on, and it stinks.

Kristen Oswald sounded like she was just regurgitating the party lines regardless, hence the 8 hours of testimony, deflection to Boris, mention handling the pandemic...I.e. all the things they think are NS's strengths will get people on side, but have bugger all to do with NS being found to have misled the committee. She sounded like she had set things she was allowed to say and it just looked odd when she carried on regardless when pulled up about it. As above this whole thing is looking very Trumpian NS doesn't accept the result of committee (that was stacked with nationalists) and its clear she won't do the honorable thing and go.

Oh, @Happinessisawarmcervix is that the voyeurism allegation?

Put this on the wrong thread, but it echoes what others have said here:

I just watched the kirsten oswald bit with jess Phillips and Ian hislop. About 10 minutes into the programme for anyone looking for it. It's just so depressing that she continues to sing from the same hymn sheet. 8 hours blah blah blah. Well apart from the fact there were breaks and lunch, if she had answered the questions then it might have taken less time. Yes to the politicking of the women and to the constant reference of Boris and mainly, do none of them ever have an original thought in their head? Sitting in her room with her EU flag, it's nonsense.

Apparently David Davis has said he'll go for round 2 in Westminster if the Spectator are forced to retract.

That was only put out a few hours ago; it looks to me like the Spectator are possibly making noise to give people time to see the original before finally complying...

Yes, the archived version can't be removed as the company is US based so not obligated to remove it. Which just serves to undermine the actions of the crown office further.

It's getting beyond farcical now.

Is anyone able to direct me to the right article? I can only get 4 free and I'll probably use those up looking at the wrong thing.

Yes the archive version can't be removed but I think they're also heel dragging on making the redactions to the live version. Could be wrong though.

www.spectator.co.uk/article/full-text-alex-salmond-s-submission-to-the-hamilton-inquiry