Oh look: new shiny round objects!

 

There’s a new shiny bauble available – and by gawd, our MSM seem to’ve been happy to grab at it! See the print editions’ front pages this morning: “Newspaper headlines: ‘You’re nicked’ and ‘no new smart motorways’” (link) and you’ll know why!

The paper which really went to town on this event is the DT. For some inexplicable reason The Times seems to be more interested in gambling, leading with an ‘Exposed!’ report: “Exposed: How Tory MP offered to lobby for gambling investors” – oh the sleaze! To make certain that their readers get the drift, the subtitle is explicit: “Scott Benton was prepared to help an investment fund influence policymakers” (link, paywalled). 

That’s terrible, innit, but it begs the question why this one MP is more important for The Times than the arrest of Peter Murrell, the Sturgeon’s husband and chief executive of the SNP. He allegedly ‘disappeared’  £600,000 of SNP funds given by members for running an Indy2Ref.  

The DT really went to town on this event, dedicating four reports to it. I think they’re correct to do so because, unlike a Tory MP lobbying for a gambling investment fund, this is sleaze written large. The DM also had a report (link) and an opinion piece where the author asks if the Sturgeon knew about this police investigation, and if so, when (link).

There are good reasons for asking that question. One is if she resigned because she knew that the investigation was coming to a close. Another is if the police waited with the arrest so that the Sturgeon could resign ‘in honour’ and the SNP could elect a new leader. The DT writes in their leading article (all emphases are mine):

“Police chiefs in Scotland are being urged to reveal whether they faced political pressure to delay the arrest of Nicola Sturgeon’s husband until after a replacement was found for the outgoing Scottish first minister. […]Although Police Scotland denied notifying her in advance, the former SNP leader and force chiefs are now facing “big questions” about the circumstances of her resignation and the timing of the arrest.” (paywalled link)

Denials is all we peasants deserve, and never mind that the general circumstances of the Sturgeon resignation now look pretty murky:

“SNP grandees said there were “legitimate” questions for both the police and Ms Sturgeon about what she had been told about the investigation and her husband’s arrest. They also said there were questions over whether she had asked the police to delay it in order to allow her to resign and have a replacement appointed.”  (paywalled link)

Methinks these questions are indeed legitimate. In such a small political pond as is the SNP surely some people knew something. After all, this investigation seems to have been going on for two years. It seems inconceivable that not even one person in the SNP was ‘aware’. There is of course another reason why these questions are legitimate:

“They questioned the timing of the arrest, barely a week after the leadership election finished, saying that members had cast their ballots without knowing about the scale of the criminality being alleged. Some MSPs and MPs queried whether the investigation was the real reason for Nicola Sturgeon’s sudden resignation in February and highlighted the party’s decision to run an “incredibly short campaign” of less than six weeks.” (paywalled link)

Of course she and Mr Yousaf, the ‘Sturgeon continuity candidate’, deny this. The DT observes that Mr Yousaf ‘was already in place as SNP leader’ at the time of Mr Murrell’s arrest. Intriguingly, he also was endorsed by the SNP ‘establishment’, writes the DT, which then continues:

“He [Yousaf] defended Mr Murrell remaining as the party’s chief executive before his resignation over inaccurate denials given to the media about a slump in SNP membership, arguing Ms Sturgeon’s husband was a “serial election winner”. Responding to Mr Murrell’s arrest, Mr Yousaf said he did not believe the police investigation into the SNP’s finances prompted Ms Sturgeon’s resignation.”(paywalled link)

And so, as the ‘formerly all-conquering SNP was in a state of shock over Murrell’s arrest’, other SNP people are worried that there might be more arrests. Well, they better prepare for more inconvenient questions going to be asked and never mind their new leader trying to make himself look as innocent as possible:

“There is little doubt at Holyrood that Sturgeon supported Yousaf as her replacement and it is widely believed that Murrell, along with senior SNP headquarters’ staff, ran Yousaf’s campaign. One question on members’ lips now is whether Humza knew in advance of Murrell’s impending arrest, given how close he has been to the outgoing First Minister’s camp. But he denied knowing anything before the arrest occurred.” (paywalled link)

Indeed so! After all, when has a politician ever acknowledged that they knew about dirty deals, backroom shenanigans and money changing hands. Instead we’re given denial after denial. I wonder if politicians generally are all ‘from Barcelona’ …

I’ve got one question which our MSM ought to ask. Given that the SNP contingent in the HoC is seen as necessary to support a Labour government: what did all the SNP MPs know? If they were blissfully unaware, doesn’t this show that they are incompetents which ought not to have a say in the UK’s policies because they can’t even govern their own party?

Perhaps though they were all frit of the mighty Sturgeon and her mighty husband and looked the other way in order to keep their ‘careers’ as troughers on track. And what about the other parties making up the glorious Uniparty? All ignorant?

Nah – don’t worry: they’re all fine and we better shout about some Tory MP being lobbied than ask about party political financial shenanigans! Duping party members into handing over money for a political campaign which isn’t going to happen: who cares! 

That’s all I have for today. It’s wonderful, isn’t it, how SNP sleaze beats Trump, as far as our Westminster MSM are concerned. Have a good day.



Print Friendly, PDF & Email