Dear All
Did you watch SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon give her 'story' at the Salmond Inquiry? If you did you would have realised that the boast that Nicola Sturgeon 'relished' the chance to give evidence was palatable drivel. Her 'evidence' if it could be called that could best be summed up as:
"I
don't agree with that characterisation."
"I
don't recall."
"That is not my recollection."
She wasn't in my opinion there to give evidence, she was there, so she could say she appeared there.
I would like to take you back to what Sturgeon did say, when asked about the Geoff Aberdein meeting on the 29th March, she said she forgot about it. That's her story, apparently being told that her mentor and friend being accused of sexual misconduct simply slipped her mind.
I don't believe that!
Another thing which I don't believe which you should focus in on is when Nicola Sturgeon said that Alex Salmond worked out the identity of one of the civil servants who accused him of sexual misconduct by trawling social media.
Why is Nicola Sturgeon making this claim now?
Well, the timing is rather suspicious because it has been revealed by Geoff Aberdein, Salmond's former Chief of Staff that he was given the name of an accuser at a meeting. Aberdein then convey this information to other people, including Kevin Pringle and Duncan Hamilton QC. So, here we have Nicola Sturgeon whose memory is apparently so bad that she can't remember an explosive meeting about sexual misconduct of her alleged friend and mentor of 30 years, but suddenly her memory dramatically improves to save someone very close to her. Sturgeon said Alex Salmond knew the identity of one of the two women who raised a formal complaint against him by checking the Scottish Government’s account on the image-sharing website Flickr, where official photographs are uploaded.
To me, that sounds entirely un-plausible. Why un-plausible? You have to look at Sturgeon's track record, this is a woman who has a history of claiming to know nothing about nothing, whether it be in government or as the local MSP in Glasgow Southside. We are to be expected all of a sudden, to swallow a new narrative that she is morphed into Ellery Queen, ace detective?
So, here is a few questions.
1/
How did Alex Salmond know the date, time and place of the alleged incident?
2/
How did Alex Salmond know to look at the Scottish Government’s account on Flickr?
3/
Are we to believe that Geoff Aberdein is a liar?
4/
Are we to believe that Kevin Pringle, former SNP Comms guy is a liar?
5/ Are we to believe that Duncan Hamilton QC, former SNP MSP is a liar?
6/ Are we to believe that Geoff Aberdein lied to Pringle and Hamilton, his close friends?
Either Sturgeon's close pal told Aberdein or she didn't. If that is the case, then is Sturgeon really saying that Salmond, Aberdein, Pringle and Hamilton are involved in a separate conspiracy to bring down a Scottish Government official? To me this smacks of something which rings rather hollow, it seems like a manufactured answer which is beyond Sturgeon's mental capacity.
So, this begs the question, if she didn't think this up, who did?
Like in any good mystery, you have to pick your way through the tsunami of information, and what you are looking for, is stepping stones to the truth. In the case of Sturgeon's answer to explain away how Alex Salmond knew the identity of a complainer, it flags up and strongly suggests that he wasn't originally told. After all if he had been told previously, why would he have to look at a Scottish Government’s account on Flickr? Also if he was going to find out later on in the official complaint, why bother? Do you see how Nicola Sturgeon's answer walked backwards doesn't gel?
Today's session by Nicola Sturgeon was as expected, we were to be told nothing by an extremely defensive individual. I expect that she probably thought her 'story' session was a success. But it wasn't really, this was billed as Sturgeon having her say, this was supposed to be her relishing to take part, to explain away every concern why there wasn't a conspiracy against Alex Salmond. To cast doubt back onto Salmond, but in the end, the doubts never left Sturgeon and her secret cabal. If Sturgeon thought she had save herself, and her pal who allegedly gave Geoff Aberdein the name of a complainer, she thought wrong. And it seems that any hope of a victory celebration will be short lived. Alex Salmond has lodged a formal complaint about an official who is alleged to have disclosed the name of a woman who made claims against him.
Time for a quote from Sturgeon's husband, Peter Murrell;
"TBH [to be honest] the more fronts he is having to firefight on the better for all complainers."
It seems that now the more fronts Nicola Sturgeon is having to firefight on the better for Salmond. Of course using the same tactics used against you isn't uncommon, and in a sense it has a delicious irony to it. A spokesman for Alex Salmond said;
"Mr Salmond has lodged a formal complaint with the Permanent Secretary to the Scottish Government under the civil service code, on the conduct of the official who is alleged to have breached civil service rules, by disclosing the name of a complainant in the Scottish Government process."
