Oor Nicola Sturgeon thread.

[Wee Bully]

18 minutes ago, coprolite said:

For party funding rules. 

Anyone making a payment for which they've no obvious means of funding should be an automatic money laundering referral and there should be questions asked. I'd say someone on less than £80k having that much liquid assets is highly dubious. 

There was no upfront disclosure when there should have been for funding rules. Suspicion level raised. 

The accounts disclosure could have been more transparent. Nothing there to allay suspicion. 

As far as i know, we only have Mr Murrell's word that it was his money and not say, someone who's not uk resident's or someone whose relationship with the government and contracts might look dodgy. 

Maybe he did have the money in a savings account and misunderstood "report all loans and donations over £7,500". I guess it's possible. 

 

Basically, we are throwing around accusations here, with not a shred of evidence.  “As far as I know…” is shorthand for “I know nothing, but I’m going to chuck shit against the wall to see if it sticks”

[coprolite]

18 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I doubt it's that unusual for someone his age to have inherited that kind of money from his parents house being sold, that bit's not suspicious to me. A foreign donor would surely be able to find a more discrete way of funnelling the money than through the CEO of the party and husband of the FM, that bit doesn't sound believable. The money was declared, if a bit late. Maybe he was putting off doing it knowing his wife would find out what he'd done with his money.  

 

10 minutes ago, Wee Bully said:

Basically, we are throwing around accusations here, with not a shred of evidence.  “As far as I know…” is shorthand for “I know nothing, but I’m going to chuck shit against the wall to see if it sticks”

Like i said it's possible they're just incompetent. 

[vikingTON]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

Everyone's talking about shady goings on but I haven't heard a theory of what they might be

Try picking up a copy or two of Private Eye then, it has been covered for about three years now. 

[welshbairn]

Given that I'm not going to buy the last 3 years of back issues of Private Eye I'm going to assume that the party spent too much on the 2021 election and as CEO he felt responsible, so he lent the money to cover a temporary shortfall in covering running costs, wages, rent etc.

Edited February 9, 2023 by welshbairn

[Aufc]

7 hours ago, welshbairn said:

You mean for optics? Maybe I'm being naïve but I don't see anything shady about accepting a loan from a party member, even if he is party CEO and husband of the FM. Where's the evil?

P.S. I reread your post and I'm not sure what you mean. 

Aside from everything mentioned a few posts back, my thought is the fact they hid it. If they are hiding stuff like this then what else are they hiding. They can bullshit all they want about not realising but only naive people will believe them

[Aufc]

Also 100k is not a huge sum in the grand scheme of things, however, if they are needing loans of that amount to run a budget then it worries me for when they are trying to run the budget in an independent country. 

[ScotiaNostra]

8 hours ago, coprolite said:

Failure to disclose the loan for so long looks pretty incompetent and careless about rules, which is a bad look for a governing party. 

The explanation given does look a bit shaky and worth digging into. There might well be nothing more to it but there could be all sorts of sinister explanations. There's enough red flags in their for a proper investigation. 

Amazing how some people lose all critical faculties when their side's on the defensive. 

The fact that the Tories and the leave campaign rip the utter piss doesn't excuse anything that doesn't match their decadent troughing. 

Its a lack of transparency and accountability that a husband and wife in those roles gives the opportunity whether anything is dodgy or not to say it is. Which is the case in point of why was it even allowed to happen and continue for so long. Surely someone said to them, you know that this will be used against the party at some point. So lets remove that weak point. 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

9 hours ago, Aufc said:

Also 100k is not a huge sum in the grand scheme of things, however, if they are needing loans of that amount to run a budget then it worries me for when they are trying to run the budget in an independent country. 

The irony is that some of those pointing the figure are in a party that siphoned off billions to their pals through PPE contracts etc.

That's not to exonerate Murrell - I personally think he is a political liability  - but have a sense of proportion about this.

Edited February 9, 2023 by DeeTillEhDeh

[vikingTON]

7 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Given that I'm not going to buy the last 3 years of back issues of Private Eye I'm going to assume that the party spent too much on the 2021 election and as CEO he felt responsible, so he lent the money to cover a temporary shortfall in covering running costs, wages, rent etc.

Your assumption would be wrong then. 

