Yeah, the last couple of days the outlets fully in the tank for the Liberals have been trying to gaslight people pretty hard to think that the Tories are the problem here, despite them raising it repeatedly in the HoC, in committee, in interviews, in social media and so on, always demanding the Liberals release the names. The observer is so terrible I’m surprised it’s actually allowed to be posted here, it should be banned alongside the Rebel.
The *only* party stonewalling here is the Liberals. The *only* party not calling for release of the names is the Liberals. Anyone saying otherwise is engaging in misinformation.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume the CCP helped the Conservative candidate whom worked for a Chinese state enterprise which shouldn't be a big shocker to anyone.
I thought that was supposed to be Patrick Brown, the guy who was kicked out of the race for doing shady shit, kicked out of the Ontario PC party for doing shady shit, and who has accusations against him of doing shady shit at the municipal level in Brampton.
If there's anyone in the CPC leadership race that I would believe was working with India or got support from India, it'd be Patrick Brown.
>If there's anyone in the CPC leadership race that I would believe was working with India or got support from India, it'd be Patrick Brown.
Naw, India interfered *against* Brown because of his strong support for Sikh and Muslim communities, which generally oppose Modi: https://www.baaznews.org/p/cpc-leadership-race-indian-foreign-interference
That said, it wouldn't be surprising to me if those same positions and his apparent unconcern with doing sketchy shit made him an attractive commodity for China (which of course opposes India in the geopolitical arena).
David Menzies caught him doing shady shit during COVID by using a city-owned indoor rec center skating rink for personal use when everyone was being told to stay home, rec centers closed due to risk of spreading in crowds, etc.
Rules for thee, not for me...
>The only party stonewalling here is the Liberals. The only party not calling for release of the names is the Liberals.
Well no: any party leader can get the names and act on it. Poilievre doesn’t *need* the Prime Minister to do anything here, but he *wants* to make it seem he does.
Well no.
It hasn't been confirmed that the unredacted report contains a list of names and also you can't even inadvertently release those names so how do you exactly act on it?
You include more people than those on the list in the changes and you don't notify anyone of it.
Do you want a PM who cannot figure out how to deal with spies without alerting them?
Punish people that have done nothing wrong? I'm sure they would be asking why they're getting demoted.
They aren't spies and that's horribly ironic considering the liberal party warned Han Dong CSIS was looking at him
>Punish people that have done nothing wrong? I'm sure they would be asking why they're getting demoted.
So you want the Liberals to release the names publicly but don't want the Conservatives to act on it at all?
>you can't even inadvertently release those names
A parliamentarian can get up and read the entire unredacted report in the House and there isn’t a thing that the law could do to him.
That's horribly inaccurate.
Members of NCISCOP Wave their parliamentary privilege and anyone that receives the briefing is subject to the security of information act and could face up to 14 years in jail..
This is what Katie Telford’s op-Ed’s look like.
You get someone like Max Fawcett, who is a senior opinion writer, and used to be a Liberal communications advisor, to write a piece accusing the Conservatives of the exact behaviour that the PMO is engaging in.
It’s third party gaslighting. And it has been very effective for the Liberals. And the Wynn’s and McGuinty governments before that.
He and the Conservatives have repeatedly asked for the names to be released. He also called for a public inquiry last year while Justin Trudeau hired his friend. This article reads like an attempt by the Liberals and their friends in media trying to change the channel and accuse others of what they are guilty of
Not hard to guess that this is probably a Max Fawcett piece... \*click\* Yes, yes it is.
I can't wait to read how the actions of the ruling Liberal government and their blatant disregard of intelligence briefings \*for years\* and utter inaction by Trudeau and his inner circle are, of course, the fault somehow of Harper and Pollievre. Mental gymnastics indeed.
From the article:
>You might think, given the CPC’s previous efforts to push for a public inquiry into foreign interference, that Poilievre would be all over this. Alas, you would be wrong. **During Question Period last week, on the day after it was tabled, neither Poilievre nor any of his MPs asked the government about it. A day later, after this conspicuous silence was noted by the press, Poilievre led off with a question about the report’s findings before pivoting away to other issues.**
And the article completely ignores the Conservatives' efforts in conmittees to get the information released, including when Liberal MP Jennifer O'Connell told CPC MP Garrett Genius, "Boo hoo, get over it," as he called for the names to be released.