This is a bit like add straws onto the back of a camel until it breaks, I would suggest that Nicola Sturgeon's pal, or to given her a generic title, Scottish Government employee will rune the day she allegedly opened her mouth. As to the Sturgeon pre-defence, well that doesn't explain away to anyone satisfaction Aberdein's testimony on oath. Nor does it explain away the testimony of Kevin Pringle and Duncan Hamilton QC. Sturgeon's answer just doesn't sound credible in any fashion. If that is the best she and presumably her Team can come up with, it also explodes another myth of the alleged 'smartness' of Sturgeon. For years the media played along with the myth that Sturgeon was somehow more canny a politician, but the truth is she isn't smart and she is no leader.
So, if you are still with me on this, let's remember what Sturgeon's actual words were:
“Alex Salmond was open with me about the identity of one complainant, because he knew. He knew about the identity of one complainant because he knew about the incident, because he had apologised to the person concerned. I can’t recall if the name of the other complainant was shared openly on April 2. He also knew the identity of that complainant because I remember him talking about how he had gone through the Scottish Government Flickr account to find out who had been with him on particular days. He knew the identity of both complainants, in one respect because he knew about the incident and in the other respect through his own investigations.”
I wasn't there, I would put a bet on what Sturgeon said above wasn't said in the presence of Geoff Aberdein, Duncan Hamilton QC and Sturgeon's Chief of Staff Liz Lloyd at Nicola Sturgeon's home on the 2nd April 2018. Sturgeon is inviting people to either believe her or Salmond, because she already knows she doesn't have evidence to back up her allegation. I would also bet that there was no contemporaneous evidence to support Nicola Sturgeon's version. Stay tuned however to someone or small group who may suddenly appear to testify if they were allegedly told about what Salmond allegedly said. Maybe either Sturgeon or Lloyd told someone in passing and then everyone forgot about that, and after today's hearing, they will come forward, as if by a miracle. Do you know the problem with lying is? The problem is that liars have to keep changing their story because evidence emerges that either disproves the lie or cast serious doubt on it. How many Scottish Government officials and others backing Sturgeon have had to correct false testimony?
In the Salmond case, the issue of Woman H was flagged, she made a claim of being a victim of attempted rape by Salmond. On the night in question, no witness remembers see her at Bute House on the day, there is no log of her entering the building and no CCTV of being in the building. This leads some people to believe that a charge of perjury should be made against her by the Crown Office. The Crown Office being corrupt has done nothing about this, and as we have seen by the appearance of the Lord Advocate at the Salmond Inquiry, this guy needs sacked.
Contrast Nicola Sturgeon's evidence and Alex Salmond's evidence and their appearances side by side, who do you think appears credible? I have seen no one from Sturgeon's cabal who even looks remotely credible in answers or appearance. And as far as I am aware, no one from Salmond's side seems remotely un-credible, far from it. Team Salmond and Salmond himself seem totally at easy and poised in what they state as evidence and how they conduct themselves. People who tell the truth, don't have to change their story, like a river, the truth flows free and fast, can the analogy be applied to Nicola Sturgeon stuttering her way through that session answering the questions at the Salmond Inquiry?
I
think not!
Finally, Nicola Sturgeon said:
“I had no motive, intention, desire to get Alex Salmond.”
In police investigations, they look for three things, means, motive and opportunity.
1/ Sturgeon had the means, the Scottish Government.
2/ She could it be argued had the motive, Salmond was a threat to her leadership, if she goes down, so does every one of her team in status.
3/ She had the opportunity, she ultimately controlled the levers of powers which worked illegally against Alex Salmond, and as we know, evidence of meetings was destroyed by Leslie Evans.
Why don't you make your own mind up, and ask yourself, if you were on a jury would find against her?
Yours sincerely
George Laird The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
29 comments:
Christ on a bike! You weren't kidding when you said Salmond was out for blood!
I was a bit skeptical that this would happen, I was like "OK I'll believe it when I see it" but you were right.
For the SNP, I suspect that this is a disaster. Hell, the Profumo affair with Christine Keeler in the early 1960s brought down the Tory government at the time, and that was about an extramarital affair with a model, that's nothing compared to this corrupt banana republic bullshit.
