comment by Zachsda( He’s gone, the shark throwers have won) (U1850)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 44 seconds ago
how can you corroborate something you weren't present at?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
One was present mate.
Look there’s not much point in going on about it. People have made their minds up and are more than happy to take her word for everything so I’ll leave it that the country is run by the most forgetful and incompetent set of a collaborative cabal ever.
Just sit back and let them run it further into the ground. They’ve made a great job of it so far
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were not.Their evidence is that someone who was present told them it.
That "proves" they passed on what they heard about the meeting, not at it.
Were I a defendant i'd expect my lawyer to challenge that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3 people have now all said the same thing.
<So its a Two Person Party?>
One was present mate.
Look there’s not much point in going on about it. People have made their minds up and are more than happy to take her word for everything so I’ll leave it that the country is run by the most forgetful and incompetent set of a collaborative cabal ever.
Just sit back and let them run it further into the ground. They’ve made a great job of it so far
I've not made my mind up about anything, if the committee or James Hamilton go away and find her in breach of the MC then I'd expect her to resign
I just didn't feel like I heard anything worth resigning over going on what other leading political figures in the UK have got away with
<They are also the most trustworthy>
That gets 2.
comment by Zachsda( He’s gone, the shark throwers h... (U1850)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 44 seconds ago
how can you corroborate something you weren't present at?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
One was present mate.
Look there’s not much point in going on about it. People have made their minds up and are more than happy to take her word for everything so I’ll leave it that the country is run by the most forgetful and incompetent set of a collaborative cabal ever.
Just sit back and let them run it further into the ground. They’ve made a great job of it so far
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were not.Their evidence is that someone who was present told them it.
That "proves" they passed on what they heard about the meeting, not at it.
Were I a defendant i'd expect my lawyer to challenge that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes a lawyer would challenge it. And no, nothing has been definitively proven.
People are free to believe what they want. I’m comfortable with my belief. She’s a liar.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 38 minutes ago
'The corroboration testifies that the meeting was arranged by her office to specifically discuss the Salmond case and everyone in attendance knew why they were going there.'
The only corroboration that gives is what they were told. That's just hearsay and doesn't confirm what actually happened.
Have you found the quote where NS called anyone a liar last week, or that the other parties released statements calling for her resignation yesterday??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
I see. So written statements from two eminent and senior individuals (one being a QC) is now deemed as being non corroborated? Well that’ll be a new one for the legal bods. Yep you can giggle that away.
And yes if you state on national tv that another country making definitive statements will be proven wrong and will have to change tact then yes you are accusing them of lying. What else would you call it?
Here’s a wee laugh emoji to be getting on withas you scoff those assertions away
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What they said was true-but it was what they were told that was being discussed. If I say ‘that is what I was told’, that’s not corroboration, and neither am I lying. I’m being absolutely honest, but it doesn’t mean that the initial allegation is true.
And your words were that she called another government liars, and you repeated it several times last week before conceding that’s not what was said. Being political as you are, you’re now changing that to accusing people of lying, which I’m not sure was what was either implied or should be taken from it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She called them liars. The word itself may not have been used but that’s what she called them.
I’m really baffled as to why anyone would interpret it differently.
She also called other people liars today. As others have called her. Was the word used? No. Can we safety interpret it as that? Absolutely.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-but that was your interpretation of it. It was challenged last week, and clearly wasn’t the case.
You’ve had 3 posters on here tell you that the ‘corroboration’ that was being discussed wasn’t actually corroboration.
Well we've just had an 'Enquiry' where SNP appointed officials have
ordered that evidence be kept secret.
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 52 seconds ago
One was present mate.
Look there’s not much point in going on about it. People have made their minds up and are more than happy to take her word for everything so I’ll leave it that the country is run by the most forgetful and incompetent set of a collaborative cabal ever.
Just sit back and let them run it further into the ground. They’ve made a great job of it so far
I've not made my mind up about anything, if the committee or James Hamilton go away and find her in breach of the MC then I'd expect her to resign
I just didn't feel like I heard anything worth resigning over going on what other leading political figures in the UK have got away with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We all know it’ll fizzle out. She won’t walk and to my knowledge the vote of no confidence hasn’t materialised. She won’t have to resign.