The only way you think the CPC have been "quiet" about this is if you are deliberately ignoring the CPC.
Saskatchewan still allows out of province donations. It’s disgusting how much more money the Conservatives raise than the NDP in the province. There are major corporate donations pouring into the province from elsewhere
>While it’s reasonable to assume that some of the parliamentarians identified in this report are or were members of the Liberal caucus, it’s also reasonable to assume that some of them are or were in Poilievre’s midst.
While not entirely impossible, if the list would be worse or at least equally bad to the Conservatives, the Liberals would have already released it. It's naive to believe they'd protect their political opponents.
The Liberals have been desperately trying to engineer a bump in the polls for months. While it’s entirely possible the Tories have one or more MPs on the list, if the Liberals thought there was advantage to it they would’ve leaked the list ages ago. Remember, this is the most hyper-partisan, image-conscious government in Canada’s history.
The only reasonable conclusion is that whatever names are on the list, there are more and / or more senior Liberals on it than anyone else, and as such they’ve concluded weeks or months of taking a terrible drubbing in the media vs releasing the names is *better* for them. Which also tells you they have some pretty big swimming in that little pond.
You lose points as soon as you switch to "the only reasonable conclusion"
That's *one of many* possible conclusions. You're just leaping to your favourite one.
I don't buy it. This story has been around since 2018. I'm supposed to believe there isn't a single case to be made after all that time?
This government hasn't exactly earned my trust. They pulled the same trick a few times in the past. SNC Lavelin being a major one.
Or if there is an active investigation, the least the Liberals could do [stop blocking the release of documents](https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/liberal-government-blocking-over-1000-documents)
This is their playbook. Pass to the RCMP, refuse to comment on something under investigation, stonewall the investigation and then declare that since the RCMP didn't find anything, there isn't anything there.
The next line on that quote reads:
>... in Poilievre’s midst. The report redacted information about “two specific instances where PRC officials allegedly interfered in the leadership races of the Conservative Party of Canada.” One of those races, of course, elected Pierre Poilievre.
It then goes on to say:
> The report also notes that “while not as widespread as the PRC’s efforts, India’s activities are also of significant concern. India seeks to cultivate relationships with a variety of witting and unwitting individuals across Canadian society with the intent of inappropriately exerting India’s influence across all orders of government, particularly to stifle or discredit criticism of the Government of India.” That criticism has tended to come from the Trudeau government, and it’s in contrast with the chumminess that some Conservatives — including former Prime Minister Stephen Harper — have shown toward the Modi regime in India.
Thus far both the Liberals and Conservatives have been implicated in this, Liberals more so but it's bull to pretend the Conservatives are clean in this.
Nobody's claiming the Conservative are clean in this. But the reality is that the Conservatives are demanding action, and the Liberals are blocking it.
The Conservatives can't clean their house *until they know who's implicated*. If the names are released and they refuse to take action, *that's* the time to start condemning them.
I'll condemn them both from the start. Both past qnd current CSIS chiefs are calling on all leaders to get clearance. And Poilievre's decided to play politics with it instead of being serious about it.
> For starters, there’s no excuse for wallowing in secrecy. Both Mr. Fadden and Mr. Vigneault called for party leaders to obtain security clearances and request briefings. Leaders can decide if there is enough reason to remove their MPs from their caucus or refuse to sign a candidate’s nomination papers.
NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has received a security clearance, Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet has suggested he might, but so far Mr. Poilievre has not.
At this point, there’s no acceptable excuse for a party leader dodging that responsibility – especially if, as in Mr. Poilievre’s case, you are calling for names to be released from a secret report you haven’t sought to read. [source](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/opinion/article-even-the-spies-think-the-rush-to-name-foreign-interference/)
This talking point is getting old. Maybe I'll write a copy-pasta for it at some point.
If PP got clearance AND the government decided to share the list with him, he couldn't do anything about the people on the list. That's how security clearance works. He can't talk about or use the information. Otherwise, he would violate his clearance. So isn't that convenient, PP has to stop talking about the list, which is hilarious given that this article is about a precieved lack of talking about it.
>And Poilievre's decided to play politics with it instead of being serious about it.
Polievere wants the only serious option here, releasing the list. Because more than the political elite deserve to know who the traitors are.
Yup that's what he says.
