You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So does anyone think that Nicola's resignation was merely coincidental timing?
(But hubby did land a great motorhome for all their spare time - allegedly)
How appropriate thata senior SNP minister had a photo op with the police this week.
Just a wee reminder to be careful what is said as its a live case and you can get into trouble.
the guardian pulled its commenting on it for this reason
An arrest is necessary to interview under caution as a suspect to compel truthful answers. I see nothing hugely out of the ordinary inthis
Is an old classic allowed!... 🙂
[img] 
[/img]
is the suggestion that the SNP have got money from places they shouldn't have, or that someone's been nicking money legitimately given by fans/members?
TJ - as a previous SNP voter, your claim that "I see nothing hugely out of the ordinary in this" - I can assure you, I most certainly do.
I don't expect or think it appropriate for MP's, from whatever rosette to participate in behaviour which ends up in handcuffs.
This should never be normalised
is the suggestion that the SNP have got money from places they shouldn’t have, or that someone’s been nicking money legitimately given by fans/members?
£600,000 was supposed to be ringfenced for IndyRef2. This was made up of donations (donors told it was strictly for IndyRef2).
Now it's gone and doesn't seem to have been spent on IndyRef2.
Most likely it just went towards running the party (and buying a campervan). Someone said on the last thread political parties are run much like football teams. Spend way beyond your means and hope you win something big before anyone looks too closely at the books.
I thought it was more about has the money been spent for the specific purpose it was proposed it would be. i.e. People donated to gain independence but instead the money brought a nice motorhome. (I guess SNP will say motorhome was going to be used for promoting independence.)
Lets be honest it can't be as bad as any other parties funding.
I can understand TJs denials on this - I remember defending Lance Armstrong right to to the point at which he confessed. It's all very disappointing to be honest.
It also erodes trust. How can we trust the SNP to run an Independent Scotland, if they can't even run the finances of their own party?
It also erodes trust. How can we trust the SNP to run an Independent Scotland, if they can’t even run the finances of their own party?
I didn't know the plan was for Scotland to be a single party state post-independence.
Or is this Johnann Lamont argument? That Scots are genetically incapable of running their own country?
If independence happens then the SNP are likely to be the party in power at the time. Not saying that will always continue to be the case.
I'm in favour of independence, by the way, and approve of most of the SNP policies, but in order to gain independence, people need to be convinced that's it's (financially) viable.
I didn’t know the plan was for Scotland to be a single party state post-independence.
The party of government runs the country. The Tories run the UK - as much as he'd like to Kier Starmer can't dictate policy.
The SNP would have been the governing party, with a big majority. It's not about Scots being incapable it's wether the SNP is capable.
There will be an election at some point though, won't there?
It suits the Unionist narrative to promote the idea that independence will mean SNP unchallenged rule forever which is why it's surprising an Indy voter would be pushing it.
Post independence I doubt the SNP would even make it to the first election. Far too many conflicting political viewpoints to survive without a single focus point to unite them.
It's not me that needs to be convinced of the benefits of independence though, it's the 50% of the country who are undecided or against it. The tribulations of the SNP financial saga isn't helping with this.
As I said already, I'm disappointed.
Not that a politician / party official is arrested - thats highly unusual but in a complex investigation where there is a suspicion of fraud its normal to arrest someone so you can interview them under oath.
Ie the arrest does not mean criminal charges are going to occur. The arrest is to progress the investigation
I am not defending anyone. Its clear that its been highly murky goings on.
Some interesting discussion on LBC about this.
There are quite few claiming it's an anti-SNP bias that's caused this and the media are stoking the fire, even though this is unheard of in a major UK political party.
It will be interesting to find out what exactly has been going on.
The SNP would have been the governing party, with a big majority
Thats just wrong. the SNP have had a majority of one, once. the rest of the time its been minority governments or coalitions
Gobuchal - actually its commonplace in Westminster. The differnce is Scotland does not have a servile police force
The tribulations of the SNP financial saga isn’t helping with this.
Comes under the heading of, 'Gotta want it' for me.
So far, this looks like three arrogant people who weren't held to account by their own party (and it seems several people did try) or the press (who have absolutely no excuse).
If this had been going on for decades and it was something everyone knew about then I would agree there is a fundamental problem. However, it's only been a couple of years and things have been progressing with the investigation and resignations throughout this period.
IF the actions of these three people are enough to push someone firmly into the No camp then I'd suggest they were a lot more than halfway there already.
