Nicola Sturgeon did want David Cameron to win the general election, report concludes – UK Politics – UK – The Independent

This blog only said there was reason to doubt the truth of Ms Sturgeon’s claims – but The Independent just came right out and said she lied.

Will the SNP’s ardent followers be cancelling their subscriptions?

A leaked civil service memo which alleged the Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon wanted David Cameron to win the general election was an “accurate” record of a conversation with a French official, an investigation has concluded.

Source: Nicola Sturgeon did want David Cameron to win the general election, report concludes – UK Politics – UK – The Independent

26 thoughts on “Nicola Sturgeon did want David Cameron to win the general election, report concludes – UK Politics – UK – The Independent

  1. Martin McMillan

    You are just making a damn fool of yourself here Mike, and the Independent will be lucky to escape a libel action. If you were so sure of the facts of the matter here, I suspect you wouldn’t have been so circumspect in your series of smear articles.
    I’m not sure what the total readership of the Independent is in Scotland, but it certainly isn’t anywhere near the membership of the SNP, and that membership will be affected not one jot by the article, except perhaps to increase it.
    Like I said to you a number of times, even before the referendum, we’ve had this crap for long enough from all corners of the media, that we see right through it, you might as well be barking like dogs for all the effect it has on our likely voting intentions.
    Such is the situation in Scotland now, we don’t need you, the newspapers, or anyone else; to analyse our politicians, or their actions for us, we do it for ourselves.
    If the SNP or any of their politicians step out of line, we are the ones who will hold them to account, because they work for us, as it should be, and they know it.
    Feel free to insult my intelligence, as before, or come up with some daft nitpicking comment, or construct a lovely big strawman for me to laugh at, it seems that it’s all you are good for these days.
    Have a nice day.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      I am sure of the facts. They are as described in my article. I don’t write smear pieces.
      Your claim about what (presumably) the Scottish people have had from the media in the past and what this means for the future makes you, personally, seem a little silly. Shouldn’t you be judging matters on their own merits?
      Part of the problem is that you don’t analyse SNP politicians in any detail; you worship them. It seems they can do no wrong, in your eyes – and that of course gives them carte blanche to do anything they want.
      You say you will hold them to account but I doubt that you will – certainly not for the next five years, because you have exercised your democratic rights in the matter and they won’t let you have another say until the end of the current Parliament.
      I don’t insult anybody’s intelligence (although some people insult mine); I don’t nitpick (I present facts); and I’m the one who laughs at “straw man” arguments.
      The weather is beautiful here in the Paradise of Wales, so I think I will have a nice day, despite your comment.

  2. Joan Edington

    “an “accurate” record of a conversation with a French official”
    Nobody with any sense is arguing that the memo was real Mike. The point is, though, that the official in question was not part of the private conversation and the civil servant who talked to that official has said that things “could have been lost in translation” so the content might not have been “accurate”. Maybe I’m a cynic, but I don’t think that a Cabinet Office report is necessarily unbiased in this case. I don’t think we will ever know for absolute certainty one way or the other but I don’t think you can claim to have been “vindicated yet again”, as you stated in a previous post.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      I think some of your fellow SNP supporters will be thinking you’ve turned against them with that first remark, Joan – they’ve been braying about it being false all night and morning.
      As I said before, it seems most likely that the civil servant was offering “plausible deniability” to the diplomats. His report puts down the comment in a straightforward, this-is-what-I-was-told, way which indicates that the “lost in translation” supposition was an afterthought.

      I can certainly claim to have been vindicated because the statements in the original article have been shown to be factually accurate.