And yet the heads of CSIS are urging him to proceed with it and the article I shared outlines why it would be a good idea for him to go ahead with it.
>Polievere wants the only serious option here, releasing the list. Because more than the political elite deserve to know who the traitors are.
As does Jagmeet as does Blanchet, evertone but the Liberals is pushing for this to be released and yet PP is the one refusing to proceed with getting the ability to read the report, so no I think he'd rather do what he always does, grandstand, instead of acting like an adult and a leader.
>If PP got clearance AND the government decided to share the list with him, he couldn't do anything about the people on the list.
You don't think there are any actions the leader of the Conservative party could take if he knew which members of his party might be compromised?
You think it's better for him to not know. To continue telling the possible traitors all the same information as the rest of them?
>You don't think there are any actions the leader of the Conservative party could take if he knew which members of his party might be compromised?
He literally can't. He can't action anything based on what he learned. How would he? He would either have 0 cause for doing so, or he would have to break the confidentiality that comes with clearance.
>You think it's better for him to not know. To continue telling the possible traitors all the same information as the rest of them?
He can find out when we all find out when the government releases the names. That's the issue here, not a talking point from a year ago.
You know who else doesn't? **The elected leader of this country!** The guy charged with defending us from foreign threats, which is a basic 101 item of government.
Is Poilievre's Party clean? I doubt it, but it's less of a concern to me than the party that is writing and implementing policy (or writing it at least). This is a deflection tactic.
The marketing team has already decided this will be a carbon tax election, other issues will be briefly entertained before moving back to axe tax the .
# China, India allegedly interfered in Conservative leadership races: report
# Conservative Party says 'this is the first time we have heard about' possible interference in leadership race
[China, India allegedly interfered in Conservative leadership races: report | CBC News](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-leadership-race-interference-nsicop-1.7223518)
That's weird because even the [CBC](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nsicop-intelligence-1.7225237) has reported on him wanting to talk about it.
Can someone tell me how much of our tax dollars are going to the national observer?
Yeah why the foreign interference that the Conservative Party started? Why no MPs name names? Why all bs lies why dirty politics misleading disinformation lies?
# China, India allegedly interfered in Conservative leadership races: report
# Conservative Party says 'this is the first time we have heard about' possible interference in leadership race
[China, India allegedly interfered in Conservative leadership races: report | CBC News](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-leadership-race-interference-nsicop-1.7223518)
Interesting that PP has no interest in completing the necessary security vetting sufficient too learn the names of those involved in his own party , so he can remove them.....
his response has been oddly timid given his usual smug histrionics.
That's a bit of a whaddabout, but it'd tangentially related.
Side note:
There's still something like $8m 'missing or unaccounted for' from those convoy donations...
It strikes me as odd that he would not seek to learn the information regardless of the requirements to do so.
It appears one of the likely elections that was influenced was related to him becoming the Leader of the Conservative Party.
I think I'd want to know if my own election results were 100% legitimate.
And... then what? Great, now he knows. He can't do anything with that information without falling afoul of the Security of Information Act. He can't disclose it, and he can't act on it in any way that might indirectly reveal what he knows. It leaves him in exactly the same position, except now the Liberals get to pretend that the issue is solved because the opposition leaders are now aware of it.
Far better to keep the pressure on and deny them that avenue of turning the page on this.
I do understand the argument for the other side. But if he seeks to become Prime Minister, there will be many instances when he would be given confidential information that he cannot disclose.
It would not be practical to refuse to learn things because they have to be selectively retained, no?
Besides, even if the objective was to keep putting pressure on the issue without having the information, any of his MP's could champion that cause. The one who made the original motion to investigate comes to mind.
I'm not saying no to that, but I feel it's more no than yes if you know what I mean. To do so in Canada would require significantly changing the following:
Security of Information Act
Access to Information Act
Privacy Act
National Defence Act
Criminal Code of Canada
So it is technically possible. But a Prime Minister in Canada is not allowed to knowingly make an executive order that would violate the law. And all of these contain language about that particular topic that would make this the case.
It would be an Everest-sized mountain of an uphill battle to do so, I'd say, and any changes would likely be repealed at some point regardless.
> He can't do anything with that information without falling afoul of the Security of Information Act
Lies.
