Oor Nicola Sturgeon thread.

[SandyCromarty]

1 hour ago, TheScarf said:

Inverness Royal Academy (IRA) alumni - Tory wee guys

Millburn Academy alumni - porn actor level shaggers

And a Celtic and Scotland midfielder.

Edited March 4, 2021 by SandyCromarty

[sophia]

Is it the case that the graffiti artist hasN't quite grasped capitalisation?

[Gordon EF]

11 hours ago, DA Baracus said:

I note some folk have mentioned that Salmond is seemingly going to submit 'further evidence'.

Why would this be allowed, and why could it possibly be considered admissible? Surely all evidence should have been submitted at the first time of asking and only new evidence that was not available and/or had not come to light at the time the rest was submitted would be valid, otherwise the process is very transparently utter nonsense and completely without merit and validity.

There's a pattern to all this "evidence". It's basically the equivalent of sweetie wife gossip completely out of context where folk can say "I'm just asking questions", "doesn't this look suspicious", etc, etc. As soon as Sturgeon is given the opportunity to face the accusations, she answers it all easily. So he's got to wait until Sturgeon's been in front of the hearing so instead of being able to answer his innuendo, it's left to stew in the media.

I admired Alex Salmond for what he achieved and to be honest, that admiration has held up far more than it should have through all of this. I don't doubt he feels a sense of injustice about the court case but he's acting like a petulant coward now.

[Gordon EF]

2 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:

The fact the UK BBC news have barely mentioned it this morning suggests Nicola did alright.

Aye. Newsnight after Salmond - full episode working through every detail. Newsnight after Sturgeon - 5 minutes and "well we don't know how this will play out".

That's as good evidence of a win for Sturgeon as you're ever likely to get.

[Gordon EF]

33 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Ah yes, the SNP, the well known far-right, minority hating, insular political party of Scotland.

Didn't their leader basically say their number one goal in politics was to to crack down on gypsies? That's pretty Nazi-ish if you ask me.

Or am I thinking of a different party?

[paolo2143]

55 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said:

Anyone know when James Hamilton will produce these findings? Early May perhaps?

The thing is the Scots Tories/opposition and media's over the top attacks on PM in advance of yesterday's hearing backfired spectacularly and actually galvanized support round SNP/FM.

They will never admit it but they hugely underestimated her ability as a Politician (not for first time), they thought she would crumble. However she came out of yesterday looking dignified, composed & displaying the one quality the likes of Alex Salmond or Ruth Davidson/Douglas Ross don't have, empathy. The losers were certain Tory members of the committee hat look like raving lunatics.

The fact that they had openly declared they had pre judged the FM before she had even given her evidence was premature ejaculation of highest order, they came across like an angry lynch mob from a kangaroo court. In a way they have now made her position more secure.

The only thing that can do permanent damage to FM now is if James Hamilton report finds that she knowingly and deliberately broke the Ministerial code.

If he finds that in trying to comply with one section of Ministerial code, that she may have unintentionally breached another part, I think she can ride that out. The public now have sympathy with her and if they believe any breach is unintentional, then I believe they will not demand her head, especially in light of perceived with hunt of last week.

They also will note that the Scottish Tories/media are utter hypocrites demanding she resign over any unintentional breach when they turn a complete blind eye to the corruption down in Westminster , such as PPE contracts scandal and PM over ruling his won inquiry that found Ms Patel had broken Ministerial code for serious bullying offences.

It quite rightly paints them as hypocrites with zero credibility and who are clearly only interested in scandal if it can be used to remove FM.

That being said I hope Tory media and the UK Govt don't start to pressurise Mr Hamilton on his findings, as nothing would surprise me.

[GiGi]

6 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

Aye. Newsnight after Salmond - full episode working through every detail. Newsnight after Sturgeon - 5 minutes and "well we don't know how this will play out".

That's as good evidence of a win for Sturgeon as you're ever likely to get.

Article on Matt Hancock confirmed in court to be acting unlawfully, this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56125462

Nicola Sturgeon and the Salmond inquiry:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56263825

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-55996021

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55738179

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-56166753

All of the links on Sturgeon are linked on the first article. No further articles are linked to Matt Hancock's blatant corruption. The difference in resources allocated to each story by the BBC is fucking staggering.

[Paco]

Vote of no confidence sounds like it’s going ahead.

