Canadian Foreign Interference (General)

[Halifax Tar]

The line continues to impress. The first 1/2 is their reaction to the Hogue Report.

 

[RangerRay]

Erin O’Toole gets it.

Traitors, Treason and the Truth

Canada's Foreign Interference Wake Up Call

erinotoole.substack.com

One of the most dangerous misconceptions about foreign interference in our democracy is the idea that it can be simplified into a discussion of traitors and treason. That is not how foreign political influence in this modern era works. The real danger facing our democracy is not spies infiltrating parliament like out of the pages of a John le Carré novel. Today, the risks can come in the form of diaspora community powerbrokers, all expense paid trips, astro turf community group support, side business sweetheart deals and social media manipulation. Foreign influence is exerting its presence through the slow erosion of integrity in far too many people who seek and wield power.

It is unlikely that a compromised politician will have taken a bribe or be subject to blackmail. There is no ‘Manchurian candidate’ sitting in the third row of the House of Commons. What we need to look for today is someone who repeatedly exercises poor judgment, allows personal relationships to cloud their decision-making, or becomes dependent on foreign support for political or financial gain. There are many shades of grey before one reaches the darkness of treason.

The most important finding from the release of the final report of the Foreign Interference Commission (the Hogue Inquiry) this week was that operating in the grey is becoming far too common in Canadian political culture. A public inquiry into foreign interference in our politics was never about finding traitors or uncovering acts of treason, which is why most media headlines this week did a disservice to the issue. The Hogue Inquiry was about examining the conduct of political leaders and their senior advisors over the last number of years to see if we were rising to meet this threat to our democracy. The simple answer is that we are not.

Far too many politicians and senior political staff have shown that they have poor judgment. The culture of complacency surrounding intelligence sharing has been just as concerning. This inattention to what is happening on an intelligence level combined with the reality of social media and modern diaspora politics in Canada means foreign interference activities have been accelerating in Canada in the last decade and we are sending a signal that we do not care.

 

[dapaterson]

The man dumped and replaced by PP thinks Canadian politics has a significant foreign influence problem.

 

[brihard]

The man dumped and replaced by PP thinks Canadian politics has a significant foreign influence problem.

Red herring. His words as quoted by @RangerRay are right in the money.

 

[dapaterson]

Red herring. His words as quoted by @RangerRay are right in the money.

I don't disagree that he's right on the money.

The party leader who replaced him has deliberately avoided intelligence briefings, and is categorically unserious and dangerous to the nation in this context.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I don't disagree that he's right on the money.

The party leader who replaced him has deliberately avoided intelligence briefings, and is categorically unserious and dangerous to the nation in this context.

His unwillingness to take the briefings, irrespective of his reasons, is irrelevant if he is the best of 3 choices for a leader (and party) that will take action to improve the situation.

 

[dapaterson]

His unwillingness to take the briefings, irrespective of his reasons, is irrelevant if he is the best of 3 choices for a leader (and party) that will take action to improve the situation.

It reflects on his character or lack thereof.

Unserious man who has never held a job outside of politics.

 

[The Bread Guy]

I don't disagree that he's right on the money.

The party leader who replaced him has deliberately avoided intelligence briefings, and is categorically unserious and dangerous to the nation in this context.

C'mon, it's not as if he's got anything to worry about in his own caucus, right? This from Hogue ...

 

[Brad Sallows]

It reflects on his character or lack thereof.

Unserious man who has never held a job outside of politics.

A perceived blot on a politician's character. How could such a thing have happened?

When conservative politicians are inexperienced, they are attacked for that.

When conservative politicians are experienced, they are attacked for that.

Now that's unserious.

 

[ArmyRick]

It reflects on his character or lack thereof.

Your opinion. I think not taking the intelligence briefing on foreign interference prevented him from being muzzled on it as he stated OVER and over again.

Unserious man who has never held a job outside of politics.

And part time snow boarding instructors and failed drama teachers are excellent political resume stuffers? Nope.

This gets tiresome.

 

[dapaterson]

I view Poilievre and Scheer the same way I view Tobin, Copps and Nunziata - career politicians good at stunts but poor to terrible choices as leaders.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

It reflects on his character or lack thereof.

Unserious man who has never held a job outside of politics.

So do you want Carney or Singh to form government? Which is the best choice to beat PP? Tell us how their plan of status quo on steroids is going to fix things for us?

Have you ever held a substantial job, that you could support a home and family with, other than a government service job?

"Unserious man who has never held a job outside of politics" is the biggest red herring that keeps getting repeated by those that can't compete with him, gain the respect he has or are in love with the current administration. It means absolutely nothing. The fact he's been as successful as he has been, for as long as he has, in this game shows skill and thought. Exactly the type of person we need as opposed to a snowboard instructor or a journalist. Or Net Zero zealot that makes Guilbault look like a toddler.