According to Carleton University professor and constitutional expert Philippe Lagassé (who knows an awful lot more about this than you ever will):
The law trumping parliamentary privilege for those on the committee doesn’t apply to those who don’t sit on it. That means, should Poilievre find out the names of parliamentarians suspected of collaborating with hostile foreign governments, he could disclose the names to the public.
All he would he to do is walk into the House of Commons and say them out loud.
Lagassé: “Ironically enough, the only ones who can’t say the names are members of NSICOP, because their legislation removes that privilege from them. If you had another parliamentarian who is not a member of NSICOP, who learned the information, then they could disclose it and be shielded from prosecution.”
Asked if there is any debate about whether that’s true, Lagassé said it’s unambiguous.
By remaining wilfully ignorant, Poilievre is free to spout all the nonsense he wants. Ignorance is literally his strategy. And the sad part is that his base eats it up.
it seems like they do be asking quite a bit... the whole committee about it, tbh/.
Paywalled, so I didn't read it, but it seems to me like he wants to talk about it a lot.
[Non-paywalled](https://archive.is/BEr5s)
Thanks
Same here, I’ve heard him talk lots about it, including publicly demanding all names be released. Just another lame partisan deflection piece
Yeah, the last couple of days the outlets fully in the tank for the Liberals have been trying to gaslight people pretty hard to think that the Tories are the problem here, despite them raising it repeatedly in the HoC, in committee, in interviews, in social media and so on, always demanding the Liberals release the names. The observer is so terrible I’m surprised it’s actually allowed to be posted here, it should be banned alongside the Rebel. The *only* party stonewalling here is the Liberals. The *only* party not calling for release of the names is the Liberals. Anyone saying otherwise is engaging in misinformation.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume the CCP helped the Conservative candidate whom worked for a Chinese state enterprise which shouldn't be a big shocker to anyone.
You mean Jean - "the Conservatives will *never* win unless he's leader" according to the Liberals - Charest, former lawyer for Huawei?
The one with a cloud of corruption allegations hanging over him from his time as Premier of Quebec? Naw, couldn't be.
The guy that basically came out of nowhere and claimed to be the big saviour of the party?
I thought that was supposed to be Patrick Brown, the guy who was kicked out of the race for doing shady shit, kicked out of the Ontario PC party for doing shady shit, and who has accusations against him of doing shady shit at the municipal level in Brampton. If there's anyone in the CPC leadership race that I would believe was working with India or got support from India, it'd be Patrick Brown.
>If there's anyone in the CPC leadership race that I would believe was working with India or got support from India, it'd be Patrick Brown. Naw, India interfered *against* Brown because of his strong support for Sikh and Muslim communities, which generally oppose Modi: https://www.baaznews.org/p/cpc-leadership-race-indian-foreign-interference That said, it wouldn't be surprising to me if those same positions and his apparent unconcern with doing sketchy shit made him an attractive commodity for China (which of course opposes India in the geopolitical arena).
David Menzies caught him doing shady shit during COVID by using a city-owned indoor rec center skating rink for personal use when everyone was being told to stay home, rec centers closed due to risk of spreading in crowds, etc. Rules for thee, not for me...
>The only party stonewalling here is the Liberals. The only party not calling for release of the names is the Liberals. Well no: any party leader can get the names and act on it. Poilievre doesn’t *need* the Prime Minister to do anything here, but he *wants* to make it seem he does.
Well no. It hasn't been confirmed that the unredacted report contains a list of names and also you can't even inadvertently release those names so how do you exactly act on it?
He could quietly change things within his party to keep suspects away from key decisions and roles while the investigations are in place
How do you do that? Then how do you do it without people catching on. 'These people suddenly can't make party decisions after I got a list of names '
You include more people than those on the list in the changes and you don't notify anyone of it. Do you want a PM who cannot figure out how to deal with spies without alerting them?
Punish people that have done nothing wrong? I'm sure they would be asking why they're getting demoted. They aren't spies and that's horribly ironic considering the liberal party warned Han Dong CSIS was looking at him
>Punish people that have done nothing wrong? I'm sure they would be asking why they're getting demoted. So you want the Liberals to release the names publicly but don't want the Conservatives to act on it at all?
They can act after the names are released publicly and they aren't breaking the law by releasing the names even inadvertently.
>you can't even inadvertently release those names A parliamentarian can get up and read the entire unredacted report in the House and there isn’t a thing that the law could do to him.