[Suspect Device]

11 hours ago, virginton said:

It's bewildering to see so many people choose a pointless baldy clown like Murrell as their hill to die on.

We've also had 'Unionist poll bias' trotted out in this wave of ludicrous denialism.

 

Yet more baldism on this forum. Are we the last unprotected minority?

Bald lives matter.  Bald pride. Etc.

[PHM]

Wee Nippy and her fake husband are up to no good. I'm looking forward to it all falling apart.

 

PS. I heard free speech is banned on here unless you're a leftie SNP lapdog? 

[Salt n Vinegar]

24 minutes ago, PHM said:

Wee Nippy and her fake husband are up to no good. I'm looking forward to it all falling apart.

 

PS. I heard free speech is banned on here unless you're a leftie SNP lapdog? 

Missing you already. 

[Wee-Bey]

37 minutes ago, PHM said:

Wee Nippy and her fake husband are up to no good. I'm looking forward to it all falling apart.

How is he a fake husband ? Did they not actually get married ?

39 minutes ago, PHM said:

PS. I heard free speech is banned on here unless you're a leftie SNP lapdog? 

Where did you hear this ? 

[ICTChris]

I can't remember if I posted on here but I don't think Nicola Sturgeon will be leaving any time soon.  I think her party are pretty solidly behind her as are a big chunk of the electorate.  Being honest about it she could probably have a press conference and say she got the £100,000 from a Mexican drug cartel and quite a few people would still support her.  In the absence of a paper-trail between her and El Chapo I think she's quite secure.  The fact that there isn't exactly a huge pipeline of talent in Holyrood also sits in her favour.

On the other hand, if her poll ratings continue to go down people might start thinking - we aren't getting a referendum any time soon, we don't agree with the de-facto referendum strategy, we think the gender reform bill could have been handled better, this loan looks bad.  She's been First Minister for nearly ten years, maybe it's best she hands over to a new face who will get time before the next election.

Also, I find the idea that Murrell is a 'beard' a bit odd -  I assume all the hinting about Murrell and people talking about a 'fake marriage' is basically saying that?  I doubt that anyone would care if someone in a same-sex relationship was First Minister.  In recent years the leaders of the Scottish Labour and Tory parties were in same sex partnerships.  Her predeccesor as FM is pretty obviously in a relationship with someone who isn't his wife, everyone knows this but no-one cares?  Maybe there is some special issue I don't know about.

Edited February 9, 2023 by ICTChris

[PHM]

36 minutes ago, Bodie said:

How is he a fake husband ? Did they not actually get married ?

Where did you hear this ? 

Elton John married a female in the 80s. Just saying.

[Wee-Bey]

32 minutes ago, PHM said:

Elton John married a female in the 80s. Just saying.

Just saying what ? Why the nudge, nudge, wink, wink stuff ?

[SandyCromarty]

12 hours ago, Wee Bully said:

Basically, we are throwing around accusations here, with not a shred of evidence.  “As far as I know…” is shorthand for “I know nothing, but I’m going to chuck shit against the wall to see if it sticks”

It's normal anti SNP drivel.

You may recall that the tories and labour were in orgasmic ecstasy when Nicola had give evidence to that committee and then it all fell flat when her evidence blootered them.

It's par for the course bear in mind that the SNP are a Scottish based party and are viewed as a threat to the union by the london based tory and labour parties.

At the next general election these pathetic little SNP haters and Tory and Labour will be in full hate mode and bring up any shite to discredit the largest party in the Scottish Government.

On gaining Independence these neanderthals will either be falling over themselves to grovel at the SNP table or emigrate to england where they will be treated as second class jocks by their english betters, nothing will ever go there way. 

[Billy Jean King]

2 hours ago, PHM said:

Wee Nippy and her fake husband are up to no good. I'm looking forward to it all falling apart.

 

PS. I heard free speech is banned on here unless you're a leftie SNP lapdog? 

FFS yet another sock puppet. At least this one knows what's coming

[PHM]

20 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

FFS yet another sock puppet. At least this one knows what's coming

"Sock puppet" are you 12? No doubt another handwringer who can't handle a different point of view. 

[PHM]

48 minutes ago, Bodie said:

Just saying what ? Why the nudge, nudge, wink, wink stuff ?

It's not nudge nudge wink wink. Elton John married a female. Fact.