On the 11th of June, SNP MSP Nicola Sturgeon was interviewed by police; she was in fact arrested, not interviewed as a witness but arrested as a suspect. Sturgeon’s arrest wasn’t unusual, already her husband, Peter Murrell was arrested, followed by Colin Beattie, the SNP Treasurer. So, the idea that the Police were going to pull Sturgeon was a racing certainty. Three people were responsible for the Scottish National Party finances, Nicola Sturgeon, Peter Murrell and Colin Beattie. Now, at this stage, it is worthwhile mentioning the word of caution by Police Scotland citing the Contempt of Court Act 1981, all the suspects named above have the presumption of innocence in law. It seems that as Operation Branchform is an active case although no one has been charged with any crime. The Police started this investigation circa 2 years ago over the issue of indyref 2 crowd funder which raked in £600,000; this money was said by the SNP to be woven through their accounts. A serious bit of journalism by Wings Over Scotland trawling through the submitted accounts of the SNP pointed out that an issue regarding cash flow held by the party. The sum in the accounts didn’t match the sum raised by the indyref 2 crowd funder.
In the wake of being arrested and held for 7 hours, the press gathered outside the home of Nicola Sturgeon presumably to welcome her home, but she didn’t go home, she went into hiding. Not only did she go into hiding, so did Peter Murrell, this might have seen strange to ordinary people which lead me to ask the question is there academic data between innocent and people going into hiding after being arrested by Police? Also, it is worth mentioning that Sturgeon proxy, Humza Yousaf who appears to be the ‘caretaker’ put in place by the Sturgeon Cult is not going to suspend Nicola Sturgeon. And he is also not going to suspend Colin Beattie and Peter Murrell, which has raised some eyebrows. Why does this raise eyebrows? Basically because when Sturgeon was First Minister and leader of the SNP, she would suspend memberships of elected SNP Politicians even without them being arrested under the catch all of bringing the party into disrepute. Lots of questions now specifically about Humza Yousaf’s behaviour which goes beyond his defence line of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ will be coming down the pipeline.
Why
the double standards by Humza Yousaf?
Why
did Humza Yousaf allegedly threaten members by saying back Sturgeon or leave?
Why
did the SNP send flowers to Nicola Sturgeon post arrest?
Why
does there appear to be an SNP led campaign to declare Nicola Sturgeon
innocent?
Why
did SNP MP Anne McLaughlin effectively tweet that Nicola Sturgeon is incapable
of committing any crime?
Why did SNP MSP James Dornan say that the press and police have colluded together?
What is happening inside the SNP under Humza Yousaf is strange, but I come back to the question, who is this campaign targeted at?
In
the wider sense, you might opine and assume that the Nicola Sturgeon is innocent
campaign is targeted directly at the public. But is the public support for
Nicola Sturgeon still there? Well, no, in a recent polling her popularity sits
at -7%, she enjoyed a +28 favourability rating as recently as December 2020
when she was doing her staged managed Joan of Arc routine, the savior of the
nation from Covid. Oh, how the less than intellectually mighty have fallen now.
One recurring concern for me which begs the question, why at this stage of
Operation Branchform, with no one being charged with anything, would this ‘support
Nicola Sturgeon’ be needed?
What did Police Scotland ask her on Sunday 11th June, and what answers, if any did she provide to the Police? If you had the opportunity would you sit through the 7 hours of her taped or videoed interview? Did she explain where the £600,000 indyref 2 cash is? In a recent Holyrood session, an SNP Minister tried to change the meaning of what the word ‘ring fenced’ actually meant, they’re appear to suggest that money taken from a budget could be taken away and spent, and then when more money came in, this money would go back into the budget. Is this a ploy to be used at any future criminal trial relating to Operation Branchform? If this was used, such a tactic would hold no weight with a judge or jury. Can you imagine SNP Government Ministers going into a court to attempt to explain what their version of ‘ring fenced’ means?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK6rWD00-jw
Basically what is said in this video, we have an IOU, and at some point it will be honoured because we have said so. Or, if you prefer, we spent the money but when more comes in, we will put it back.
When Nicola Sturgeon returned home on Sunday 18th June after a week in hiding, it was very noticeable that her husband Peter Murrell wasn’t standing beside her. And it was very noticeable that her demeanour and body language screamed that she didn’t want to answer any questions or be there in front of the press. She couldn’t look anyone directly in the eye, but she was keen that the press meets up with her later in the week, to ask questions. This appears to be part of her and the SNP’s campaign to declare her innocent of any wrongdoing.
