An explanation of what is going on with the Salmond enquiry.

Alex Salmond was the leader of the SNP and was first minister of Scotland, but he stepped down from this position after the SNP failed to secure the Scottish Referendum.

Nicola Sturgeon took his place.

Nicola was basically Salmonds underling and he was her mentor. They were very close.

Everything after this point is all speculation/allegations, so take everything with a pinch of salt until the facts come out.

If the SNP ever allow them to come out.
A rift had been growing for many years between Salmond and Sturgeon as he felt she was not progressing enough towards an independent Scotland, probably because the party focuses mainly on woke bullshit and hate crime laws for memes.

Salmond hinted a return to the party.
Around about this time, with very convenient timing, Salmond got MeToo'd by several women within the SNP, this resulted in a massive police investigation, seriously huge, with the cops interviewing around 400 people.

Salmond was charged with several counts of sexual assault.
The case goes to trial, which results in Salmond being aquitted of all charges.

This is usually where such things would end, but it turns out this exposed everyone to a rabbit hole of alleged corruption within the SNP at it's highest levels.
Important to include that not only was he aquitted, but an enquiry also found the governments action against him unlawful, and he was awarded £500,000 in legal costs.
A parliamentary enquiry was launched to investigate the "mishandling" of this case by the Scottish government.

Some people consider this to be due to him being aquitted, some people believe it was part of a conspiracy to bring Salmond down as he threatened Sturgeons power.
Craig Murray, an ex-ambassador and diplomat, released the identities of Salmonds accusers, which resulted in him being charged with contempt of court.

In this article for The Majority, his defence statements say some pretty damning things about the SNP and Sturgeon.
He alleges that in his meetings with Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon and other high ranking SNP members, conspired to bring Salmond down.

Again, all of this is currently just allegations.
He also alleges that the SNP put major pressure on the police themselves to go ahead with the investigation, that it was something they really pushed for.

The whole "what evidence do you need" angle is pretty sus.
As the statement goes on, it seems the alleged victims were being treated like tools, with one even saying they felt more "pressured than supported" to go ahead with the allegations.

Indicates the party were more concerned with destroying Salmond, than getting justice.
You can read the entire thing here :

https://t.co/tkUGJhANbZ
He then closes with the reasons he made the names of the accusers public.
All of this still ongoing within the Scottish parliament, but it also includes a lot of fuckery, people giving conflicting statements, some people contradicting themselves, evidence being withheld, as well as accusations of Sturgeon breaking ministerial code by lying.
As enquiries are still ongoing, just a few days ago, Nicola Sturgeons own husband was giving evidence via video call, and during the call it is claimed he was "constantly looking to the left" leading to allegations that he was being coached off-camera about what to say.
There are many more things that I did not include for the sake of brevity, but this seriously is a huge rabbit hole and again it is still important to note that all of this far is just allegations. We don't have the full facts yet, and we might never get them.
But, if all of this turns out to be true, then it's over for the SNP, not only will the parties reputation be in the gutter, but many of its most prominent figures will have to resign and possibly face criminal charges themselves
If the upper echelons of this government are abusing their power in order to increase that power, then the Scottish people have a right to know, so I am happy with a full and unbiased enquiry, free from SNP influence, taking place.

More from World

You May Also Like

The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.


In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.

In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.

This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.

In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
Great article from @AsheSchow. I lived thru the 'Satanic Panic' of the 1980's/early 1990's asking myself "Has eveyrbody lost their GODDAMN MINDS?!"


The 3 big things that made the 1980's/early 1990's surreal for me.

1) Satanic Panic - satanism in the day cares ahhhh!

2) "Repressed memory" syndrome

3) Facilitated Communication [FC]

All 3 led to massive abuse.

"Therapists" -and I use the term to describe these quacks loosely - would hypnotize people & convince they they were 'reliving' past memories of Mom & Dad killing babies in Satanic rituals in the basement while they were growing up.

Other 'therapists' would badger kids until they invented stories about watching alligators eat babies dropped into a lake from a hot air balloon. Kids would deny anything happened for hours until the therapist 'broke through' and 'found' the 'truth'.

FC was a movement that started with the claim severely handicapped individuals were able to 'type' legible sentences & communicate if a 'helper' guided their hands over a keyboard.