Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

elantan wrote: »

I will even donate a tenner if u like ... go on take her to court .but I bet you won't Hamish... maybe it doesn't bother you that much really ... your just clinging on for anything that you can to push your SNP bad agenda ... ..

Heh...

Politicians lie.

Not exactly a shocker.

But only the SNP fanatics are desperate enough to waste £200,000 of their money taking it to court and losing...;)

Shakethedisease

Leanne1812 wrote: »

My goodness.....a lot of outrage again! And it isn't coming from the 'nats!'

If you scroll back you'll see the Carmichael case wasn't even raised by one of us 'nats'. It was string who brought it up, fair enough.

EVERY single off topic tittle tattle BIG SCANDAL story here is brought up by those with pro-union views. I got it in the neck a few pages back for being 'off topic' all the time whereas people like string and Hamish were focused on the 'real' economics.

I couldn't even be bothered pointing what you said out, though am glad finally someone has.

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Heh...

Politicians lie.

Not exactly a shocker.

They do. But not many of them come out a week after they've been re-elected, safe and sound for another 5 years....and say 'oops' after appearing on national tv and denying all knowledge. That memo dominated headlines and news print 24/7 for about a week during the election run up. Perhaps if the story hadn't been made such a meal of. Then people wouldn't have felt the need to re-run the Orkney election.

And a re-run of the election all cards on the table was what the ultimate aim was.

But only the SNP fanatics are desperate enough to waste £200,000 of their money taking it to court and losing...;)

Not as much as Carmichael and his party has and will off the back of it. Silly man.

The astonishing aspect of this case is that his defence was that he did indeed lie to fool his constituents. He deliberately pulled the wool over their eyes. He admits cheating the voters. The reality is that the knowledge to which they were entitled, yet did not get in time, may well have swung the vote against him. It is the clearest and most blatant act against democracy.

He survives merely because the test in law applied under the legislation chosen by the plaintiffs demands that he tells the lie for a personal reason rather than the political one. They were not convinced he cheated and lied in a way that would lead people to think it was out of character. If he had linked the lie to a statement declaring himself a trustworthy and honest man, it would have damned him. But the lack of that context gave rise to doubt in the judges’ mind and allowed them to decide it was a political ruse instead. But isn’t that exactly why this cowardly man should resign?

http://derekbateman.co.uk/2015/12/09/men-of-honour/

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

a re-run of the election all cards on the table was what the ultimate aim was.

So I assume you support the same outcome for the SNP MP's currently involved in Fraud and Theft scandals.... Natalie McGarry and Michelle Thomson?

A re-run of the election with "all cards on the table"?

Do you really think Thomson would have won her slim 3K vote lead had the information about 13 counts of mortgage fraud and ripping off a woman with cancer emerged before the election?

Generali

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

So I assume you support the same outcome for the SNP MP's currently involved in Fraud and Theft scandals.... Natalie McGarry and Michelle Thomson?

A re-run of the election with "all cards on the table"?

Do you really think Thomson would have won her slim 3K vote lead had the information about 13 counts of mortgage fraud and ripping off a woman with cancer emerged before the election?

Doesn't count, they're SNP members or at least were.

Do try to keep up. If you're in The Party then you're not only innocent until proved guilty but evidence of guilt or even guilt itself is immaterial.

Leanne1812

wotsthat wrote: »

Don't worry it's deemed yesterday's news. We've determined the severity of any lie depends upon..

- whether the liar is a nationalist
- whether people voted for them in the knowledge they're a liar and; to add to the list..
- how long ago the lie was told

She's a nationalist, other nationalists didn't care she was a liar and some time has passed since the lie ergo it doesn't matter.

So, no proof whatsoever then?

Deflect & spin all you like.

Evidence & I'll concede, it's really that simple.

Leanne1812

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Her former colleagues in the NHS know it all too well...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28883221

And...


http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/surgeon-exposed-spreading-bogus-claims-4103150

Hmm, quotes from people with their own agenda.

Not quite what I asked for.

Prove to me she told a deliberate misleading lie.

Leanne1812

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

So I assume you support the same outcome for the SNP MP's currently involved in Fraud and Theft scandals.... Natalie McGarry and Michelle Thomson?

A re-run of the election with "all cards on the table"?

Do you really think Thomson would have won her slim 3K vote lead had the information about 13 counts of mortgage fraud and ripping off a woman with cancer emerged before the election?

I would support a re-run.

If the SNP MP's are found to be guilty guilty of theft/fraud then voters deserve the right to decide if they should hold their seat or not. . Let's wait for the law to decide first though eh.

Can you link to the story of Thomson ripping of the woman with cancer please? Is this particular case more important or relevant than any others?

Do you think Carmichael would have won his 800 vote lead had the truth been known beforehand?

Leanne1812

Generali wrote: »

Doesn't count, they're SNP members or at least were.

Do try to keep up. If you're in The Party then you're not only innocent until proved guilty but evidence of guilt or even guilt itself is immaterial.

Do keep up. Provide the necessary evidence to prove their guilt. Simple enough request is it not?

Leanne1812

Shakethedisease wrote: »

EVERY single off topic tittle tattle BIG SCANDAL story here is brought up by those with pro-union views. I got it in the neck a few pages back for being 'off topic' all the time whereas people like string and Hamish were focused on the 'real' economics.

I couldn't even be bothered pointing what you said out, though am glad finally someone has.

When will you learn?.......if it's SNP bad it's on topic!