Bit of a no-lose scenario for the Tories. If Labour/Lib Dems join them it gives a real chance of getting rid of Sturgeon, if they don’t then the Tories earn staunch points and win a trickle of votes from boomers who hate Nippy.

Patrick Harvie sounded unconvinced at best at this stage so even a unionist pact is very unlikely to succeed.

[Mark Connolly]

Imagine the scenes if you were able to have confidence votes on the leaders of the opposition parties

[Sherrif John Bunnell]

Harvie needs a decent number of SNP voters to give the Greens their list vote, so it would be madness if he backed the Tories here.

[Dons_1988]

17 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

Aye. Newsnight after Salmond - full episode working through every detail. Newsnight after Sturgeon - 5 minutes and "well we don't know how this will play out".

That's as good evidence of a win for Sturgeon as you're ever likely to get.

BBC breakfast gave it as much prominence as the budget yesterday morning. Not a peep in the headlines today other than brief coverage on Reporting Scotland.

[GiGi]

3 minutes ago, Sherrif John Bunnell said:

Harvie needs a decent number of SNP voters to give the Greens their list vote, so it would be madness if he backed the Tories here.

I take it this is still the same in most parts of Scotland, best use of votes is SNP/Green.

[NotThePars]

Patrick Harvie would have to have sustained a massive head injury to support a bitter Tory VONC given Sturgeon scooshed it yesterday.

[Lurkst]

24 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

Aye. Newsnight after Salmond - full episode working through every detail. Newsnight after Sturgeon - 5 minutes and "well we don't know how this will play out".

That's as good evidence of a win for Sturgeon as you're ever likely to get.

To cut them some slack they did have a UK budget to discuss last night.

 

[Saltire]

Looking at the front pages, only the comedic rags (Daily Express and Daily Mail) are bad. The others look apprpriate/ok at a glance.

Scotland's papers: Salmond 'should say sorry' and budget tax rise - BBC News

[SANTAN]

10 hours ago, HTG said:

Agreed. At some point soon he's going to need a hand on the shoulder and "enjoy your night pal". 

You guys are at it. Absolutely indignant that no more evidence should be seen. Nothing to see here move along. Sturgeon has appeared at a select committee so the matter is closed. Lord give me strength.

[Gordon EF]

1 minute ago, NotThePars said:

Patrick Harvie would have to have sustained a massive head injury to support a bitter Tory VONC given Sturgeon scooshed it yesterday.

Aye. You'd have to imagine that the Greens don't even want a VONC and that even if they did, it would be a fairly catastrophically stupid move to support it. Given it's not binding, I reckon even if the Greens did side with the unionists and consign themselves to the electoral bin, Sturgeon would get away with just ignoring it.

[SANTAN]

1 hour ago, AndyM said:

You really don't. Whether you are pro or against the SNP or the Tories or whatever there is a real vile element on Twitter that trawls the depths.

Janella is one of the high priestesses of the Yoon windowlicker element on Twitter and is to be avoided much as you would wish to avoid Rev Stuart Campbell of the Indy movement who is basically a fucking w****r.

You seem like you're doing a lot to buck the trend. 

[oneteaminglasgow]

8 minutes ago, Paco said:

Vote of no confidence sounds like it’s going ahead.

Bit of a no-lose scenario for the Tories. If Labour/Lib Dems join them it gives a real chance of getting rid of Sturgeon, if they don’t then the Tories earn staunch points and win a trickle of votes from boomers who hate Nippy.

Patrick Harvie sounded unconvinced at best at this stage so even a unionist pact is very unlikely to succeed.

I know Ross Greer is a bit of a fanny, but he’s (correctly) called out the Conservatives for flagrant political opportunism around the no confidence stuff, and I can’t imagine he wouldn’t have cleared that with the other Greens. Definitely doesn’t sound like they’ll support it.

https://mobile.twitter.com/scottishgreens/status/1367254530015043584

[Gordon EF]

1 minute ago, Stormzy said:

You guys are at it. Absolutely indignant that no more evidence should be seen. Nothing to see here move along. Sturgeon has appeared at a select committee so the matter is closed. Lord give me strength.

It's not really that though is it? If Salmond had evidence worth hearing that he could give to the hearing, why not do it before he appeared and before Nicola Sturgeon appeared. What possible reason is there to wait until Sturgeon's finished and then announce you have more? It looks desperate and pathetic.