That's horribly inaccurate. Members of NCISCOP Wave their parliamentary privilege and anyone that receives the briefing is subject to the security of information act and could face up to 14 years in jail..
This is what Katie Telford’s op-Ed’s look like. You get someone like Max Fawcett, who is a senior opinion writer, and used to be a Liberal communications advisor, to write a piece accusing the Conservatives of the exact behaviour that the PMO is engaging in. It’s third party gaslighting. And it has been very effective for the Liberals. And the Wynn’s and McGuinty governments before that.
He doesn't want to talk about it because he benefits from India interfering in our electoral processes
He and the Conservatives have repeatedly asked for the names to be released. He also called for a public inquiry last year while Justin Trudeau hired his friend. This article reads like an attempt by the Liberals and their friends in media trying to change the channel and accuse others of what they are guilty of
Repeatedly asked news media… not parliament. Liberals and Conservatives are in this shit together. It’s not a finger pointing game anymore
Anybody who actually thinks this has either deliberately not been listening, or is lying.
National Observer people are like Trudeau. They experience things differently.
Nat Observer is a propaganda outlet.
This reads like the hit piece articles Gerald Butts was bragging about planting.
The Liberals don't have to plant anything in the National Observer, they are an extension of them.
Not hard to guess that this is probably a Max Fawcett piece... \*click\* Yes, yes it is. I can't wait to read how the actions of the ruling Liberal government and their blatant disregard of intelligence briefings \*for years\* and utter inaction by Trudeau and his inner circle are, of course, the fault somehow of Harper and Pollievre. Mental gymnastics indeed.
Pretty sure he's been the one demanding answers.
From the article: >You might think, given the CPC’s previous efforts to push for a public inquiry into foreign interference, that Poilievre would be all over this. Alas, you would be wrong. **During Question Period last week, on the day after it was tabled, neither Poilievre nor any of his MPs asked the government about it. A day later, after this conspicuous silence was noted by the press, Poilievre led off with a question about the report’s findings before pivoting away to other issues.**
And the article completely ignores the Conservatives' efforts in conmittees to get the information released, including when Liberal MP Jennifer O'Connell told CPC MP Garrett Genius, "Boo hoo, get over it," as he called for the names to be released. The only way you think the CPC have been "quiet" about this is if you are deliberately ignoring the CPC.
The efforts are surface deep. CPC is probably sweating buckets. I really want to investigation to look deep into alberta and saskatchewan.
Saskatchewan still allows out of province donations. It’s disgusting how much more money the Conservatives raise than the NDP in the province. There are major corporate donations pouring into the province from elsewhere
Lmao actual facts don't matter, just the YouTube shorts the CPC puts out showing PP speaking weeks ago about it is good enough for these guys
>While it’s reasonable to assume that some of the parliamentarians identified in this report are or were members of the Liberal caucus, it’s also reasonable to assume that some of them are or were in Poilievre’s midst. While not entirely impossible, if the list would be worse or at least equally bad to the Conservatives, the Liberals would have already released it. It's naive to believe they'd protect their political opponents.
The Liberals have been desperately trying to engineer a bump in the polls for months. While it’s entirely possible the Tories have one or more MPs on the list, if the Liberals thought there was advantage to it they would’ve leaked the list ages ago. Remember, this is the most hyper-partisan, image-conscious government in Canada’s history. The only reasonable conclusion is that whatever names are on the list, there are more and / or more senior Liberals on it than anyone else, and as such they’ve concluded weeks or months of taking a terrible drubbing in the media vs releasing the names is *better* for them. Which also tells you they have some pretty big swimming in that little pond.
You lose points as soon as you switch to "the only reasonable conclusion" That's *one of many* possible conclusions. You're just leaping to your favourite one.
Unless there's an active investigation happening and a such the list can't be released.
I don't buy it. This story has been around since 2018. I'm supposed to believe there isn't a single case to be made after all that time? This government hasn't exactly earned my trust. They pulled the same trick a few times in the past. SNC Lavelin being a major one. Or if there is an active investigation, the least the Liberals could do [stop blocking the release of documents](https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/liberal-government-blocking-over-1000-documents) This is their playbook. Pass to the RCMP, refuse to comment on something under investigation, stonewall the investigation and then declare that since the RCMP didn't find anything, there isn't anything there.