Why does she need a campaign to declare her innocence?
After Sturgeon proxy, Humza Yousaf demand back Nicola Sturgeon or leave the party, at the next FMQs, it appears that 20 plus SNP MSPs didn’t turn up. As the nationalist camp implodes, those who hold seats are fearful of their future and rightly so. Polling shows 20 plus losses of SNP Westminister seats to Scottish Labour. In trying to save Sturgeon’s party membership, is Humza Yousaf or whoever controls him willing to risk the party’s future? It appears so, so what is in it for Yousaf? In the recent Bellshill council by-election, the result was a disaster for the SNP, even Humza Yousaf campaigning made no difference; Scottish Labour polled twice as many votes. A real test though will be the Rutherglen and Hamilton West by-election for Westminster. The SNP were traditionally good at organizing the big by-elections for Holyrood or Westminster, pulling in activists from right across Scotland, but as donations dry up, will the same happen with the experienced activists not showing up? What does a loss at Rutherglen and Hamilton West mean for the SNP Westminster group?
An answer to the question above might be rebellion, you see when you threaten people’s future and money; people become less compliant to authority. Already the shift away from the party leadership has started the party’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn has said Nicola Sturgeon, her husbandPeter Murrell and Colin Beattie MSP would no longer be welcome in the SNP if they were charged by the police. In Flynn’s mind, a criminal charge alone would be the material grounds to eject someone from the party, rather than waiting for a lengthy court verdict to happen. He told BBC Radio Scotland:
“In terms of my views at the moment, if someone is charged by the police for wrongdoing, then they shouldn’t be in the Scottish National Party.I am not aware of anyone being charged by the police in relation to any matter who is in the Scottish National Party. If that changes, then I’m sure people will act accordingly.”
People will act accordingly? Does that mean coup against Humza Yousaf? Does that mean vote of no confidence and a leadership challenge? Are there grounds to challenge for the replacement of Humza Yousaf? If so, does this mean a Kate Forbes for First Minister campaign is primed to go? If you have watched the SNP closely, you will know they operate to the cult of personality, in the case of Humza Yousaf, this pitch has flatly bottomed out. In their attempts to make Humza Yousaf credible and loveable to the masses, it just isn’t happening.
Although all eyes of the public are fixed on Operation Branchform, and let’s face it, everyone loves a good crime story, there are also two more criminal investigations working their way down the pipeline. In total, as of this day the SNP and the Scottish Government are embroiled in three live criminal cases.
Alex
Salmond investigation leaks
The longest-running one apprently is the perjury investigation into Peter Murrell, which Scottish Labour deputy leader Jackie Baillie instigated 19 months ago in January 2021.
Finally, it never rains but it pours, my eye was drawn to this gem. It appears that Police Officers are assessing allegations that SNP MP’s relative handed over thousands to the Scottish National Party but that donations were never declared to the Electoral Commission. It is said that SNP officials accepted envelopes stuffed with cash from a relative of one of the party’s own MPs. Begs the question, which SNP Officials? When? How much? And whether the money was paid into the SNP bank account? And just to show hard feelings, the new explosive claims were made in a letter sent last week to Police Scotland. A copy was also sent to the Lord Advocate, the country’s chief prosecutor, and The Scottish Mail on Sunday. So, I guess some people already interviewed and possibly others who haven’t been might have a trip to the police station in their futures. Under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, parties are legally obliged to declare donations worth more than £500. Failure to do so is a criminal offence which can result in a party being fined and ordered to forfeit the undeclared donations. And, the cherry, who took the cash in envelopes of cash and what did they do with them?
I
am sure there are many questions, but an indicator of withdrawal of human
capital might be exposed when the SNP members are expected to turn in Dundee for #HumzaFest
when for the price of a tenner members can hear pure drivel. Followed by the standard SNP
con trick that 2024 Westminster election is a de facto referendum on
independence. Quite frankly, the whole thing looks more like an exercise in
raising a few quid to pay the party’s spiralling legal fees via ordinary
members’ pockets, because let's face it, these people appear to have a track record when it comes to using other people's money to pay for things.