This has been led a merry farce of a dance by the SG and they will have achieved what they set out to do. Ruin it.
mental that sturgeon knocked back ginger when he tried to winch her and he can't let it go.
grow up mate, she didnae fancy u
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 38 minutes ago
'The corroboration testifies that the meeting was arranged by her office to specifically discuss the Salmond case and everyone in attendance knew why they were going there.'
The only corroboration that gives is what they were told. That's just hearsay and doesn't confirm what actually happened.
Have you found the quote where NS called anyone a liar last week, or that the other parties released statements calling for her resignation yesterday??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
I see. So written statements from two eminent and senior individuals (one being a QC) is now deemed as being non corroborated? Well that’ll be a new one for the legal bods. Yep you can giggle that away.
And yes if you state on national tv that another country making definitive statements will be proven wrong and will have to change tact then yes you are accusing them of lying. What else would you call it?
Here’s a wee laugh emoji to be getting on withas you scoff those assertions away
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What they said was true-but it was what they were told that was being discussed. If I say ‘that is what I was told’, that’s not corroboration, and neither am I lying. I’m being absolutely honest, but it doesn’t mean that the initial allegation is true.
And your words were that she called another government liars, and you repeated it several times last week before conceding that’s not what was said. Being political as you are, you’re now changing that to accusing people of lying, which I’m not sure was what was either implied or should be taken from it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She called them liars. The word itself may not have been used but that’s what she called them.
I’m really baffled as to why anyone would interpret it differently.
She also called other people liars today. As others have called her. Was the word used? No. Can we safety interpret it as that? Absolutely.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-but that was your interpretation of it. It was challenged last week, and clearly wasn’t the case.
You’ve had 3 posters on here tell you that the ‘corroboration’ that was being discussed wasn’t actually corroboration.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No need to be sorry but I’ll form my own opinion and often it’s not based on someone else’s. To me the amount of individuals stating exactly the same thing does form corroboration; especially set against a background scenario where there was no real agenda for this meeting and Salmond just popped in from 200 miles away.
comment by JFK - The Rebel Treble (U8919)
posted 1 minute ago
mental that sturgeon knocked back ginger when he tried to winch her and he can't let it go.
grow up mate, she didnae fancy u
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sigh
You’re hiding behind the couch routine was far better mate.
comment by The Mighty Quinn (U4099)
posted 3 minutes ago
Well we've just had an 'Enquiry' where SNP appointed officials have
ordered that evidence be kept secret.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing to see here.
Got a zoom.
Go gettem' Ginger.
Won't be hearing that too often
mrs gingers behind it with me.
HA!
take that.
I don’t even know why I’m actually bothered about all this. Her and her party will not influence my life one little bit other than making me wait to get back to the football a bit longer than necessary.
comment by JFK - The Rebel Treble (U8919)
posted 51 seconds ago
mrs gingers behind it with me.
HA!
take that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cow
‘ No need to be sorry but I’ll form my own opinion and often it’s not based on someone else’s. To me the amount of individuals stating exactly the same thing does form corroboration; especially set against a background scenario where there was no real agenda for this meeting and Salmond just popped in from 200 miles away.’
3 people have explained to you why it wasn’t corroboration. I think you’re confused over what we’ve all been talking about, and what you think we’ve been talking about.
Being blunt, you’re wrong on this-and that’s not even debatable. Because some of the committee used the word ‘corroboration’ doesn’t make it so.
The 2 that you’re talking about weren’t at the discussions that took place. Their corroboration is that they can confirm that one of the people there told them what was said. That’s not corroboration.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
So shes doing you a turn
no excuse ginger, you set yourself up for it
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 4 seconds ago
So shes doing you a turn
no excuse ginger, you set yourself up for it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye I walked into that.
Time for a perfectflow. Usually does the trick
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Zachsda( He’s gone, the shark throwers h... (U1850)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 4 seconds ago
So shes doing you a turn
no excuse ginger, you set yourself up for it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye I walked into that.
Time for a perfectflow. Usually does the trick
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I need to get one of those
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Great investment but not sure how long you have to wait now. Can’t be long surely?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Sign in if you want to comment
This nonsense has to stop
Page 34 of 38
34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38
posted on 3/3/21
comment by Zachsda( He’s gone, the shark throwers have won) (U1850)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 44 seconds ago
how can you corroborate something you weren't present at?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
One was present mate.
Look there’s not much point in going on about it. People have made their minds up and are more than happy to take her word for everything so I’ll leave it that the country is run by the most forgetful and incompetent set of a collaborative cabal ever.