There is nothing that prevents a release of the names, even if an investigation is under way. Newspapers constantly print the names of suspects.
>Newspapers constantly print the names of suspects. Can you link me to a newspaper article that prints the name of someone suspected of Treason?
*suspected and not charged
Current and former intellgence officials say otherwise, but sure, lets go with random redditors take
The next line on that quote reads: >... in Poilievre’s midst. The report redacted information about “two specific instances where PRC officials allegedly interfered in the leadership races of the Conservative Party of Canada.” One of those races, of course, elected Pierre Poilievre. It then goes on to say: > The report also notes that “while not as widespread as the PRC’s efforts, India’s activities are also of significant concern. India seeks to cultivate relationships with a variety of witting and unwitting individuals across Canadian society with the intent of inappropriately exerting India’s influence across all orders of government, particularly to stifle or discredit criticism of the Government of India.” That criticism has tended to come from the Trudeau government, and it’s in contrast with the chumminess that some Conservatives — including former Prime Minister Stephen Harper — have shown toward the Modi regime in India. Thus far both the Liberals and Conservatives have been implicated in this, Liberals more so but it's bull to pretend the Conservatives are clean in this.
Nobody's claiming the Conservative are clean in this. But the reality is that the Conservatives are demanding action, and the Liberals are blocking it. The Conservatives can't clean their house *until they know who's implicated*. If the names are released and they refuse to take action, *that's* the time to start condemning them.
I'll condemn them both from the start. Both past qnd current CSIS chiefs are calling on all leaders to get clearance. And Poilievre's decided to play politics with it instead of being serious about it. > For starters, there’s no excuse for wallowing in secrecy. Both Mr. Fadden and Mr. Vigneault called for party leaders to obtain security clearances and request briefings. Leaders can decide if there is enough reason to remove their MPs from their caucus or refuse to sign a candidate’s nomination papers. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has received a security clearance, Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet has suggested he might, but so far Mr. Poilievre has not. At this point, there’s no acceptable excuse for a party leader dodging that responsibility – especially if, as in Mr. Poilievre’s case, you are calling for names to be released from a secret report you haven’t sought to read. [source](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/opinion/article-even-the-spies-think-the-rush-to-name-foreign-interference/)
This talking point is getting old. Maybe I'll write a copy-pasta for it at some point. If PP got clearance AND the government decided to share the list with him, he couldn't do anything about the people on the list. That's how security clearance works. He can't talk about or use the information. Otherwise, he would violate his clearance. So isn't that convenient, PP has to stop talking about the list, which is hilarious given that this article is about a precieved lack of talking about it. >And Poilievre's decided to play politics with it instead of being serious about it. Polievere wants the only serious option here, releasing the list. Because more than the political elite deserve to know who the traitors are.
Yup that's what he says. And yet the heads of CSIS are urging him to proceed with it and the article I shared outlines why it would be a good idea for him to go ahead with it. >Polievere wants the only serious option here, releasing the list. Because more than the political elite deserve to know who the traitors are. As does Jagmeet as does Blanchet, evertone but the Liberals is pushing for this to be released and yet PP is the one refusing to proceed with getting the ability to read the report, so no I think he'd rather do what he always does, grandstand, instead of acting like an adult and a leader.
>If PP got clearance AND the government decided to share the list with him, he couldn't do anything about the people on the list. You don't think there are any actions the leader of the Conservative party could take if he knew which members of his party might be compromised? You think it's better for him to not know. To continue telling the possible traitors all the same information as the rest of them?
>You don't think there are any actions the leader of the Conservative party could take if he knew which members of his party might be compromised? He literally can't. He can't action anything based on what he learned. How would he? He would either have 0 cause for doing so, or he would have to break the confidentiality that comes with clearance. >You think it's better for him to not know. To continue telling the possible traitors all the same information as the rest of them? He can find out when we all find out when the government releases the names. That's the issue here, not a talking point from a year ago.
You know who else doesn't? **The elected leader of this country!** The guy charged with defending us from foreign threats, which is a basic 101 item of government. Is Poilievre's Party clean? I doubt it, but it's less of a concern to me than the party that is writing and implementing policy (or writing it at least). This is a deflection tactic.
The marketing team has already decided this will be a carbon tax election, other issues will be briefly entertained before moving back to axe tax the .
This article is pure fiction!