I watched her on TV. Monotonous in her replies, she went on n on for minutes, without actually saying anything. She hardly answered one question.
Can I just say if you step back from all of this and look at the timeline Alex Salmond loses his WM seat in June 2017 There must have been some concern about him attempting a returning to Holyrood maybe? In October 2017 the Harvey Weinstein scandal broke and that presents a perfect cover to change policy to include ex ministers and deal with Alex Salmond who lets face it is no angel. A rushed policy develops at pace as that scandal actually broke Harvey Weinstein scandal was at this stage only a series of newspaper articles his trial didn’t start until May 2018 so I’m struggling to see that this was the driver for SG rapidly introducing these policies as NS claims. During or after the trial maybe but before? This new policy is rushed in botched and is passed in December 2017. When you look at Alex Salmonds trial reports these charges are very thin and in the one charge of attempted rape Ms H in my humble opinion should be facing potential perjury charges. I’m shocked this all got to court at all. Was Alex Salmond a bully and a pest .... looks like it but was he a criminal .... no!! The only reason I can see that it got that far was that he was a high profile individual. The txt messages we have seen and the mess that the SG has made of this fiasco you can see that a witch-hunt against Alex Salmond looks like a very good explanation as the back drop to all of this. SG having achieved their goal of dealing with AS then botch the whole investigation, fail to pass papers to their own QCs, leak the story to the daily record as after all getting AS is the main aim and thinking they’ve achieved that aren’t very careful at covering their tracks. Oh but then they lose the judicial review and oops buts aren’t that well covered it seems AS trial fails and SG have to start hiding behind courts etc in any way they can as a beam of light is shone on this whole debacle. AS was clear in thought and spoke with ease The sign of someone speaking the truth The others were coached and reluctant to engage with the committee Nicola seemed to be involved in nothing, knew nothing, was nowhere that mattered and her evidence was stuttered Always repeating the question back as the thought through her answer. The inquiry are left with incompetence or criminality with little chance of figuring that out .Me I think this was a witch-hunt that went very badly wrong indeed
These things are never concluded the day after an evidence session like yesterday. Channel 4 News, Sky News, The Sun, Daily Mail, Telegraph, Gurdian and Times all have jounalists on the case now and that wasn't so a couple of weeks ago. They will be discussing Sturgeon's evidence.
It's like Jim Sillars said a week aso: 'The toxic tentacles of the SNP have poisoned all of Scotland's public bodies.' None more so that our legal profession who will happily stand by nowadays and watch the SNP hang some native from a tree, as long as it gets everyone off the hook.
I don't beieve that the British State, MI5/MI6 are behind this at-all. What I do believe though is that the gravity of Alex Salmond's testimony have reached and been understood by those in Westinster and Whitehall. Hence the BBC are now asking Sarah Smith and Glenn Campbell: 'What the fuck are you doing about this?'
At Watergate it was said that 'it wasn't the crime, it was the cover-up.' We cannot say that here, here we have an exceptionally serious crime and a cover-up by the Lord Advocate.
Personally, I think the Lord Advocate should be bagged first and that will remove the flimsy excuse of 'legal advice' which has dogged this inquiry from the start.
Holyrood has turned into a disaster for Scotland. We now have 40% entrenched Unionist and 40% entrenched Nationalist and 20% floating in the middle. We are now needlessly a bitter and divided country with a hatred for the other. We have free prescriptions and free fanny-pads but we frame and seek to jail our political opponents. Our legal system exists only to protect the rich and well connected. Close the feckin place down.
From Kevin Pringle's page of evidence to the James Hamilton Inquiry:'My hope was the Alex Salmond would be exonerated by the Jury and that Nicola Sturegon would continue in her job.'
I don't know exactly who Kevin Pringle was within the SNP, but this is an example of the simplistic shite that has been in charge of the country for the past 6-years. So, we bring all the great powers of state down on the head of Alex Salmond, but he hopes he survives and he hope that Nicola survives too.
What, Kevin, if our Lord Advocate refuses to release evidence required under oath by the court? What if the alphabet women are liars? What if Leslie Evans is a liar too? What if they all being coached by professional liars? Is that OK and does that alter your hopes for the perfect outcome? It appears obvious to me that it would alter Alex Salmond's hopes.
