QuoteYou seem to be oblivious to political events in Scotland, perhaps you're focusing too hard on events here. Let me enlighten you. The First Minister of Scotland is facing a misconduct investigation for holding a series of meetings with a former First Minister of Scotland, who was recently under investigation himself, but has been successful in his judicial review of the allegations made against him. Why the First Minister felt the need to claim these meetings were unofficial, when government officials were present, at here home, has yet to be revealed.This one still has some mileage to go yet. Cant wait Oh, and do try and keep up As I pointed out previously the judicial review brought by Mr Salmond was in respect of the government being in breach of it’s own procedures in their investigation of allegations made against him. It was not as you said a review of the actual allegations made against him.QuoteThis one still has some mileage to go yet. Cant wait That was the only bit you got right agricola. Former Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond arrested - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-46984747 Yes this one could run for a wee while.
You seem to be oblivious to political events in Scotland, perhaps you're focusing too hard on events here. Let me enlighten you. The First Minister of Scotland is facing a misconduct investigation for holding a series of meetings with a former First Minister of Scotland, who was recently under investigation himself, but has been successful in his judicial review of the allegations made against him. Why the First Minister felt the need to claim these meetings were unofficial, when government officials were present, at here home, has yet to be revealed.This one still has some mileage to go yet. Cant wait Oh, and do try and keep up
This one still has some mileage to go yet. Cant wait
Not right to comment further till after the trial.
Nope, I was absolutely bang on, it was a review of the allegations, not an inquiry of the allegations.
QuoteNope, I was absolutely bang on, it was a review of the allegations, not an inquiry of the allegations.Nope sorry I don't have a clue.
Re: Just for VNA a brexit thread « Reply #1804 on: Today at 07:51:17 PM » QuoteModify Quote<blockquote>Nope, I was absolutely bang on, it was a review of the allegations, not an inquiry of the allegations.</blockquote>
Nope sorry you don't have a clue.
a former First Minister of Scotland, who was recently under investigation himself, but has been successful in his judicial review of the allegations made against him.
QuoteRe: Just for VNA a brexit thread « Reply #1804 on: Today at 07:51:17 PM » QuoteModify Quote<blockquote>Nope, I was absolutely bang on, it was a review of the allegations, not an inquiry of the allegations.</blockquote>QuoteNope sorry you don't have a clue. Agricola, Mr Salmond quit the SNP and brought a legal action against the government. It was a judicial review into government procedure. Mr Salmond alleged that the government did not correctly implement it’s own investigative procedures. He won his case.You stated,Quotea former First Minister of Scotland, who was recently under investigation himself, but has been successful in his judicial review of the allegations made against him.There has been no judicial review into the allegations made against Mr Salmond.
Quote from: steve 10562cc on 24 January 2019, 07:26:54 pmNot right to comment further till after the trial.Ah shit....You had to go and say it, didn't you.
Mr Salmond initiated a judicial review which found that the Scottish Govt, as you correctly stated, cocked up.
Yet the 'stupid woman' is still not listening
If everybody knows that No Deal isn't going to happen, how can it be a negotiating position?
If everybody knows that No Deal isn't going to happen, how can it be a negotiating position? Or are the Tory MPs who need to be won over that stupid?
Tim complains about EU laws, but guess what, just like the BREXIT foccers here, he can’t name one law he opposes.
They do name them, but you're the self appointed judge and jury of whether those answers are acceptable and lo and behold, you dismiss them all.
I can refuse to accept that it will get dark this evening. Don't make it true tho
just like the BREXIT foccers here, he can’t name one law he opposes.
Quote from: VNA on 25 January 2019, 12:02:54 pmjust like the BREXIT foccers here, he can’t name one law he opposes.If someone names a law they oppose, and you don't oppose that law, you declare that they haven't answered!. That's plain bonkers. You might disagree with their view point as is your right, but it's still an answer.fazersharp dislikes DRL on cars. That's an answer to your question. Because you disagree you declare that it isn't an answer!.How can ANYONE debate against reasoning like that?!