Edgware wrote: » Or do we need old man Higgins with his finger on the button?
Rhineshark wrote: » At this point I don't see O'Doherty getting any nominations. What possessed her to make a conspiracy out of Veronica Guerin's murder a couple of days before going to her brother in his capacity as a Fingal councillor for a nomination?
Water John wrote: » Its a subject sh'e deeply immersed in. For her it may have had some karma feeling. Maybe the choice of words wasn't perfect. But to read anything into that would be nit picking. None of us know how words would come out, with a live mike in front of us. I'm not sure where she'll be on my ballot, at present. But of the nominated and likely runners, I would scratch Duffy and likely the SF candidate, esp if it's Ni Riada.
Edgware wrote: » Gemma is working on the Princess Diana killing. Reckons it was the Mexicans
Henryhill2 wrote: » I've got a terrible foreboding that SG has a winning plan
Rhineshark wrote: » What did she [Gemma] think was going to happen?
Water John wrote: » [Freeman]Maybe the choice of words wasn't perfect. But to read anything into that would be nit picking. None of us know how words would come out, with a live mike in front of us.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » [Gallagher]I hope he at least has answers to a few questions:
Water John wrote: » I think SF might be pushing the O'Caolain line to show a pretence of some sort of internal democratic process and that Ni Riada will be the choice. O'Caolain TMK expressly said he had no interest in the job.
pixelburp wrote: » Gallagher re-running at all is a strange decision: I'm guessing he either truly believes the taint on his 'brand' has passed, or is still sore after the ignominy of that 2011 TV debate, stubbornly out to prove a point. Assuming RTÉ don't behave in a 'twice shy' fashion, and just pretend the question-marks over his FF past no longer exist, you'd have to imagine all the accusations will simply resurface, Gallagher spending his time once more defending his business links. And as mentioned, his public profile since then has been negligible. No more than any other business-person who runs for office, it's hard to shake the suspicion this is merely an excuse to feather some nests, and make business trips on the public purse. It's all well and good decrying expensive Swiss hotel rooms, but you'd want to be severely naive not to foresee extreme nepotism and strokes pulled if anyone like Gallagher got to be president.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » Like everything else she tweets about, thought doesn't enter into it.* I am assuming former!
Rhineshark wrote: » I am not holding her family's connections against her though. As she rather reasonably pointed out, if her sister's work is to be held against her, surely by the same standards her daughter's work should stand for her. (Or they are all individuals and none if it is hugely relevent.)
marieholmfan wrote: » Apparently many of her more off the wall tweets were the result of hacking. It would be fairly easy for a state actor to crack her twitter password. For example by breaking into her home and installing a keylogger on her phone or computer.
batgoat wrote: » Eh, she has stated the Veronica Guerin stuff in public and the McCann stuff, hpv stuff etc are things she also stands by... So no state conspiracy...
VinLieger wrote: » Your kidding me...... is she or her supporters actually pushing this as another conspiracy theory?
Hurrache wrote: » Soooo, hacking eh? If I was hacked I'm sure I'd notice at the time and delete any tweets that made me look like a headcase and tell people about it at the time.
pixelburp wrote: » Gallagher re-running at all is a strange decision: I'm guessing he either truly believes the taint on his 'brand' has passed, or is still sore after the ignominy of that 2011 TV debate, stubbornly out to prove a point.
marieholmfan wrote: » She actually did tell people about albeit not immediately.
Hurrache wrote: » And yet she double, nay trebled, down on it a couple of weeks ago during her speech about big pharma and the government in their pocket which is the reason why vaccines were being pushed into kids. So what's the excuse there, mind control?
marieholmfan wrote: » What conspiracy theory? She has said she was hacked and should be given the benefit of the doubt. Could embedded forces in the Garda Siochana be trying to discredit her and if so why? At first glance one would think that the President would find serious investigative journalism impossible.
VinLieger wrote: » Where has she claimed she was hacked? The conspiracy theory that veronica guerin was murdered by the state, theres no evidence and gemma has refused to answer questions on it.
marieholmfan wrote: » Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. OK Look this is unproductive; it seems to me and I may be unfair here and if so I apologise ; that you are determined to use Gemma's words against her and you are not willing to accept the possibility that she was hacked or deceived.