Hopefully lessons will be learned and the Yes movement will come out stronger in the end. I'd like to see a separation between the SNP and the wider Yes movement with the SNP acting as executors of the Yes movement's will when it comes to independence matters while focusing more on the business of running the country and governing being the SNP's main function.
Post independence I doubt the SNP would even make it to the first election.
That's hardly an incentive for those currently enjoying their salaries, benefits and power to actually do something about independence.
That’s hardly an incentive for those currently enjoying their salaries, benefits and power to actually do something about independence.
That's why I said what I did about the SNP becoming the 'governing' party and only executing the will of the wider Yes movement when it comes to independence.
This situation is a pretty good illustration of why mixing political parties and single issue campaigns is not a good idea.
The differnce is Scotland does not have a servile police force
But it absolutely does has a servile 'Independent' Crown Office, who have been dragging their feet in issuing warrants. The ICO is run by the Lord Advocate, who sits in Government, and was appointed by Nicola Sturgeon. Absolutely no conflict of interest there at all. Nothing to see.
I've aid it before on another thread, but SNP (and the Tories) are now disengaged from the 'people', they have been in power for so long that they are now doing their own thing and not really doing a great job of helping the people.
Both parties need to be kicked out and someone fresh in charge, get things moving in the right direction again.
But it absolutely does has a servile ‘Independent’ Crown Office, who have been dragging their feet in issuing warrants.
Errm - thats 2 premises searched, 3 folk interviewed under caution. hardly dragging their feet
Both parties need to be kicked out and someone fresh in charge, get things moving in the right direction again.
That does beg the question, who should that be and what is the right direction?
In Scotland its pretty much " a plague on all their houses"
tories - led by a dim nonentity who everytime he tries to distinguish the scots tories from Westminster gets slapped down and rtrtacts. Not a single positive policy
Labour - another nonentity in charge who is not allowed to differentiate from london and whoes main policy is SNP baaaaaad
Lib Dems - hopeless compromised by the proven liar Charmicheal 5th place in the number of seats
Greens - spent all their political capital on the GRA and the deposit scheme - the former of which is hardly their core remit and the latter a fringe issue
SNP - hubris, secrecy and murky financial dealings.
Alba - run by yesterdays man and a self confessed groper only people with seats are all defectors tiny real support
I have no idea who I will vote for at the next holyrood elections
I expect a tory / labour anti SNP pact again and a tory / labour coalition after the next Holyrood elections
@tjagain, the ICO wanted the police Investigation to be publicly (i.e. by the cops) called a "fact finding mission" and delayed granting search warrants for four weeks. Why the delay? What happened in the meantime? While the cops are most certainly investigating now, there has been a (so far) inexplicable delay in getting started. It may be meaningless, but it adds further weight to both people saying there's been a cover up and accusations of self interested parties with power and reputations to protect well; protecting themselves.
I've long held Nicola Sturgeon as a politician that we down south could and should be envious of, and this whole affair spoils what is otherwise a pretty faultless political career. I would personally wish for all of this to be easily explainable, but the more I look, the more it looks like the top of the SNP is a bit rotten. And that is a shame.
Maybe this is for another thread. But in that case TJ. Why do you support Independence?
It’s not me that needs to be convinced of the benefits of independence though, it’s the 50% of the country who are undecided or against it. The tribulations of the SNP financial saga isn’t helping with this.
whilst I am one of those 50% unconvinced on the merits of independence, this doesn’t really factor into my concerns
Let’s be perfectly honest here, the SNP may well be dodgy as hell, but if we don’t get independence we’ll be run by Westminster, who are also dodgy as hell. So either way we get screwed.
The solution is to ban anyone from politics who ever expresses an interest in being a politician from an early age. As its a vocation that seems to attract self serving, corrupt opportunists regardless off political allegiance .. I only semi joke when I say that..
As an aside, I am slightly enjoying seeing the egg on the faces of all those nationalists who have constantly ripped into boris and co over the past few years, when it transpires that our lot are just as bad😂
Because I strongly believe an independent Scotland would be a more prosperous, fairer and better place to live once we are no longer being dragged down by a right wing england and I want to be in the EU
As an aside, I am slightly enjoying seeing the egg on the faces of all those nationalists who have constantly ripped into boris and co over the past few years, when it transpires that our lot are just as bad😂
Hmm, not sure I would say getting done for fraud for saying 'donate for the 2nd IndyRef' instead of 'donate for the independence campaign' really compares to the billions in fraud the Tories are responsible for.