Kevin Pringle does sound like an absolute fanny to me. It must be hoped that those in his place are somehow better, although I fear they are even worse.
This might not be the only skeleton is Sturgeon's cupboard just now.
They say the James Hamilton has form on these inquiries having found 'nothing to see here' on a similar but much less serious inquiry into the Welsh Assembly. I hope I am wrong. 10 years ago many of us were entitled to free legal aid from almost any Scottish lawyer. Nowadays the SNP have withdrawn that and now the cash is spent on rewarding sympahetic old Irishmen for exonerating bent Scottish politicians. Are we ready for independence in 2021?...really? The law's not for us, is it?
Alex Salmond has released further evidence last night. Henry McLeish stated that it was bizarre that no-one had already resigned. It is not one resignation that is needed, I would guess that it amounts to more than a dozen. You may remember McLeish resigned due to a scam involving the rental of his offices. A scam and a crime certainly, but nothing on the scale of this. In the meantime, nuisance-value wee Patrick Harvie says 'it is all a theatrical plot by the Tories to bring-down Nicola'. What a vainglorious tit that man is.
FROM THE SPECTATOR - “This leaves us with a First Minister whose government breaks the law; who apparently misleads parliament herself; who seemingly treats the ministerial code like a takeaway menu, its provisions being there to pick and choose from as the appetite strikes her.
When the Scottish parliament tries to hold her to account, her government obscures and omits, refuses and revises.
When the Scottish parliament tries harder, it receives a letter from state prosecutors warning it to disappear evidence already published on its website.
Holyrood’s powerlessness in the face of an overmighty government is a fundamental design flaw of devolution. It would be unthinkable for a Westminster inquiry to be treated in this contemptuous way.”
Was Sturgeon working on the basis - If you can't fox them with facts then baffle them with bullshit!!!
An example is Adam Tomkins; a Professor of Law and so someone who can make a life for himself outside Holyrood. He went to Holyrood to make a difference, but it is hopeless. If is surrounded by thick folk and bullies and so he's leaving in May.
One thing that has pissed him off is that as soon as information passes through the hands of Holyrood it is redacted. For no reason; it is just redacted. The present Lord Advocate doesn't think he needs to provide a reason.
Holyrood doesn't work and it's a matter of time before it ends in real disaster. I am greatly disappointed that Alister Jack doesn't do something about that. It is left to webstes like this one and Wings over Scotland. God almighty, is that what Scotland is reduced to?
'A former Labour first minister of Scotland, Henry McLeish, has criticised the Scottish Government for a failure of responsibility over its unlawful handling of sexual harassment complaints against Alex Salmond, and branded it “bizarre” there had been no resignations.' The Scotsman
The problem I see is this: they use an unlawful procedure to attempt to jail a former First Minister and no-one is pursued for that, but they jail for 6-months a relatively harmless chap in Fife who divulged the names of some of the precious 'alphabet women.' You know...these woman that no-one believed at the criminal trial...these women who were all part of Sturgeon's close group of work colleagues?
'The Salmon is the King of Fish, it swims upstream and no obstacle stops it returning to from whence it came. It does or dies. In the now fetid waters of Scottish politics, a new turbulence is underway. They’ve not seen the last of the Salmond.'
All the information Alex Salmond referred to, WhatsApp messages, Geoff Aberdein's statement etc can be provided to The Spectator and they will publish them. Surely that must be under consideration now? It strikes me that that is all that is needed to establish the truth and to ensure Hamilton's Inquiry isn't a whitewash. If he has this information, then we should have it too.
Surely this little insignificant woman must resign with embarrassment after listening to all her lies she is spinning
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/03/05/statement-on-behalf-of-alex-salmond-2/
We have a Lord Advocate and a Deputy First Minister in Scotland whos' job it is to make legal documents disappear. That's all they do. They do fuck-all else. We pay them every month to do this for us. We don't ask them to do it, but they think it is acceptable for them to do it and no-one in Scotland should dare ask why or they will be breaking the law.
The truth is: 'Access Denied'
Nowadays, in Scotland, parliamentarians tell the Lord Advocate what to say. The Lord Advocate say it and the parliamentarians say: 'we're following legal advice.
Give any piece of evidence to the same Lord Advocate and he will make it disappear, if you want it to. If Alex Salmond cannot do anything about it then you can be sure that none of the rest of us can.