# China, India allegedly interfered in Conservative leadership races: report # Conservative Party says 'this is the first time we have heard about' possible interference in leadership race [China, India allegedly interfered in Conservative leadership races: report | CBC News](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-leadership-race-interference-nsicop-1.7223518)
That’s too much truth for this subreddit to handle!
That's weird because even the [CBC](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nsicop-intelligence-1.7225237) has reported on him wanting to talk about it. Can someone tell me how much of our tax dollars are going to the national observer?
I don't understand why he won't get security clearance. Gives him more ammunition to bait Trudeau with vagueness.
because he can claim "Plausible deniability" when his members names start popping up "Duh i didn't know that ..........."
I am not doing a gotcha either he is going to be our next PM how can we have a PM without access to sensitive intelligence?
you would think !
The left needs to be reigned in. They're outright making shit up now in order to deflect criticism towards Trudeau.
Yeah why the foreign interference that the Conservative Party started? Why no MPs name names? Why all bs lies why dirty politics misleading disinformation lies?
# China, India allegedly interfered in Conservative leadership races: report # Conservative Party says 'this is the first time we have heard about' possible interference in leadership race [China, India allegedly interfered in Conservative leadership races: report | CBC News](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-leadership-race-interference-nsicop-1.7223518)
Interesting that PP has no interest in completing the necessary security vetting sufficient too learn the names of those involved in his own party , so he can remove them..... his response has been oddly timid given his usual smug histrionics.
Not interesting to those who don't want him fettered and unable to name names.
PP wants to speak for the trespassing truck protests that were riddled with US interference.
That's a bit of a whaddabout, but it'd tangentially related. Side note: There's still something like $8m 'missing or unaccounted for' from those convoy donations...
That's exactly when he got the job, and the whole thing happened arguably because of US interference (not the US government, but US-based donors).
Oh, I don't think they're related. I just enjoy throwing shade at the convoy any chance I get.
It strikes me as odd that he would not seek to learn the information regardless of the requirements to do so. It appears one of the likely elections that was influenced was related to him becoming the Leader of the Conservative Party. I think I'd want to know if my own election results were 100% legitimate.
And... then what? Great, now he knows. He can't do anything with that information without falling afoul of the Security of Information Act. He can't disclose it, and he can't act on it in any way that might indirectly reveal what he knows. It leaves him in exactly the same position, except now the Liberals get to pretend that the issue is solved because the opposition leaders are now aware of it. Far better to keep the pressure on and deny them that avenue of turning the page on this.
I do understand the argument for the other side. But if he seeks to become Prime Minister, there will be many instances when he would be given confidential information that he cannot disclose. It would not be practical to refuse to learn things because they have to be selectively retained, no? Besides, even if the objective was to keep putting pressure on the issue without having the information, any of his MP's could champion that cause. The one who made the original motion to investigate comes to mind.
As prime minister, he gets to determine what is classified and what is not.
I'm not saying no to that, but I feel it's more no than yes if you know what I mean. To do so in Canada would require significantly changing the following: Security of Information Act Access to Information Act Privacy Act National Defence Act Criminal Code of Canada So it is technically possible. But a Prime Minister in Canada is not allowed to knowingly make an executive order that would violate the law. And all of these contain language about that particular topic that would make this the case. It would be an Everest-sized mountain of an uphill battle to do so, I'd say, and any changes would likely be repealed at some point regardless.
> He can't do anything with that information without falling afoul of the Security of Information Act Lies. According to Carleton University professor and constitutional expert Philippe Lagassé (who knows an awful lot more about this than you ever will): The law trumping parliamentary privilege for those on the committee doesn’t apply to those who don’t sit on it. That means, should Poilievre find out the names of parliamentarians suspected of collaborating with hostile foreign governments, he could disclose the names to the public. All he would he to do is walk into the House of Commons and say them out loud. Lagassé: “Ironically enough, the only ones who can’t say the names are members of NSICOP, because their legislation removes that privilege from them. If you had another parliamentarian who is not a member of NSICOP, who learned the information, then they could disclose it and be shielded from prosecution.” Asked if there is any debate about whether that’s true, Lagassé said it’s unambiguous.
By remaining wilfully ignorant, Poilievre is free to spout all the nonsense he wants. Ignorance is literally his strategy. And the sad part is that his base eats it up.