600k out of a target 1 million raised from a population of ~6 million half of whom purportedly support independence. Oh dear.
My bet is the outcome of all this is a fine for the SNP under electoral law or accounting. No criminal charges to individuals.
I have no idea who I will vote for at the next holyrood elections
It's a worry isn't it. For me, the elephant in the room is that if independence happened tomorrow (clearly it won't but it's something I'm broadly for) I have little confidence in the current representatives (parties and individuals) of Holyrood being up to the job. A totally discredited SNP without a figurehead like Sturgeon to rally around leaves a damn big void of credible 'professionals' with charisma to lead and debate our joint future. And that is as much a damnation of the opposition parties as it is the SNP. An independent Scotland needs both a governing party and opposition that look like they are up to the job.
Also the "questionnaires" that Johnson and Sunak filled in after their illegal partying are equivalent to an interview under oath. Both were prosecuted and found guilty under criminal law
My bet is the outcome of all this is a fine for the SNP under electoral law or accounting
Depends what happened to the money really. If it's been spend by individuals on themselves (perhaps some sort of high value vehicle?) could be more than a slap on the wrist or just a fine.
Hmm, not sure I would say getting done for fraud for saying ‘donate for the 2nd IndyRef’ instead of ‘donate for the independence campaign’ really compares to the billions in fraud the Tories are responsible for.
Of course it doesn't, but it's still fraud. I don't think the SNP should get an easy ride because the Tories are shits
So it would appear Scottish politicians are no more trustworthy or competent than Westminster politicians, at least according to TJ, but it will all be better if Scotland was independent, hmm I'm convinced.
An independent Scotland needs both a governing party and opposition that look like they are up to the job.
Post independence I expect a large realignment in the parties and also labour or whatever they become will be no longer controlled by London
Its a huge source of frustration for me as a former labour voter that Scottish labour are forbidden to develop any policies that work for scotland independently of London and thus are forced to compete with the tories for the unionist vote ie half the population
So it would appear Scottish politicians are no more trustworthy or competent than Westminster politicians,
Errmmm - there is no corruption on anything like the scale that is normalised and legalised at Westminster. Westminster is corrupt from top to bottom and also Scotland has an electoral system suitable for a 21st century democracy
So it would appear Scottish politicians are no more trustworthy or competent than Westminster politicians, at least according to TJ, but it will all be better if Scotland was independent, hmm I’m convinced.
To be fair, Scotland is currently investigating whether £600,000 was raised under false pretenses (ie, for the SNP rather than specifically for the IndyRef2 campaign).
The Tories, meanwhile, have managed to funnel at least some of the £69 billion they have 'wasted' into the pockets of their mates.
https://www.bestforbritain.org/scandalous_spending_tracker
Yeah, I'm pretty comfortable saying Westminster is worse.
My bet is the outcome of all this is a fine for the SNP under electoral law or accounting. No criminal charges to individuals.
Also the “questionnaires” that Johnson and Sunak filled in after their illegal partying are equivalent to an interview under oath. Both were prosecuted and found guilty under criminal law
So breaking electoral law is not a criminal offence?
Its a huge source of frustration for me as a former labour voter that Scottish labour are forbidden to develop any policies that work for scotland independently of London and thus are forced to compete with the tories for the unionist vote ie half the population
Amen to that.
Pushing the limits of my knowledge but organisiations can be fined. Certainly the Tories were fined twice for similar offenses but no individual got a criminal charge. labour as well
Edit: link to a differnt case!
Hmm, not sure I would say getting done for fraud for saying ‘donate for the 2nd IndyRef’ instead of ‘donate for the independence campaign’ really compares to the billions in fraud the Tories are responsible for.
it shows that they are equally untrustworthy
Although if we want to pedantic, have any Tories been arrested for billions of pounds worth of fraud yet?
Mone is probably the closest.
In Scotland its pretty much ” a plague on all their houses”
tories – led by a dim nonentity who everytime he tries to distinguish the scots tories from Westminster gets slapped down and rtrtacts. Not a single positive policy
Labour – another nonentity in charge who is not allowed to differentiate from london and whoes main policy is SNP baaaaaad
Lib Dems – hopeless compromised by the proven liar Charmicheal 5th place in the number of seats
Greens – spent all their political capital on the GRA and the deposit scheme – the former of which is hardly their core remit and the latter a fringe issue
SNP – hubris, secrecy and murky financial dealings.
Alba – run by yesterdays man and a self confessed groper only people with seats are all defectors tiny real support
You forgot the Scottish Family Party. Run by an ex UKIPer who wants to ban gay and trans people. Yeah they sound great!
