Read on Twitter
A thread on the latest Sturgeon-Salmond revelations. 
1/13
1/13
Evidence has emerged of a deliberate cover-up.
A crucial detail was apparently hidden from the public.
According to Sky, the official knew it would potentially end their career if it came to light.
This is important because it may undermine Nicola Sturgeon’s story. 2/13
A crucial detail was apparently hidden from the public.
According to Sky, the official knew it would potentially end their career if it came to light.
This is important because it may undermine Nicola Sturgeon’s story. 2/13
Throughout the Alex Salmond affair, the First Minister has dodged questions at every turn.
She has tried to hide behind legalities, false narratives, straw men.
Every tactic in the book has been rolled out to stop the truth reaching the public. 3/13
She has tried to hide behind legalities, false narratives, straw men.
Every tactic in the book has been rolled out to stop the truth reaching the public. 3/13
To her utmost shame, the First Minister uses the women who were so badly let down by her government as a shield.
She argues they are being attacked, when nothing could be further from the truth.
We all want to get to the bottom of what happened here - for those women. 4/13
She argues they are being attacked, when nothing could be further from the truth.
We all want to get to the bottom of what happened here - for those women. 4/13
Instead of justice, those women have been caught in this uncivil war - that they never wanted to be part of.
They’ve been failed by basic, unforgivable errors from Nicola Sturgeon’s government.
And failed ever since by the SNP’s obstruction over what went on. 5/13
They’ve been failed by basic, unforgivable errors from Nicola Sturgeon’s government.
And failed ever since by the SNP’s obstruction over what went on. 5/13
The First Minister isn’t on those women’s side.
If she was, she wouldn’t have met with Alex Salmond all through the summer of 2018.
Her staff wouldn’t have - allegedly - revealed a complainants name to Salmond.
They would have done things the right way. 6/13
If she was, she wouldn’t have met with Alex Salmond all through the summer of 2018.
Her staff wouldn’t have - allegedly - revealed a complainants name to Salmond.
They would have done things the right way. 6/13
We’ve heard the FM make the ridiculous argument that she’s accused of both conspiring and colluding against Salmond.
That’s pure spin. I’m not interested in either.
I care if the First Minister lied though. That matters. 7/13
That’s pure spin. I’m not interested in either.
I care if the First Minister lied though. That matters. 7/13
We’ve heard the FM say she’s being blamed for a man’s mistakes.
Let’s be clear, Salmond is not a good man. His acquittal doesn’t change that. He did things that are out of order.
Nobody blames Sturgeon for his actions.
We blame her for lying about what she knew & when. 8/13
Let’s be clear, Salmond is not a good man. His acquittal doesn’t change that. He did things that are out of order.
Nobody blames Sturgeon for his actions.
We blame her for lying about what she knew & when. 8/13
Sturgeon claims these are all conspiracy theories.
But the evidence is apparently backed up by credible people. Well respected people in legal and media circles, professionals.
It’s not Salmond’s word against Sturgeon.
It’s a number of people’s word against hers alone. 9/13
But the evidence is apparently backed up by credible people. Well respected people in legal and media circles, professionals.
It’s not Salmond’s word against Sturgeon.
It’s a number of people’s word against hers alone. 9/13
So let’s cut to the chase, First Minister.
No more spin, no more hiding, no more shutting down scrutiny with cleverly worded statements.
Let’s get some straight yes or no answers. 10/13
No more spin, no more hiding, no more shutting down scrutiny with cleverly worded statements.
Let’s get some straight yes or no answers. 10/13
Did your official see a draft statement and ask for the record to be changed from when they “knew” of complaints to when they had a “suspicion” of complaints?
This is a straight yes/no question, there are no legal repercussions to answering it. 11/13
This is a straight yes/no question, there are no legal repercussions to answering it. 11/13
The official apparently feared for their career if the original statement was published.
Was the original statement – that they “knew” of complaints – correct or incorrect, in the your view?
This is a straight question. It can be answered without getting into any details. 12/13
Was the original statement – that they “knew” of complaints – correct or incorrect, in the your view?
This is a straight question. It can be answered without getting into any details. 12/13
If that original statement was published, before a change from your official was apparently requested, would it fatally undermine what you have told the Parliament?
Again there are no legal repercussions to answering them.
@NicolaSturgeon - let’s finally hear the truth. 13/13
Again there are no legal repercussions to answering them.
@NicolaSturgeon - let’s finally hear the truth. 13/13
