Holyrood Elections 2021

[Orraloon]

32 minutes ago, aaid said:

The most serious complainant was the one which has been characterised - by Salmond - as the "sleepy cuddle".  That resulted in the Not Proven verdict on a charge of attempted rape.  This was where he was in he'd asked a senior civil servant - after they'd been drinking - to go with him to his bedroom in Bute House to finish off some paperwork late at night.  He made an advance towards her - there's a difference of opinion over how serious and how prolonged it was - he was rebuffed and backed off.   The complainer raised it unofficially - there was no route at that time to raise an formal complaint - and he apologised for his behaviour.   None of that is disputed.    The other complaint was less serious, again I believe what's disputed was the seriousness and intent and whether it amounted to criminality.

I'm not aware of any witnesses being proven to have lied in court, when that happens perjury charges tend to follow.  What I have seen is a couple of things.  Firstly people trying to contend that because someone is found not guilty then by definition witnesses who say otherwise are by definition lying which is obvious bollocks.  That's a general theme.

There's also a particular point that is contended which is where the other charge of attempted rape was alleged to have taken place in Bute House after a dinner.   There's conflicting evidence as to whether or not the complainer was present or not.  I've seen people claim that because a witness claimed that she wasn't there that proves that the complainer was lying.   It doesn't course prove anything of the sort, nor does the complainer claiming she was there prove the contrary.   

It's just a case of people cherry picking the bits of evidence that suits their view and ignoring the bits which counter that.   

FWIW, I'm personally sceptical about that witness's evidence but you couldn't go as far to say that you thought she was lying.  I'm of the opinion that it happened but that she wasn't minded to pursue it at the time for whatever reason but that she changed her mind when the two original complaints became public.
 

Was that the hair pinging incident? I've forgotten most of the stuff I read about it at the time.

 

[aaid]

9 minutes ago, duncan II said:

Right, okay. But wait a minute, maybe I'm not following. If a complainant made a complaint but wasn't actually there, how can there be any other conclusion reached other than she was lying?

There was conflicting evidence.  As I remember it there were supposedly 4 - or 3 depending on who you believe - people present at the dinner.   Salmond was one, Ken Stott was another, Samantha Barber - a businesswoman - was the third and the fourth was the complainer.

Salmond and Barber both said there were only three people there.  Ken Stott didn't give evidence in person - he had COVID apparently, but a video of a police interview was shown.  I think he couldn't remember much about who was or wasn't there.   So 2 1/2 to 1 1/2.   Even if you say 2 v 1, it casts doubt on the evidence of the complainer but doesn't prove she was lying.

[Orraloon]

3 hours ago, phart said:

 

I'm waiting till the economic strategy is placed by ALBA. That was Salmonds weakness (as the majority said on here in the post mortem) in 2014 on strategy. Let's see what lessons have been learned and new strategies implemented. I've not ruled out voting ALBA since Wightman is away north.

As an aside is there any independence blog that does "analysis" properly. That blog reads like a buzzfeed top 7 milkshape toppings in it's depth. "not necessarily actively opposed to independence" is a belter of sentence saying nothing but implying everything. Who are these people? What is the evidence for the claim? Why does the evidence support your conclusion? What are the confounding variables that could disrupt your claim.

instead we get

"the top place on the SNP list in each region is held by a very mixed bag of individuals, and in some cases their Alba counterparts are obviously superior.  The clearest example of all is in Lothian, where it's a no-brainer that Kenny MacAskill would be a better list MSP than Graham Campbell.  "

So much rot that's considered good cause the reader agrees with it.

 

His currency union idea was a big blunder and I'm sure he now recognises that. He failed to foresee how much ammunition that would give to the Unionists. Then he failed to react quickly and strongly enough when they said no to a currency union. I would like to see us start to make plans for our own new currency. Just keep it simple. Also using the GERS figures was a major flaw.

As for the article. It's his opinion about how he sees things. I don't think he has never claimed to be impartial. From memory he has covered most of those 7 points in more detail in recent months. I think he just put that together as a concise collection of his thoughts. Possibly for the benefit of people who don't want to allocate much time to reading about it?

I don't think a good analysis blog exists. If it does, I haven't seen it. Everybody seems to be on one side of the other. Sometimes they change sides right enough.

 

Edited April 13, 2021 by Orraloon

[thplinth]

Yeah she was lying.

Woman H especially should be in jail for perjury as should a few others surrounding Nicola. 

Smears, lies and hiding behind the anonymity laws.

That is the game and always was.

[aaid]

24 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

Was that the hair pinging incident? I've forgotten most of the stuff I read about it at the time.

 

It's the Stirling Castle incident where he allegedly grabbed the complainer's backside while they were getting photographed.   She raised it with her line manager the following day.