      1. Martin McMillan

        I don’t imagine any SNP supporters will be turning against Joan over her opening remarks Mike, as the majority are aware what quotation marks mean, in terms of her attributing the statement to you.
        The longer you spend flogging this and other dead horses, the longer it will be before you begin to get your own house in order, I’ve witnessed you blaming the SNP for “stealing” Labour votes, I’ve witnessed you insulting the intelligence of the Scottish electorate, accusing us of being cultists, and deluded.
        I think you are projecting your own problems on us.
        If I was an SNP cultist, you would think that I would have bothered my arse joining the party, eh? I haven’t.
        The Labour Party’s major problem, is that it stands for nothing these days, other than to be not quite as bad as the Tories, the electorate deserve better, and in Scotland they now have it.
        You might as well deal with the new reality, because it’s here to stay, at least for the time being, and though Scotland, like the rest of the UK, needs an effective opposition, it is as yet unclear whether that will ever be the Labour Party again, and that is a sad state of affairs.

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        She didn’t attribute the statement to me. Look at the quoted material from the Independent story. See it? That’s what she was quoting. She was just setting the scene for her own remarks.
        It’s not a dead horse; this is a topical subject. And I haven’t insulted the intelligence of the Scottish electorate, most of whom didn’t vote SNP.
        I most certainly am not projecting my problems anywhere.
        I don’t have to deal with any new reality because your idea of it only exists in your mind – and those of other SNP adherents. Hence the ‘cultist’ tag.
        There aren’t enough of you to make even the perception real enough for the rest of us to pay attention.

  3. Joan Edington

    And therein lies your position. The use of the word “us” which considers all Scots as a minor bit off the top of the UK and not worth paying attention to at all. Just like the rest of the national media. To the “us” that is the Scottish people, the SNP are very obviously real enough to pay attention to, whether we support them or not.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      The “you” I mentioned would be SNP cultists like the other commenter. The “us” is then everybody who isn’t an SNP cultist like that person – including Scottish citizens.
      Really, Joan, you are desperate to be divisive today, aren’t you? I suppose that’s the nationalist position, though, isn’t it – force division where there isn’t any; try to make up differences between people when there aren’t any.
      Once again: The SNP is not Scotland; not all Scottish people support it, and many never will.

  4. Joan Edington

    I read another opinion yesterday. It said that, with David Mundell being Carmichael’s deputy for 5 years, sharing the same offices in Edinburgh and London and being quite friendly, is it likely that he wouldn’t have been told of this memo, totally real or otherwise? If so, is it equally likely that he wouldn’t have informed Cameron? I must not make claims that can be classed as libel; just asking the questions as that blogger did. If they were true, that would put the Tories in a quandary re Scotland. If both MPs had to resign, he would have no Scot to make Secretary of State.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      From the information available to us, this seems highly unlikely.
      I find it strange that a supporter of the SNP is putting forward alternative possibilities about this matter, reflecting badly on other parties, when SNP supporters have been doing their best to shut down the most obvious alternative to their own narrative.

  5. Lorraine Sharon P Kelly

    So what you are basically or anyone else for that matter ,that wasn’t even in the meeting are saying is that Both Nicola Sturgeon and the French Ambassador lied .
    Think you should think very very carefully about what you have written ,as you will be liable to a law suit
    As for the SNP i think you will find that it will now be the main party of Scotland for a long long time and people like you are just going to have to deal with it , just like i have to deal with the Tory Party being in power in Westminster even though i and thousands like me didn’t vote for them

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      No, I’m not saying that they lied; I’m saying we don’t know that they told the truth.
      Meanwhile, SNP supportors all over the place are running around waving Carmichael’s letter like their God’s Own Messengers, proclaiming it to be absolute proof that she didn’t say what the Telegraph claimed, when it isn’t.
      Carmichael doesn’t know whether the memo accurately recorded the meeting between Sturgeon and the ambassador or not. The only people who say he does are people with a vested interest in claiming Sturgeon’s innocence.
      That’s not good enough for me.
      And no – I won’t be facing any lawsuits over this.
      You face a future of disillusionment and despair. I pity you.

  6. rosie

    Small point here “most of Scottish electorate didn’t vote SNP” but 50 % did on May 7th. That is a fact!

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      No, less than 36 per cent of the Scottish electorate voted SNP on May 7. That’s the fact!

