Londonwell Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, strichener said: He was previously a party member and resigned from the party whilst the court case was running. The SNP have no basis to exclude him from joining the party if that is a route he wants to go down (which is what his statement at the time of his resignation indicated he would do). I can’t imagine that you’re not bright enough to realise that the situation isn’t as simple as that. Edited April 13, 2020 by Londonwell 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londonwell Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 17 minutes ago, welshbairn said: SLAB's wet dream. Even in that scenario SLAB would still be irrelevant. They can dream all they like. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 1 minute ago, Londonwell said: I can’t imagine that you’re not bright enough to realise that the situation isn’t as simple as that. Isn't it? Perhaps you can enlighten us all with why a previous member of the party who resigned their membership at a time when: a) they were being improperly investigated by the Scottish Government and b) was later charged and cleared in a court of law of charges arising from a) shouldn't be able to rejoin the party. It may be inconvenient for the current party leadership but if any of the rumours are true regarding the actions of factions within the SNP then the current leadership may already be untenable. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londonwell Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 3 minutes ago, strichener said: Isn't it? Perhaps you can enlighten us all with why a previous member of the party who resigned their membership at a time when: a) they were being improperly investigated by the Scottish Government and b) was later charged and cleared in a court of law of charges arising from a) shouldn't be able to rejoin the party. It may be inconvenient for the current party leadership but if any of the rumours are true regarding the actions of factions within the SNP then the current leadership may already be untenable. I work for the party so I won’t be getting into anything to do with it I’m afraid. I am sure you are smart enough to read between the lines of what is going on yourself. All the information is out there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 1 minute ago, Londonwell said: I work for the party so I won’t be getting into anything to do with it I’m afraid. I am sure you are smart enough to read between the lines of what is going on yourself. All the information is out there. Fair enough, we'll leave it there Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrewDon Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 What would be the justification for not accepting him as a member, if he applied? Genuine question. I'm unsure why he wouldn't be allowed back if he hasn't been found to have committed any illegal acts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detournement Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 6 minutes ago, DrewDon said: What would be the justification for not accepting him as a member, if he applied? Genuine question. I'm unsure why he wouldn't be allowed back if he hasn't been found to have committed any illegal acts. Nicola doesn't like him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 45 minutes ago, strichener said: they were being improperly investigated by the Scottish Government Only the process was found to be improper, I don't think anyone thinks the allegations didn't merit investigation, even though it turned out they didn't meet the level of criminality. Any HR department in any organisation that ignored them would be rightly condemned. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 (edited) 11 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Only the process was found to be improper, I don't think anyone thinks the allegations didn't merit investigation, even though it turned out they didn't meet the level of criminality. Any HR department in any organisation that ignored them would be rightly condemned. The investigation was found to be conducted improperly. The weight of merit of the accusations and the right to due process for the accused were both adversely affected by the incompetence of the investigations. The interesting thing about this episode is that the original complainants appear not to be questioning how such a snafu was allowed to happen nor seeking to ensure that such mistakes cannot be allowed to re-occur and that people are held accountable for this incompetence. I wonder why this is? Edited April 13, 2020 by strichener 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 1 hour ago, welshbairn said: SLAB's wet dream. In what way? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 5 minutes ago, strichener said: The investigation was found to be conducted improperly. The weight of merit of the accusations and the right to due process for the accused were both adversely affected by the incompetence of the investigations. The interesting thing about this episode is that the original complainants appear not to be questioning how such a snafu was allowed to happen nor seeking to ensure that such mistakes cannot be allowed to re-occur and that people are held accountable for this incompetence. I wonder why this is? Probably because they're more concerned with the facts than procedural and legal arguments. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 11 minutes ago, NotThePars said: In what way? Having Cherry overthrowing or even seriously challenging Sturgeon in the run up to the Holyrood election would leave them like the Simpsons Dad when he stole the internet. It's got zero chance of happening so it's a bit irrelevant. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 If I was looking to take over the party I might align myself with the parts of the party that actively engage with internal party democracy and get their candidates elected at conference rather than the extremely online but then again I'm not a fancy clever lawyer so who knows. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 .......for the cause of independence.....this is just wrong.....very wrong!!!!! The current management of the snp have no desire to get us their. It's surely just SNP fanboys who are in denial now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 By the looks of it he is looking to make Sturgeon's position untenable - if it isn't already - and then support Joanna Cherry in the leadership contest. The SNP payroll squealing that Sturgeon's way is the only way to get Indyref2 seems a bit desperate. The Tories aren't granting a referendum and Starmer probably won't either. This is the beginning of a struggle over the SNP's relationship with the UK state. Joanna Cherry has more chance of winning the SLab leadership than being SNP leader. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 16 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Having Cherry overthrowing or even seriously challenging Sturgeon in the run up to the Holyrood election would leave them like the Simpsons Dad when he stole the internet. It's got zero chance of happening so it's a bit irrelevant. I still don't get it. Half the activists I know keep claiming Slab can win next year which is lunacy but will be spitefully funny when the vote collapses further. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted April 13, 2020 Share Posted April 13, 2020 45 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Probably because they're more concerned with the facts than procedural and legal arguments. Putting yourself in their position you would be happy with the way this was handled? I seriously doubt it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted April 24, 2020 Share Posted April 24, 2020 Craig Murray has been charged with contempt of court for blogs he wrote during the Salmond trial. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted April 24, 2020 Share Posted April 24, 2020 46 minutes ago, ICTChris said: Craig Murray has been charged with contempt of court for blogs he wrote during the Salmond trial. I wonder whether any MSM journalists will also be charged. Those MSM journalists who, in the main, are anti-independence. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsimButtHitsASix Posted April 24, 2020 Share Posted April 24, 2020 Depends if they were in contempt of court or not 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.