cal chuck

@Dr_PhilippaW Thankful for the SNP keeping them out. And for keeping Westminster's privatisation agenda out of our Scottish NHS. We all know this is why the bias BBC keep attacking SNHS, they wanted Labour to get their dirty hands on it so they could sell it all off.

#Palantir is NOT in #NHSScotland!

@msm_monitor The greens are a real threat to establishment a-holes, so the BBC and MSM are going to be excluding, attacking and smearing them constantly for the next 3 years.

BBC Scotland once again displaying a complete disregard for the Scottish public and a breathtaking display of pro-Union bias. Four Unionists and one solitary pro-Indy panellist. Why have the Tories been given a seat that should have gone to the Greens? Few people watch this but that's irrelevant. The panel should have *some* semblance of balance. If this is the panel, what's the audience going to be like?

@msm_monitor Yeah, it could not be more obvious you are not watching a news report, you are watching a uk-state propaganda broadcast.

Glenn Campbell's analysis of the Swinney/Starmer meeting on BritNat Breakfast this morning was predictably poor. He said Swinney maybe hasn't got as much as he thinks. Swinney has got *exactly* what he wanted. The constitution will be raised by the FM. It'll dominate coverage of the talks. One of the things that we've noticed with respect to Scottish political journalism is the very poor analysis from senior reporters. They never saw Scottish Labour's capitulation until the final days despite social media predicting it immediately after Starmer's 2024 landslide. We said last September Sarwar was cooked and Starmer would be gone within a year. Campbell's analysis has been dreadful in recent years. He foolishly claimed Rachel Reeves' first budget in Oct 2024 was going to define the 2026 Holyrood election and help Sarwar, despite nobody knowing how it was going to pan out and there being another budget scheduled for 2025. Paul Hutcheon was still punting the idea of a FM Sarwar in the middle of the Holyrood campaign despite the motormouth being well behind. Gina Davidson of LBC laughably concluded pre-vote that a 62 seat victory would be a poor result for Swinney. A pro-Union culture runs through the Scottish political media and renders it unable to see the truth. A desire to please their paymasters leads to group-think and bizarre conclusions/analysis that makes them look foolish.

@msm_monitor Scotland had been ignored and insulted by Labour and their Scottish Secretary for 2 years. Only now, with Labour getting hammered, is there some pretence of cooperation.

Starmer meeting Swinney won't see an Indyref being conceded. That's not what Swinney's goal is. It's the beginning of a process aimed at applying Celtic pressure on Westminster to formally confirm how an Indyref in Scotland and Wales can be achieved. NI already has a clearly stated route. Scotland and Wales don't. We'll have one by the end of this Holyrood term.

@msm_monitor Thet also tried to give Sarwar credit for the Scottish seats in the Labour government in westminster. Even though we all know it was not a pro-Labour vote, it was a fuck the tories vote.

There's a narrative being cultivated by Sarwar's loyal fan club that the motormouth wasn't responsible in any way for Labour's catastrophe in Scotland. Paul Hutcheon started it last December. Even after fronting Labour's worst Holyrood result ever, Sarwar is still untouchable.

@msm_monitor It's that "once in a generation" crap all over again. Unionist media is all lies and disinformation. At least we've now got the welsh and irish to push back against London lies from all sides.

This paper continues to serve up BritNat propaganda to its dwindling readership. Swinney sought an SNP majority because London has ignored repeated Scottish parliament majorities. The goalposts haven't changed, they remain bricked up by London and papered over with this rag.

@msm_monitor Sarwar was given permission BY Starmer to do it. They had a strategy meeting down in London, and the very next day Sarwar comes out with some statement to try distance himself from Starmer, a statement where he said "for Scotland" about 20 times. It was all just electioneering.

The first attack on Starmer didn't come from Anas Sarwar. It came from Welsh Labour leader Eluned Morgan exactly one year before last week's elections. Note that Sarwar never opposed Starmer's disability cuts. He was a Starmer loyalist and resorted to his 'resign' stunt in desperation.

@msm_monitor The call is coming from inside the building...

The Radio BritNat phone-in is discussing Starmer ... or is supposed to. It's just had a caller attacking John Swinney and falsely claiming the FM is "disenfranchising" Reform voters. Swinney hasn't deprived anyone of their vote or their rights. It wasn't challenged. Serious fake accusations like this should be stamped on immediately when made on live radio or TV. No one is served by allowing disinformation like this to be aired.

Had Sarwar won the election he'd not only have opened up Scotland to new nuclear power plants, he'd have handed over the Scottish NHS to his Labour masters in London. Scotland dodged a bullet when voters rejected the motormouth.

@msm_monitor The best solution is a time delay. With even a 1s delay, it is straight up difficult to yield to an interruption, the natural instinct is to finish your sentence. without a delay it is natural to let yourself be interupted, which would be fine if the BBC was not weaponising this.

The usual suspects on BBC Scotland are already out of control interrupting SNP politicians mid-answer. Laura Maxwell was at it today when interviewing Shirley-Anne Somerville. Martin Geissler did it this morning with Màiri McAllan as did Gary Robertson yesterday. It has to be stamped out.

