Nicola Sturgeon said she knew nothing. The SNP said there was nothing to see.
The more we learn about this scandal, the less believable that becomes.
A grubby deal that appears to have protected Peter Murrell, limited further scrutiny of Nicola Sturgeon and spared the SNP even more damaging revelations.
Who agreed it? Who benefited from it? And why was it considered acceptable?
Strugeon "deceived, misled and betrayed"
OK... so why exactly has she done a deal with lying criminal Murrell to protect £60K worth of 'Sturgeonesque purchases'?
This stunk before, now it's rancid.
Perhaps his anger is because he bled votes and he bled seats at the election just like the last time he was SNP leader…..and goodness knows how worse it would have been if the Murrell trial hadn’t been delayed.
Questioned by Anas Sarwar on whether the SNP made fraudulent VAT refund claims when Murrell was in charge, John Swinney acknowledges that this may have happened. Which makes his continued resistance to a proper inquiry even harder to justify.
@GreenBhoy1967 Jeez … she’s fucked off to London leaving you nutters behind. But she’ll be back to answer questions. Do your homework, she’s a horrible corrupt bully.
I see John Swinney has finally admitted that the “ring fenced” fund for a 2nd indyref was spent on other things. Apart from the deceit perpetrated on the donors this does rather beg the question of how the SNP would fund a second indyref campaign if they got a section 30 order.