I'm less concerned by the finances of the SNP and more concerned that half the membership wanted a leader who was a bigot or one who got her policies from God.
it shows that they are equally untrustworthy
So, just to double check this, you're saying the £600K is just as bad as the Tories' £69 billion?
I think equating the two takes some mental gymnastics I'm just not capable of at the moment.
To keep it simple the point of independence is that Scots are the best placed to govern Scotland. There is no claim that we're superior to any other people and no acceptance that we're inferior to any other people.
To keep it simple the point of independence is that Scots are the best placed to govern Scotland. There is no claim that we’re superior to any other people and no acceptance that we’re inferior to any other people.
this.
That does beg the question, who should that be and what is the right direction?
No idea to both of those I'm afraid...I mean I have an idea but I'm not sure it is enough of an idea to have any momentum.
So, just to double check this, you’re saying the £600K is just as bad as the Tories’ £69 billion?
It's not the size of the pig in the trough, it's the size of the trough in the pig.
I think equating the two takes some mental gymnastics I’m just not capable of at the moment.
2 sets of politicians up to no good. I don’t think it’s too hard to equate the 2 personally but if you are struggling then fair enough..
where there is a suspicion of fraud its normal to arrest someone so you can interview them under oath.
Ie the arrest does not mean criminal charges are going to occur. The arrest is to progress the investigation
A question for the legal experts out there - why did they not just interview him under caution?
Surely an arrest needs a bit more to justify than an interview under caution and the evidence is exactly the same to progress the investigation?
No idea to both of those I’m afraid…I mean I have an idea but I’m not sure it is enough of an idea to have any momentum.
I think if UKIP have taught us anything, it's that you shouldn't really vote for the party you want to govern. You should vote for the single-issue party that represents the change you want to see.
If the party gains any kind of traction the big parties will soon be falling over themselves to pander to your issue. Why keep the people who are already voting for you happy when the people you really need to appeal to are the ones who aren't voting for you and you just need to keep them happy on a single issue.
Yeah, politics is not in good shape in the UK at the moment.
Beyond my knowledge.
I don’t think it’s too hard to equate the 2 personally but if you are struggling then fair enough..
In the tories case its embezzling billions for personal gain. In the SNP case there appears to be no personal gain
In the tories case it cost many lives.
2 sets of politicians up to no good. I don’t think it’s too hard to equate the 2 personally but if you are struggling then fair enough..
Politicians are never up to any good which is why the scale of their nefariousness is important.
Are you saying that any wrongdoing whatsoever renders a politician just as bad as the Tories?
Yeah, right you are..I forgot the individuals arrested from the SNP were committing fraud (allegedly) for the greater good ..
Tories bad
SNP ok (ish)
I’ll remember that next time I come on one of these threads..😂
I think equating the two takes some mental gymnastics I’m just not capable of at the moment.
Just scale - think of it like this...
Tories - in charge of a country.
SNP - in charge of a county council.
😉
To be fair, Scotland is currently investigating whether £600,000 was raised under false pretenses
That's not really correct though is it, what's being investigated its what's happened to it, not whether it was raised under false pretences. The confusion over what it's for is a SNP politician trying to obfuscate about where it's gone.
Surely an arrest needs a bit more to justify than an interview under caution and the evidence is exactly the same to progress the investigation?
They will want these interviews conducted under controlled conditions. Including good quality audio or video recording. Best done in police interview suites.
The police will be being very careful to make sure there is no chance they can be called "soft" on the SNP and that everything is as thorough as it could possibly be to avoid any accusations of bias.
Given the nature of the allegations the arrest to conduct an interview under caution does not seem particularly unusual to me but as above my legal knowledge does not extend as to whether they could do an interview under caution without an arrest. I just do not know
If you had your tinfoil hat on you could link masons in the police force to militant unionism to anti SNP bias but actually I have reasonable faith in the scots police. I think they are just being careful to be thorough and to be seen to be so.
Remember also that the scottish press is overwhelmingly unionist. worse than the pro tory bias down south. anything that shows the SNP in a bad light is amplified hugely by this and even the "neutral" BBC will follow the unionist press as they take their "neutrality" as the mid point of the press
In some ways it shows the Scots establishment and political setup in a good light as the SNP are being investigated without fear or favour. Compare this to how the Met acted in investigating the tories.
They will want these interviews conducted under controlled conditions. Including good quality audio or video recording. Best done in police interview suites.