[thplinth]

Have the SNP laid out their plan for currency and central bank come independence? I missed it.

Can someone post a link to it? Ta.

[Orraloon]

3 minutes ago, aaid said:

It's the Stirling Castle incident where he allegedly grabbed the complainer's backside while they were getting photographed.   She raised it with her line manager the following day.

He didn't admit to that one though? Or did he? As far as he is concerned it didn't happen, which was backed up by other witnesses. Why would it be a resignation matter if it didn't happen?

From what I remember, and I could well be wrong here, the things he admitted to were, the sleepy cuddle, hair pinging and a previous relationship with one of the complainers. And, the previous relationship wasn't actually complained about. I could be mis remembering though?

[phart]

27 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

His currency union idea was a big blunder and I'm sure he now recognises that. He failed to foresee how much ammunition that would give to the Unionists. Then he failed to react quickly and strongly enough when they said no to a currency union. I would like to see us start to make plans for our own new currency. Just keep it simple. Also using the GERS figures was a major flaw.

As for the article. It's his opinion about how he sees things. I don't think he has never claimed to be impartial. From memory he has covered most of those 7 points in more detail in recent months. I think he just put that together as a concise collection of his thoughts. Possibly for the benefit of people who don't want to allocate much time to reading about it?

I don't think a good analysis blog exists. If it does, I haven't seen it. Everybody seems to be on one side of the other. Sometimes they change sides right enough.

 

Exactly. The Economis Mark Blyth has had a few good podcasts about it as well over the last few months. Be interesting to see what lessons have been learned and how they intend to move forward with their expedited timetable for independence.

[Orraloon]

9 minutes ago, thplinth said:

Have the SNP laid out their plan for currency and central bank come independence? I missed it.

Can someone post a link to it? Ta.

They commissioned a study and that was one of the main recommendations but I think that is as far as it has gone. There might be something in the manifesto which comes out on Thursday. Cannae wait. 

[thplinth]

Ohh the Stirling Castle accuser... interesting choice.

Again remember aaid is hiding behind the anonymity laws to re-smear Salmond, he was not at the trial and only the jury saw all the evidence so what is reported is limited. 

However Craig Murray commented about Woman K.

For example the second original civil service accuser - who met Nicola's Principal Private Secretary on 21 and 22 November to discuss her allegation, 10 weeks before Nicola claims she knew - is the woman who claims Alex touched her bum during a photoshoot at Stirling Castle.    

Two eyewitnesses, immediately before and after in the photoshoot queue, were standing 3 ft either side at that exact moment and both were watching. Both testified on oath it did not happen. The actual photographer did not testify but also questioned by police and saw nothing.

The SNP have had a shit few days so it is back to smearing Salmond. It is getting more than a little transparent.

[thplinth]

7 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

They commissioned a study and that was one of the main recommendations but I think that is as far as it has gone. There might be something in the manifesto which comes out on Thursday. Cannae wait. 

Yeah that is what I thought, the SNP have zilch basically, 7 years after the failed referendum where that lack of plan was considered a major weakness. That has always struck me as very strange, as if they are not preparing for it all it seems. All lip service.

It is actually a very tricky thing to lay out but still...

[aaid]

11 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

He didn't admit to that one though? Or did he? As far as he is concerned it didn't happen, which was backed up by other witnesses. Why would it be a resignation matter if it didn't happen?

From what I remember, and I could well be wrong here, the things he admitted to were, the sleepy cuddle, hair pinging and a previous relationship with one of the complainers. And, the previous relationship wasn't actually complained about. I could be mis remembering though?

The other witness was Tasmina though and she didn't say it didn't happen rather that she didn't see anything, which is a kind of "if it wasn't on YouTube it didn't happen". 

Maybe that one on it's own wouldn't be a resigning offence, it would be an almighty scandal though, maybe he could tough it out.  The other one, no chance of him staying in post.

[thplinth]

Again here are the main plotters in the Salmond Stitch-up... there are others who are not named.

Leslie Evans - Permanent Secretary to FM
Liz Lloyd - Chief of Staff to FM
Judith MacKinnon - Head of People Advice for SNPG
Peter Murrell - CEO of SNP and Husband to FM
Sue Ruddick - COO of the SNP 
Ian McCann - Compliance Officer of SNP
Nicola Richards - Head of People for SNPG
Barbara Allison - Director of Communications for SNPG

It is everyone around Nicola. Her "inner circle".

If you knew who the accusers were, the messages between them all... well let's just say that is why they went to great lengths to hide it all from you, still are.

[PapofGlencoe]

Is it usually this late in the day you get manifestos?  

Press are too busy cringing over scottish history or the latest twatter fall out.

Glory the days of Andy Kerr's knife policy.  