Or the orange liiberal, Jagmeet Singh.

 

[dapaterson]

Your opinion. I think not taking the intelligence briefing on foreign interference prevented him from being muzzled on it as he stated OVER and over again.

That is uncategorical bullshit from him.

 

[dapaterson]

So do you want Carney or Singh to form government? Which is the best choice to beat PP? Tell us how their plan of status quo on steroids is going to fix things for us?

I'd prefer OToole. The CPC adopting the prior Liberal approach of torching the leadership after each election is foolish.

The Liberals adopting an approach of leader protection from reality is equally bad.

I actually found the picture below, it's directly from the LPC HQ.

 

[brihard]

Your opinion. I think not taking the intelligence briefing on foreign interference prevented him from being muzzled on it as he stated OVER and over again.

Utter nonsense. His parliamentary privilege would not be muzzled by FISOIA. He has stated it over and over again be cause he knows he rely on supporters to just buy it without making any effort to understand the applicable laws and parliamentary immunities. He would simply need to behave responsibly within what he learned within the confines of those privileges if he wished to continue to be shown such into with any degree of detail in the future. The whole point of intelligence collection is for it to be used to inform policy, within the constraints of the ability to protect sources and methods.

 

[ArmyRick]

That is uncategorical bullshit from him.

How so? Is it uncategorical billshit because you say so? What part of what he said was wrong or incorrect? Funny how the not so report came out and no one is even whispering Pierre's name. Please do elaborate and explain, like a good officer should.

I'll wait. Probably a long ass time.

 

[ArmyRick]

Utter nonsense. His parliamentary privilege would not be muzzled by FISOIA. He has stated it over and over again be cause he knows he rely on supporters to just buy it without making any effort to understand the applicable laws and parliamentary immunities. He would simply need to behave responsibly within what he learned within the confines of those privileges if he wished to continue to be shown such into with any degree of detail in the future. The whole point of intelligence collection is for it to be used to inform policy, within the constraints of the ability to protect sources and methods.

Is that so? How about the legal experts (like lawyers) who have said after taking the brief he can NOT say anything or he can ACT in way to reveal the info he learned in the top secret briefing. In accordance with the secrets act.

I think his advisor team was way ahead of someone like Trudeau and he was right about how he handled it.

Some of you are quite upset about that.

 

[ArmyRick]

I'd prefer OToole

Go figure, you select the option that is not available.

 

[ArmyRick]

Utter nonsense. His parliamentary privilege would not be muzzled by FISOIA. He has stated it over and over again be cause he knows he rely on supporters to just buy it without making any effort to understand the applicable laws and parliamentary immunities. He would simply need to behave responsibly within what he learned within the confines of those privileges if he wished to continue to be shown such into with any degree of detail in the future. The whole point of intelligence collection is for it to be used to inform policy, within the constraints of the ability to protect sources and methods.

Now Trudeau on the other hand, had all the power in the world to de-classify the documents or take action as the Prime Minister.

 

[brihard]

Is that so? How about the legal experts (like lawyers) who have said after taking the brief he can NOT say anything or he can ACT in way to reveal the info he learned in the top secret briefing. In accordance with the secrets act.

I think his advisor team was way ahead of someone like Trudeau and he was right about how he handled it.

Some of you are quite upset about that.

There is no “secrets act”. You don’t even have the most basic understanding of what law applies- I specifically referenced it; FISOIA (as amended from SOIA in June). Guess what the new “FI” part stands for. I’m bloody sure you’re not in a position to speak to how offences under that act actually work.

Lawyers experienced in national security law have indeed spoken on this, and on how it interfaces with his parliamentary immunities. If Elizabeth May can read a report and give a presser, so can he- and she wasn’t even covered by any parliamentary privilege there. He’s literally choosing to be less informed on Canada’s national security than Elizabeth May. Ponder that.

If he wants to shape certain legislation being introduced in Parliament based on intelligence information he absolutely can. How do you think national security legislation is crafter? It’s not by ignoring security intelligence. It needs to be used carefully but it can be used. He would just find himself in a position where he would no longer be able to fall back on ignorance of the truth.

Now Trudeau on the other hand, had all the power in the world to de-classify the documents

That’s not how originator control and declassification work.

or take action as the Prime Minister.

Like introducing and passing laws. Like Bill C-70 regarding foreign interference that got royal assent in June, and which establishes new criminal offences, new threat reduction disclosure powers for CSIS, and a foreign agents registry once regulation is issued.