  7. Tony Hemphill

    Your wrong here mike, have the balls to admit it! and no matter what happens we’re leaving the uk within the 5 to 10 years with ether another referendum or when we give the SNP a huge mandate next year at the Scottish GE UDI , labour sold the scottish people out, we all saw (before the referendum) labour standing shoulder to shoulder with the scum that is the tories. PS i wish the english people all the best BUT you (not you personally) voted the scum back into power not us (as usual ) and we are fucking sick of not getting governments we vote for. SAOR ALBA GU BRATH

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      And now you’re about to see the SNP standing shoulder to shoulder with the Tories on the EU referendum. Doesn’t that give you even the remotest reason to stop and think?
      No, I didn’t vote the Tories back in, but many of those who did, did so because they feared the possibility that the SNP would have any influence over the national finances – so, again, the SNP can’t get out of its part in what happened (I know you’d like it to).
      The rest of us know about your planned Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI). It wouldn’t be legal; you’d get no recognition and no help.

      1. Joan Edington

        “the SNP standing shoulder to shoulder with the Tories on the EU referendum”.
        Desperate stuff Mike. I believe that the SNP position re the EU referendum is the same as Labour’s new position. They accept that there will be a referendum but will be campaigning against leaving the EU. Salmon has said that he will campaign alongside those Tories who are also against leaving as, presumably, will the Labour party. I’m still not sure what the official Tory position actually is.

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        Labour has not said it will work with anyone on the EU referendum (to the best of my knowledge) – possibly because of the Better Together experience.
        The SNP – via Alex Salmond – has said it will work with anyone who isn’t a fascist.

  8. Tony Hemphill

    pps:if ED MILLIBAND HAD SAID HE WOULD DEAL WITH THE SNP ON A VOTE BY VOTE ISSUE LABOUR WOULD HAVE WIN THAT ELECTION, BUT NO THE COWARD WAS SCARED THE TORIES WOULD SAY HE WAS HELPING THE SNP BUT ENGLISH PEOPLE LIKE SNP POLICIES BECAUSE THEY WERE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THE 2 MAIN PARTIES WERE SAYING, WHAT WAS HE SCARED OF? THE THE MSM WOULD CALL HIM A SOCIALIST,JESUS THEY WERE ALREADY CALLING HIM THAT! YOU NEED TO START ALL OVER AGAIN FROM THE GRASSROOTS LIKE WE HAVE BEEN DOING SINCE 2012 NOW WE ARE THE BIGGEST PARTY IN SCOTLAND AND THE 3RD BIGGEST IN WESTMINSTER WITH MEMBERSHIP GOING UP EVERY DAY: AND UP HERE WE STILL REMEMBER HOW TO BE A DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST PARTY. SAOR ALBA GU BRATH

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      Don’t shout, please.

      You are badly mistaken. The Middle Englanders, who voted Tory, did so precisely because they did not want Ed Miliband leading a government that would deal with the SNP on any issues at all. Please try to understand that this is why Labour lost – not because Miliband would not go into a deal with the SNP but because of the fear that he would. You ask why he should be afraid of the MSM calling him a socialist – of course, he wasn’t! Ed Miliband called Ed Miliband a socialist.

      You are badly mistaken about what has happened and if you are representative of your party, then it is heading for a disaster.

  9. Alistair

    Hey Mike,
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/22/lib-dem-alistair-carmichael-admits-responsibility-anti-sturgeon-leak-mp-snp-leader-david-cameron
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-32849065
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/05/22/alistar-carmichael-admits-to-nikileaks-leak_n_7421384.html
    http://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-herald/20150523/281479275005697/TextView

    The guy himself admitted it was b***shit, why you would be writing this stuff is beyond me.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      Hey Alistair,
      The guy himself – Carmichael – wasn’t involved in any of the meetings or conversations relevant to this issue, so he wouldn’t know if it was true or false and his claim is useless.
      Why you would be suggesting otherwise is pretty obvious to anybody with a brain, but don’t suggest it again.

Comments are closed.