Just sit back and let them run it further into the ground. They’ve made a great job of it so far
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were not.Their evidence is that someone who was present told them it.
That "proves" they passed on what they heard about the meeting, not at it.
Were I a defendant i'd expect my lawyer to challenge that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3 people have now all said the same thing.
posted on 3/3/21
<So its a Two Person Party?>
posted on 3/3/21
One was present mate.
Look there’s not much point in going on about it. People have made their minds up and are more than happy to take her word for everything so I’ll leave it that the country is run by the most forgetful and incompetent set of a collaborative cabal ever.
Just sit back and let them run it further into the ground. They’ve made a great job of it so far
I've not made my mind up about anything, if the committee or James Hamilton go away and find her in breach of the MC then I'd expect her to resign
I just didn't feel like I heard anything worth resigning over going on what other leading political figures in the UK have got away with
posted on 3/3/21
<They are also the most trustworthy>
That gets 2.
posted on 3/3/21
comment by Zachsda( He’s gone, the shark throwers h... (U1850)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 44 seconds ago
how can you corroborate something you weren't present at?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
One was present mate.
Look there’s not much point in going on about it. People have made their minds up and are more than happy to take her word for everything so I’ll leave it that the country is run by the most forgetful and incompetent set of a collaborative cabal ever.
Just sit back and let them run it further into the ground. They’ve made a great job of it so far
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were not.Their evidence is that someone who was present told them it.
That "proves" they passed on what they heard about the meeting, not at it.
Were I a defendant i'd expect my lawyer to challenge that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes a lawyer would challenge it. And no, nothing has been definitively proven.
People are free to believe what they want. I’m comfortable with my belief. She’s a liar.
posted on 3/3/21
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 38 minutes ago
'The corroboration testifies that the meeting was arranged by her office to specifically discuss the Salmond case and everyone in attendance knew why they were going there.'
The only corroboration that gives is what they were told. That's just hearsay and doesn't confirm what actually happened.
Have you found the quote where NS called anyone a liar last week, or that the other parties released statements calling for her resignation yesterday??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
I see. So written statements from two eminent and senior individuals (one being a QC) is now deemed as being non corroborated? Well that’ll be a new one for the legal bods. Yep you can giggle that away.
And yes if you state on national tv that another country making definitive statements will be proven wrong and will have to change tact then yes you are accusing them of lying. What else would you call it?
Here’s a wee laugh emoji to be getting on withas you scoff those assertions away
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What they said was true-but it was what they were told that was being discussed. If I say ‘that is what I was told’, that’s not corroboration, and neither am I lying. I’m being absolutely honest, but it doesn’t mean that the initial allegation is true.
And your words were that she called another government liars, and you repeated it several times last week before conceding that’s not what was said. Being political as you are, you’re now changing that to accusing people of lying, which I’m not sure was what was either implied or should be taken from it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She called them liars. The word itself may not have been used but that’s what she called them.
I’m really baffled as to why anyone would interpret it differently.
She also called other people liars today. As others have called her. Was the word used? No. Can we safety interpret it as that? Absolutely.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-but that was your interpretation of it. It was challenged last week, and clearly wasn’t the case.
You’ve had 3 posters on here tell you that the ‘corroboration’ that was being discussed wasn’t actually corroboration.
posted on 3/3/21
Well we've just had an 'Enquiry' where SNP appointed officials have
ordered that evidence be kept secret.
posted on 3/3/21
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 52 seconds ago
One was present mate.
Look there’s not much point in going on about it. People have made their minds up and are more than happy to take her word for everything so I’ll leave it that the country is run by the most forgetful and incompetent set of a collaborative cabal ever.
Just sit back and let them run it further into the ground. They’ve made a great job of it so far
I've not made my mind up about anything, if the committee or James Hamilton go away and find her in breach of the MC then I'd expect her to resign
I just didn't feel like I heard anything worth resigning over going on what other leading political figures in the UK have got away with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We all know it’ll fizzle out. She won’t walk and to my knowledge the vote of no confidence hasn’t materialised. She won’t have to resign.