@msm_monitor Are they still pushing finding a £5billion black hole in Scotland’s economy without any mention of…eg: this…☝️

@msm_monitor He's a boring face on corruption, neoliberal serving the rich, authoritarian fascism. He represents a right-wing cancer in our politics, and is dull enough that people aren't seeing it. I want him gone.

All Yessers should be hoping Starmer remains PM. He'll be an albatross around Sarwar's neck. Moreover, hearing Starmer dismiss Swinney's section 30 request will annoy even those undecided about Indy he's loathed that much. Add in the 'essential items' price cap that needs UK Govt approval and the call for energy to be devolved and a lame duck Starmer repeating No, No, No! will boost Yes support.

Those calling for Scottish Labour to break away from the UK party miss one vital point. There is no such thing as Scottish Labour. There is only Labour. They'd have to create their own party. Problem is it'd be broke in a year. What we call Scottish Labour is an English franchise of a London operation. Its designed to thwart the SNP and independence. Nothing else. It attracts self-servers like Anas Sarwar, Jackie Baillie, Douglas Alexander, Michael Shanks, Kirsty McNeill, Margaret Curran et al. There's no way this mob would defect to a genuine stand-alone, left-wing Scottish democratic socialist party. Scottish Labour, like the Scottish Tories, Scottish Reform, Scottish LDs, BBC Scotland, the Scottish Sun, Daily Record, Scottish Daily Express, Scottish Daily Mail and others are all fake. They are all branches of English organisations and answer to those organisations. After independence they have no purpose and cease to exist almost overnight. Only then will a real Scottish Labour party emerge.

@msm_monitor Establishment types pushing so hard for the right wing Anti-Intellectual populism they want for greed reasons, that they may have lost the room. Hopefully this new mask-off unionism helps people see who the Lab/Tory party has really been serving this whole time.

Whichever way you look at polls for tomorrow's vote it's bad for Labour. Jackie Baillie bursting into tears at Sarwar's final campaign event is very telling. Could Labour be destined for fourth place? It's also bad for the Union if Reform is the top BritNat party and the Greens manage third. If the SNP get a majority it's potentially catastrophic for the Union.

@msm_monitor So predictable. State-broadcaster running campaign adverts for the UK establishment parties. Propaganda

Reporting Scotland at 0800 led with an item about the Holyrood campaign. It showed four of the six main party leaders. Malcolm Offord, Russell Findlay, Anas Sarwar and Alex Cole-Hamilton. Yes, only the Unionist leaders. Another clear breach of Ofcom campaign guidelines.

@msm_monitor The more people hear from Sarwar and Offord, the less they like them, Swinney the opposite. So the BBC doesn't want to talk about it, just hoping for low turnout.

Part of the reason for the BBC's subdued coverage of the Holyrood campaign has been John Swinney's sure-footedness. No gaffes from the SNP leader coupled with sensible policies has meant a dearth of SNPBad material. His 'essential items' pledge looks like a masterstroke given food prices are expected to soar. BBC Scotland initially went after it but that almost certainly backfired. His energy bills messaging is also on point. His 'SNP majority means Indyref2' message might just persuade enough Yessers to get out and vote. Sarwar's campaign has been non-existent. Hamstrung by different slogans [Change/New direction/Gimme five] and a near absence of policy or vision has meant there's nothing for the BBC to sell. You can only do so much with slogans and smears [SNP Secrecy/Coverup ... again? really?]. BBC Scotland is resigned to the SNP winning handsomely. The only question is where in the 57 to 67 seats range Swinney's party falls. The station is also hoping for a really low turnout which it'll use to implicitly 'delegitimise' the result.

Two days out from a Holyrood election and one of BBC BritNat's few political reporters is walking around Greenock counting vape shops. The station's interest in this election slowly eroded along with Sarwar's chances of winning. It's now promoting disinterest and Reform tropes.

@msm_monitor The Labour attack is a massive backfire, makes them look useless, petty and makes SNP clearly the party to represent Scottish interests. BBC do not want the other shoe to drop so they are pretending the story is as Labour say, even if they have to lie and dodge the facts to do it

The presentation of the whisky tariff announcement as a 'row' by BBC Scotland is indicative of a station that wantonly conceals what it knows to be the truth in order to promote Unionist smears and lies. We saw it with the QEU hospital and we're seeing it again here. The Labour Govt was preoccupied with an all-encompassing trade deal at the time of Trump's visit to Scotland. It was not specifically lobbying on behalf of Scotch whisky. News footage at the time confirmed Trump had no idea there was an issue with respect to whisky. That's when John Swinney took the initiative and personally lobbied Trump, arguing that Kentucky bourbon producers would benefit from removal of the tariff. When Swinney announced there was a good chance the tariff would be removed he was speaking from an informed position having spoken personally with Trump in the Oval Office. Trump being Trump he waited until the Royal visit before making the announcement. Charles was key to getting it over the line but Swinney did all the heavy lifting including facing ridicule from those now smearing him when went to the USA. BBC Scotland knows Trump contacted Swinney to congratulate him and inform the FM his Kentucky bourbon argument was an important factor in the decision. Despite this, no reporter has specifically mentioned this major part of the story. Instead we have headlines talking about squabbling politicians.