That doesn't require an arrest though?
You get arrested "on suspicion of ........" which then means you can be forced to attend an interview.
You can voluntarily attend the police station for an interview without being arrested.
[source: too much time spent in the back of transit vans at police stations, it's not what it sounds like]
Can you not also be arrested to "effect prompt investigation of " or similar?
Needs someone with a decent understanding of scots law on this. None of us seem to know enough
They will want these interviews conducted under controlled conditions. Including good quality audio or video recording. Best done in police interview suites.
But they don't need to arrest someone to do that. They can ask them to attend for an interview under caution. Of course, if you refuse they may then decide to arrest you to conduct it but they still need to have reasonable grounds.
Not sure why it could take this long for an investigation.
Submit accounts, balance sheet etc. (Takes moments to do this from any accounting package)
Bank statements, list of assets etc..
Critically, invoices and receipts.
Where is the money?
There will be transfers out if money has moved from SNP accounts to elsewhere. There should be records of everything spent. And a list of people who had access to party funds. What could take this long to investigate?
When you get a VAT inspection it takes the Revenue about 20 mins to do all that and come up with a list of things they want to look at in a bit more detail.
Companies House records shows the SNP had a sharp rise in their credit worthiness about the time of the £600k going in. They haven't submitted anything recently, so a bit out of date and they are not Limited so less detail due to that as well.
It used to be the case that a suspect attending a police station voluntarily had to sign a paper form to confirm they were there of their own free will. For example back in the day detention before charge was limited to 6 hours. I believe questions were sometimes asked about how genuinely voluntarily their attendance was. Arresting removes any doubts which is an advantage for the police. It is also a safeguard for the suspect as it starts a clock and limits the time a suspect can be interviewed.
I'm sure if a suspect wasn't arrested and his interview went beyond 13 hours the police would be criticized for not arresting and it would be suggested they were trying to avoid the 12 hour limit.
The establishment are terrified of the SNP, and are basically doing all they can to discredit, simply because of the SNP's strong voter base and its constant direction towards independence for Scotland.
If they can discredit thee party, they hope this will derail the independence thingamabob in the eyes of the possible swing voters. They know they arent going to change the minds of the 40% ish, but theres always a chance that the other 11% needed might just vote in such a referendum in favour of independence.
They saw what happened with brexit, and few actually believed that would happen. So they know that the Scottish people might just, possibly vote Yes. If they can discredit the SNP, they'll maybe turn those or enough voters away that an independence vote will fail.
Not sure why it could take this long for an investigation.
Because the police have to submit a request for a warrant, once they've gathered enough evidence for a proper investigation to take place (ie look for evidence at some-ones house) and the public body responsible for doing that took at at least four weeks to come to a decision. The person in charge of the body that issues warrants is part of the government and was appointed by Nicola Sturgeon.
I think they'd want to arrest him because they can interview under caution, keep him in the nick for a bit and check out what he says, and then re-question him (if they want to) and I'm reminded of Tyler Hamilton's response when the FBI "invited" him to answer questions about doping, casually allowing their jackets to gape open revealing their handguns. Tyler recalls his reaction that was to immediately take it very seriously indeed. This is the same I reckon, make a big show of an arrest, it's a whole process and is a bit scary and involves the thing that most law-abiding citizens never want to happen to them. I'd imagine he's being very co-operative (or at least that's the hope)
Someone has a crystal ball. This was posted yesterday.
Look out for Colin Beattie in the news in the next couple of days. 👍
https://twitter.com/FacundoSavala/status/1648061920761597965
The establishment are terrified of the SNP,
Which establishment would that be, in Scotland they are the establishment, as far as Westminster goes they are of not that important other than they've helped keep Labour out of power in the UK and they are a good whipping boy and dog whistle to get a lot of core Tory voters out barking. The SNP work well for the Tories, they are a controllable bogeyman, ultimately Westminster and therefore at the moment the Tories control the power. It's not really in Tory interests to destroy them.
An arrest is necessary to interview under caution as a suspect to compel truthful answers.
Not that a politician / party official is arrested – thats highly unusual but in a complex investigation where there is a suspicion of fraud its normal to arrest someone so you can interview them under oath.
TJ you are vaguely in the right direction with these two statements but both are fundamentally flawed. It is impossible to compel anyone to give a truthful answer or even to answer at all. Police interviews are not conducted under oath, but under caution which affords the suspect the right to silence. There is presumably a reason to suspect they may have committed a crime, otherwise the arrest would be improper, but either a cooperative interview may clear that up or a no-comment interview may fail to uncover the incrimination needed to turn a bad smell into a a basis for charging.
