Salmond v Sturgeon round 4. What next?

[Cismyfatarse]

New thread.

According to the detailed Buzzfeed piece about him Sparling worked for “women I don’t agree with are Jeremy Hunts” Mhairi Black as well as Robertson. He seems quite enmeshed with the party.

Agree! I'm still fizzing about the delay in the OECD report on CFE til after the election. If its good, it'll be sold as "look how brilliant we are at education" and if it's bad it'll be "ah well, we are hamstrung by Westminster but we'll take things on board, but look, we've been voted in again so the People think we are brilliant at education".

Almost as if a decision made without a key piece of evidence is the same decision that would have been made had that evidence been available... Funny that! Wonder if SGs lawyers feel the same?

A bit more info from Sky

twitter.com/jamesmatthewsky/status/1372841108389179392?s=20

The arrogance of the further statement today. Any CEO of a global company would be long gone.
Does this come down to a talent issue- there is literally nobody to succeed her, therefore the independence dream is in tatters if she goes? The steel wall around NS has been formed and randomly, Scottish crime writers appear to be on door duty alongside all the SNPbots.

Gloves off article from Jim Sillars.

Puts into context the position the Committee found itself in. Also quite a lot between the lines.
yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/03/18/jim-sillars-hits-out/

If the OECD report was good I would bet it would be released by now

@WouldBeGood

If the OECD report was good I would bet it would be released by now

Yep! No question....that is a damning report. I don’t need the OECD to tell me the Scottish Government have utter trashed our children’s education.

There’s no chance the OECD report is good! Education is a mess! They’ve got very little in the way of good points to capitalise on for this election campaign. She sounded authoritative in Covid briefings- so what? The terrible figures are the reality behind those briefings. Just seeming confident that Scotland had gone slightly better than England is nowhere near enough. And older people and those in care homes have been treated appallingly in a country with an aging population!

*done

[quote SempreSuiGeneris]Gloves off article from Jim Sillars.

Puts into context the position the Committee found itself in. Also quite a lot between the lines.
yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/03/18/jim-sillars-hits-out/[/quote]
That's quite something isn't it.

This has a link to the spectator TV interview with DD & Fraser (editor, surname escapes me!) which is interesting.

Link to Tweet

Fraser Nelson, another "no true Scotsman" according to the nats

@StatisticallyChallenged

Fraser Nelson, another "no true Scotsman" according to the nats

There will soon be no true scots men or women left.

Just scrolling looking at the comments about how poor Nicola was put in a spot by AS and how she is the best leader ever etc. It's so bizarre.

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

twitter.com/i/status/1372180428208095236

Nelson. Not sure why I couldn't get it!

I see Patrick Harvie is moaning on Twitter about the committee pre judging the evidence. What are the bets he wouldn't be saying that if the result was the other way round?! As if the SNP members of the committee would vote against Nicola?! 🤔

There was a pro Indy majority on the committee as well!!!

The investigation should have been carried out independently so there could have been no (fewer?) accusations of bias.

The biased committee thing is infuriating. It's split on party lines, 4 parties vs 1. If there were 5 SNP and it had therefore split 5:4 for Sturgeon she wouldn't be saying it was biased, she'd be championing it as a superb example of our democratic institutions.

After complaining about institutions being called into disrepute the SNP are doing exactly that.

Yup. Opposition members from 4 very different political viewpoints voting against NS is an example of bias, whereas SNP members voting for her isn't. Not at all.

www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/nicola-sturgeons-office-accuses-alex-23758523

And so it continues...

"Nicola Sturgeon’s spokesperson has accused the Alex Salmond Inquiry of smearing her after they concluded she had misled Parliament.

The official also claimed the Committee had “deliberately ignored and suppressed evidence” and hit out at their “base political motives"."

Accusing anyone else of suppressing evidence in this matter is actually hilariously hypocritical

It genuinely is hitting the absurd levels of trumpian outrage when something goes against SNP script. That response accusing the committee of suppressing evidence? 🤪

Would that be the evidence that had to be wrung out of JS under threat of a no confidence vote? Or the evidence that the committee had to redact after publication after input by the LA? Or maybe the evidence that the committee weren't able to get because the notebooks had been lost in a freak yachting accident?

It's definitely a case of having your own truth.( And sticking to it!)

I'm currently listening to Craig Murray talk through some issues & not quite sure where it's heading.

@TheShadowyFeminist

It genuinely is hitting the absurd levels of trumpian outrage when something goes against SNP script. That response accusing the committee of suppressing evidence? 🤪

Dear lord. That’s just embarrassing. DARVO?

[quote SempreSuiGeneris]Gloves off article from Jim Sillars.

Puts into context the position the Committee found itself in. Also quite a lot between the lines.
yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/03/18/jim-sillars-hits-out/[/quote]
“We must hope that another MP was the recipient of the whistle blower’s material, and that in a fuller debate in the House of Commons he or she, along with Davis, will the lid will be lifted on everything.”

He or she, eh? Perhaps someone recently booted from the front bench and who understands the law?