[ParisInAKilt]

1 hour ago, Orraloon said:

His currency union idea was a big blunder and I'm sure he now recognises that. He failed to foresee how much ammunition that would give to the Unionists. Then he failed to react quickly and strongly enough when they said no to a currency union. I would like to see us start to make plans for our own new currency. Just keep it simple. Also using the GERS figures was a major flaw.

As for the article. It's his opinion about how he sees things. I don't think he has never claimed to be impartial. From memory he has covered most of those 7 points in more detail in recent months. I think he just put that together as a concise collection of his thoughts. Possibly for the benefit of people who don't want to allocate much time to reading about it?

I don't think a good analysis blog exists. If it does, I haven't seen it. Everybody seems to be on one side of the other. Sometimes they change sides right enough.

 

You’d hope the SNP would have a good currency plan in place by now and a strategy to convince voters and combat unionist scaremongering etc. 

[thplinth]

The Sun is only printing what many have already heard. Loon knows what this story is about.

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/5290002/nicola-sturgeon-snp-private-life-rumours-gossip-not-true/

And here is another that is doing the rounds which the Express this time has picked up on. 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1418932/Nicola-sturgeon-news-snp-latest-sturgeon-legal-career

There seems to be more to these stories than just idle gossip.

[thplinth]

During the inquiry Jackie Baillie asked Nicola Sturgeon a very cryptic question about whether she was aware of some story that the Daily Record was about to break sometime in 2018 but which it didn't in the end, and instead later ran with another story.

Well it ties in with that Express story, allegedly.

https://petercherbi.blogspot.com/2021/03/first-interests-judge-recommended-for_8.html

It has since come to light this story was filed with a Scottish newspaper for publication in June 2018 – after several other newspapers refused to publish the story.

According to now deleted tweets from a former journalist which have now been widely published online – a story on the complaint regarding Nicola Sturgeon’s failure to provide adequate legal services to a victim of domestic violence, and the identification of several counts of professional misconduct against Ms Sturgeon by currently serving Sheriff Olga Pasportnikov - had support from one editor to be published – until a ‘Political editor’ at the same newspaper voted the story down.

The deleted tweet goes on to allege that some weeks later, the same newspaper which did not publish the story on Nicola Sturgeon - was leaked details of the harassment complaints against Alex Salmond...

[exile]

So it's the STV leaders debates tonight. It's a shame Alba isn't there because I think it would show a fairer, more balanced panel (3 indy v 3 unionist) and show a better breadth of opinion across the Yes movement.

I've found the Greens' contribution above par this campaign. They have actually some fresh ideas (about Scotland joining the Nordic Council and Arctic Council) and rattling the sabre over nuclear weapons, in contrast to the SNP's more cautious approach. I liked the fact they didn't just give the usual old waffle about Prince Philip, and ruffled a few monarchist feathers into the bargain.  Being not the party of Government allows them to be a bit more 'bolshie' and forthright.

To be honest I'd hoped that is the kind of thing Alba would be doing, putting the positive case for independence and with more creative ideas for indy, that the SNP as (till now) governing party as less able to do. I am a bit disappointed that so much of Alba's campaign so far seems to be not about how differently they'd achieve independence, or what they'd do to get EU/UN recognition faster; but mainly procedural arguments about the voting system and supermajority, that are mainily about redistributing Yesser's votes rather than winning more people to Yes. Like others I look forward to hearing of their economic plans and plans for independence. Maybe later in the campaign we'll get to hear from them in more detail in a debate and we can hear their ideas when more fully developed.

[Orraloon]

4 minutes ago, exile said:

So it's the STV leaders debates tonight. It's a shame Alba isn't there because I think it would show a fairer, more balanced panel (3 indy v 3 unionist) and show a better breadth of opinion across the Yes movement.

I've found the Greens' contribution above par this campaign. They have actually some fresh ideas (about Scotland joining the Nordic Council and Arctic Council) and rattling the sabre over nuclear weapons, in contrast to the SNP's more cautious approach. I liked the fact they didn't just give the usual old waffle about Prince Philip, and ruffled a few monarchist feathers into the bargain.  Being not the party of Government allows them to be a bit more 'bolshie' and forthright.

To be honest I'd hoped that is the kind of thing Alba would be doing, putting the positive case for independence and with more creative ideas for indy, that the SNP as (till now) governing party as less able to do. I am a bit disappointed that so much of Alba's campaign so far seems to be not about how differently they'd achieve independence, or what they'd do to get EU/UN recognition faster; but mainly procedural arguments about the voting system and supermajority, that are mainily about redistributing Yesser's votes rather than winning more people to Yes. Like others I look forward to hearing of their economic plans and plans for independence. Maybe later in the campaign we'll get to hear from them in more detail in a debate and we can hear their ideas when more fully developed.