This has been led a merry farce of a dance by the SG and they will have achieved what they set out to do. Ruin it.
posted on 3/3/21
mental that sturgeon knocked back ginger when he tried to winch her and he can't let it go.
grow up mate, she didnae fancy u
posted on 3/3/21
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by My Partially Peeved POV (U10636)
posted 38 minutes ago
'The corroboration testifies that the meeting was arranged by her office to specifically discuss the Salmond case and everyone in attendance knew why they were going there.'
The only corroboration that gives is what they were told. That's just hearsay and doesn't confirm what actually happened.
Have you found the quote where NS called anyone a liar last week, or that the other parties released statements calling for her resignation yesterday??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
I see. So written statements from two eminent and senior individuals (one being a QC) is now deemed as being non corroborated? Well that’ll be a new one for the legal bods. Yep you can giggle that away.
And yes if you state on national tv that another country making definitive statements will be proven wrong and will have to change tact then yes you are accusing them of lying. What else would you call it?
Here’s a wee laugh emoji to be getting on withas you scoff those assertions away
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What they said was true-but it was what they were told that was being discussed. If I say ‘that is what I was told’, that’s not corroboration, and neither am I lying. I’m being absolutely honest, but it doesn’t mean that the initial allegation is true.
And your words were that she called another government liars, and you repeated it several times last week before conceding that’s not what was said. Being political as you are, you’re now changing that to accusing people of lying, which I’m not sure was what was either implied or should be taken from it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She called them liars. The word itself may not have been used but that’s what she called them.
I’m really baffled as to why anyone would interpret it differently.
She also called other people liars today. As others have called her. Was the word used? No. Can we safety interpret it as that? Absolutely.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-but that was your interpretation of it. It was challenged last week, and clearly wasn’t the case.
You’ve had 3 posters on here tell you that the ‘corroboration’ that was being discussed wasn’t actually corroboration.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No need to be sorry but I’ll form my own opinion and often it’s not based on someone else’s. To me the amount of individuals stating exactly the same thing does form corroboration; especially set against a background scenario where there was no real agenda for this meeting and Salmond just popped in from 200 miles away.
posted on 3/3/21
comment by JFK - The Rebel Treble (U8919)
posted 1 minute ago
mental that sturgeon knocked back ginger when he tried to winch her and he can't let it go.
grow up mate, she didnae fancy u
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sigh
You’re hiding behind the couch routine was far better mate.
posted on 3/3/21
comment by The Mighty Quinn (U4099)
posted 3 minutes ago
Well we've just had an 'Enquiry' where SNP appointed officials have
ordered that evidence be kept secret.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing to see here.
posted on 3/3/21
Got a zoom.
Go gettem' Ginger.
Won't be hearing that too often
posted on 3/3/21
mrs gingers behind it with me.
HA!
take that.
posted on 3/3/21
I don’t even know why I’m actually bothered about all this. Her and her party will not influence my life one little bit other than making me wait to get back to the football a bit longer than necessary.
posted on 3/3/21
comment by JFK - The Rebel Treble (U8919)
posted 51 seconds ago
mrs gingers behind it with me.
HA!
take that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cow
posted on 3/3/21
‘ No need to be sorry but I’ll form my own opinion and often it’s not based on someone else’s. To me the amount of individuals stating exactly the same thing does form corroboration; especially set against a background scenario where there was no real agenda for this meeting and Salmond just popped in from 200 miles away.’
3 people have explained to you why it wasn’t corroboration. I think you’re confused over what we’ve all been talking about, and what you think we’ve been talking about.
Being blunt, you’re wrong on this-and that’s not even debatable. Because some of the committee used the word ‘corroboration’ doesn’t make it so.
The 2 that you’re talking about weren’t at the discussions that took place. Their corroboration is that they can confirm that one of the people there told them what was said. That’s not corroboration.
posted on 3/3/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 3/3/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 3/3/21
So shes doing you a turn
no excuse ginger, you set yourself up for it
posted on 3/3/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 3/3/21
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 4 seconds ago
So shes doing you a turn
no excuse ginger, you set yourself up for it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye I walked into that.
Time for a perfectflow. Usually does the trick
posted on 3/3/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 3/3/21
comment by Zachsda( He’s gone, the shark throwers h... (U1850)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 4 seconds ago
So shes doing you a turn
no excuse ginger, you set yourself up for it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye I walked into that.
Time for a perfectflow. Usually does the trick
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I need to get one of those
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Great investment but not sure how long you have to wait now. Can’t be long surely?
posted on 3/3/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Page 34 of 38
34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38