Also the “questionnaires” that Johnson and Sunak filled in after their illegal partying are equivalent to an interview under oath. Both were prosecuted and found guilty under criminal law
Neither were prosecuted or found guilty - a fixed penalty is an offer from the crown not to prosecute if you meet the terms of the notice. Paying the penalty notice does not result in a conviction and does not technically an admission of guilt.
My bet is the outcome of all this is a fine for the SNP under electoral law or accounting. No criminal charges to individuals.
You may be right. My bet would actually be that charges are levied on individuals rather than the party, with the party claiming to be the victims, but that ultimately it never results in a conviction because providing fraud charges is really hard.
But it absolutely does has a servile ‘Independent’ Crown Office, who have been dragging their feet in issuing warrants.
The Crown Office doesn't issue warrants. The police (with the approval of the procurator fiscal) apply to the independent judiciary for a warrant. Applications for warrants are not public so you have no idea of the police, pf, or sheriff was the barrier to be overcome. As a general rule, you want to live in a country where the barrier for the state to obtain a warrant is high to protect you from malicious actions.
The ICO is run by the Lord Advocate, who sits in Government...
Do you mean the ICO? The ICO is a UK independent body which is not run by the Lord Advocate. I'm guessing you mean the COPFS? The Lord Advocate has a bit of a weird half-in-half-out of government role - she is not an MSP, she doesn't automatically attend cabinet. There are lots of people within COPFS who are not SNP fans and would happily "out" her if it seemed she was taking a political position. Its much more likely that the investigation and prosecution of financial crime is just an incredibly slow process.
It used to be the case that a suspect attending a police station voluntarily had to sign a paper form to confirm they were there of their own free will. For example back in the day detention before charge was limited to 6 hours. I believe questions were sometimes asked about how genuinely voluntarily their attendance was. Arresting removes any doubts which is an advantage for the police. It is also a safeguard for the suspect as it starts a clock and limits the time a suspect can be interviewed.
I’m sure if a suspect wasn’t arrested and his interview went beyond 13 hours the police would be criticized for not arresting and it would be suggested they were trying to avoid the 12 hour limit.
To be fair it seems to be the old leaders of SNP that are trying to discredit SNP - not the establishment. It would appear it is not "Westminster and the English" making it up.
Ta Poly - I did of course mean " under caution"
I'm still seeing it all individually as not looking like a big deal, but enough together to look like a bigger deal. At the very least stuff like the battle bus looks like gross wastefulness of donor's money- I used to be a member, if I still was I'd be raging. And getting arrested is not a good look, even if it never leads to anything.
Too much of it just seems still up in the air- will the arrests lead to anything of substance, will the accounts be delivered in time, will they be signed off by a new auditor etc. I'm naturally a bit suspicious of when so much is made of the story before it settles, that often seems to be a tactic people choose when they think it'll come to nothing and they need to make the most of the uncertainty. But Sturgeon's timing goes a long way to cancel that out.
Like I said in the other thread that got locked, the auditor thing's became a bit symbolic of the whople thing to me- so many asparaguses and suggestions flying around about that, but there seems to be no real substance to it as yet. (and the fact that the same people condemned the timing when they thought it was recent, and then condemned the timing when they discovered it wasn't, is pretty funny. "Whevnever this happened, it's very significant and important that it happened at that moment, whenever it was") Overall it feels almost like someone's shot their load early as far as running the story since it only becomes an event if they don't sort it before the next accounts submissions- July, I think? And even then it's not that big of a deal, as the Electoral Commision just appoints their own. But again at the very best it looks amateurish, they didn't need to leave themselves open. And maybe it's suggestive of something more- again, we'll see.
I'm definitely reserving judgement but, I get why a lot of people won't. Ultimately they're kind of still my guys so if they've been doing wrong I want them to go down in flames... But I suspect it'll mostly fizzle into a few fairly minor things and a lot more asparagii and ends up not really doing much solid but being a millstone around their necks for ages.
(I don't get the motorhome thing at all- like, who gains from that? Was it just being kept quiet because it was embarassing? Or being left to see if it could be "forgotten" and then used? Usually you just look for who gained but nobody really seems to have... except the motorhome seller)
I don’t get the motorhome thing at all- like, who gains from that?
I suspect Murrell is actually a secret STWer. It hasn't been widely reported but during the searches they also found a wood burning stove and an AGA cooker.