I think that is the main message they need to get across, if their plan is to work to any extent. IMO, they still haven't managed to get that message across. Most folk still don't understand how the voting system works. If they can't get that first message across then their other policies may turn out to irrelevant. This is ALBAs biggest problem, IMO. How do they educate the population in such a short period of time.

 

[hampden_loon2878]

1 hour ago, thplinth said:

The Sun is only printing what many have already heard. Loon knows what this story is about.

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/5290002/nicola-sturgeon-snp-private-life-rumours-gossip-not-true/

And here is another that is doing the rounds which the Express this time has picked up on. 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1418932/Nicola-sturgeon-news-snp-latest-sturgeon-legal-career

There seems to be more to these stories than just idle gossip.

That is why Alba is so important just now, there’s something well off with the murrells private lives, i just get a really bad feeling that there is a lot of truth to the rumours and will be exposed at the most effective time to cause, indy voters may well need an alternative. The fact that it's been kept out of the public domain is worrying and causes me to go down the route of conspiracy 

[exile]

22 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

I think that is the main message they need to get across, if their plan is to work to any extent. IMO, they still haven't managed to get that message across. Most folk still don't understand how the voting system works. If they can't get that first message across then their other policies may turn out to irrelevant. This is ALBAs biggest problem, IMO. How do they educate the population in such a short period of time.

 

I see your point, but you could argue the opposite, that if Alba gave people a more positive reason to vote for them (like the Greens) then people would be happy to give them their vote on the list, irrespective of 'gaming' d'Hondt.

I guess it boils down to what the party is really about.

If Alba was simply a 'neutral' indy-only 'vehicle' devised to max the vote (like maybe A4I was) then it could be just about persuading a subset of current SNP voters how best to use their list vote (which IMHO should honestly point to where SNP2 or Green2 would work better, and to not stand in regions where SNP or Green already have a chance.). They would only need to appeal to the logic of the list, in a positive way, and would not need to attack or smear other indy parties. We wouldn't need to know their opinions on obscure matters which could be sorted out after indy.

Alternatively, if Alba really want to offer an alternative vision of Scotland, an alternative vision of independence, an alternative vision of society, that they really want to promote over and instead of an SNP or Green worldview then they need to spell out what it is, and sell it more positively IMHO.  As an example, I use the Greens again, who are also competing with SNP but as I see it in a more positive constructive way.

Anyway, enough about Alba for one day. Time to watch some good old fashioned slagging off and stair heid rammy?

Edited April 13, 2021 by exile

[AlfieMoon]

59 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

That is why Alba is so important just now, there’s something well off with the murrells private lives, i just get a really bad feeling that there is a lot of truth to the rumours and will be exposed at the most effective time to cause, indy voters may well need an alternative. The fact that it's been kept out of the public domain is worrying and causes me to go down the route of conspiracy 

When do you think the ‘most effective time’ would be? 
 

Would it be before 6th May election? 
After the 6th May election? 
Or during the Indyref2 campaign? 

Edited April 13, 2021 by AlfieMoon

[hampden_loon2878]

2 hours ago, AlfieMoon said:

When do you think the ‘most effective time’ would be? 
 

Would it be before 6th May election? 
After the 6th May election? 
Or during the Indyref2 campaign? 

“IF” there was any dirt to bring to light, during a indy ref campaign would be most effective as if we lose another one its over however i think they would shit themselves and do it before the mays election if it looked like it was going to be a land slide 

[hampden_loon2878]

Anyone watch the debate tonight? How did it go? 

[tartandon]

3 hours ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

That is why Alba is so important just now, there’s something well off with the murrells private lives, i just get a really bad feeling that there is a lot of truth to the rumours and will be exposed at the most effective time to cause, indy voters may well need an alternative. The fact that it's been kept out of the public domain is worrying and causes me to go down the route of conspiracy 

I think the point of peak effectiveness to expose any of the supposed rumours I previously heard may well have passed.

We have been living under stringent restrictions for the past year, meaning that none of the stuff I heard about would have been possible recently. The First Minister has been at pains to point out that she hasn't seen her parents for ages. I'm sure all the tabloids are following all her movements very closely, looking for even tiny slip-ups - as evidenced by the big deal they made out of the story about her being without a mask at a funeral wake.

The papers would be all over any breach of travel restrictions whether that be to go and see her parents in Ayr,  travel to Peebles for the afternoon,  go to Bridge of Allan for a couple of hours, or do anything else that breaches covid restrictions. So we can safely assume that she hasn't being engaging in any of the rumoured activity in at least the last year.

If there were any kompromat, it would have to pre-date the pandemic and will have lost the potential sensationalist tabloid effect that would have benefited from contemporaneous reporting.

Of course, you may be referring to something completely different for which the impact of the story would not be diminished in any way by everything that has happened in the last year