It's that easy. It's the Holyrood version of the 'democratic deficit'. It makes Scotland ungovernable in any fair sense of the word and if we don't do something about it now, then we will continue going backwards and be criticized by the English.
Spectator leading article on Scotland:
“A First Minister whose government breaks the law, who apparently misleads parliament herself; who seemingly treats the ministerial code like a takeaway menu, its provisions being there to pick and choose from”
The government that breaks the law for free. If they decide they don't like you, they'll bang you up in Govan Police Station for 6-days and nights. If you decide to take them to Court for Mallicious Prosecution then you'll almost certainly win....the problem is it costs about £1.5m to do that. We cannot spend that kind of money, but Sturgeon can.
Welcome to Scots Law. Once the most respected in the world and we have taught it in our Universities for two hundred years. Now, and after 6-years of Sturgeon, it's worthless.
Scotland, is in the grubber.
Jackie Baillie, the best and most forensic MSP we've got, thought that it was a 'polished performance, as we've come to expect from the First Minister.'
Therein lies the problem. If Jackie Baillie thinks it is polished and that there is nothing wrong with it, then many of the rest of us will automatically think the same. Is Jackie right or wrong?
Was it polished? Does anyone think she would have gotten away with that in the High Court? Does anyone think she would have gotten away with it at Westminster? Does it compare with Alex Salmond's performance?
I don't think for a second she would have been allowed to talk in those vague terms in front of a Judge or MP's and that is the problem with this Inquiry. It has been designed to fail and that's what is going to happen.
The plan was for Alex Salmond's lifeless body to be hanging from a tree in Strichen by now. That hasn't worked-out, has it.
'In recent weeks almost every branch of the Scottish legislature has fought to protect the Queen Bee. All the while proving nothing but their own deep corruption.' - THE DAILY TELEGRAPH
Sturgeon is a bad tempered little narcissist who, in the private sector, wouldn't last five minutes.
Her biggest problem is her inability to behave in a civil manner when asked awkward or difficult questions. At FMQs she descended immediately into a personal attack on Ruth Davidson and her elevation to the HoL. Most people don't give a toss about that. They want answers.
She's pissed off a lot of journalists with her attitude to them at the daily briefings. That is now changing with the very effective investigative journalists now taking an interest.
To see how Scotland has turned into a cesspit of division, you only need to look at how the SNP behaved under Salmond. In the main it was a well disciplined party. Now it is a bunch of rank amateurs who lash out. The SNP were the first party to effectively use social media - now it is being used against them. eg "I've known Nicola since she was 16".
She's trying to use the same approach with the inquiry. It's about time she was hauled in front of a Westminster Committee. They would not take any of her shit.
Today we hear from John Swinney that no minutes exist for the meetings with council, Roddy Dunlop QC. A fantastically unlikely scenario which he doesn't think he needs to defend or even explain.
All's well if Sturgeon puts-on a bravura-performance in front of the Fabiani Committee. All will be forgotten about soon. Let's all talk about something else. 7,000 additional new SNP members in a single day, for example.
What a deeply rotten country Scotland has become. Sturgeon is styling herself in the same mould as dictators do in wee countries all over the world. There is no vision here of independence within the EU. That's all been forgotten. The EU wouldn't touch us now.
14-years of corruption and cover-up. No-thanks. Close Holyrood. Time for a change.
She wanted to set the record straight but answered ‘I don’t know' on at least 50 occasions.
'A poll has suggested a majority of Scots would now vote in favour of remaining in the United Kingdom should a second independence referendum be held tomorrow.' - From today's Scotsman.
Momentum is everything in politics and the momentum is solidly against independence. Gone are the days when everyone in the world admired the Scots. Nowadays, I think many in the world would actually go out of their way to avoid dealing with the Scots and that, sadly, includes the English.
We're now a nation of crooked politicians and crooked lawyers.
@murdo_fraser
She couldn't remember, couldn't recall, didn't have the figures to hand etc, 50No times. Check Murdo Fraser's Twitter - that explains it.
As dishonest as her husband.
'In unpublished evidence, details of which have been shared with The Sunday Times, Aberdein claims he was asked by a member of Sturgeon’s government to alter his account about harassment complaints against Salmond.' Who would the member of Sturgeon's government be? - John Swinney?
Post a Comment