[undercoverbrother]

A good read:

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/ca...ond-in-command

Norman’s unexplained removal also raises other questions. Among those:

Since no criminal charges had been laid, why didn’t Gen. Vance consider moving Norman to another position? Vance has declined to comment.
Sources told Postmedia that Vance knew almost from the beginning that the investigation into Norman was not related to national security concerns. Sajjan did not acknowledge publicly that Norman’s removal was not related to national security until a week later. Norman’s supporters say the silence on that point from the Liberal government and the military significantly damaged the vice-admiral’s reputation. Sajjan has declined to comment on that question.
The Canadian Forces claims it can’t talk about the case to protect Norman’s privacy. If so, why did it release to the media Vance’s letter detailing Norman’s removal? The military has declined to comment on this aspect of the matter.
Vance has told military officers he has zero tolerance for leaks of any kind. But military public affairs officers say Vance came up with a process the general has called the “weaponization of public affairs,” which includes the leaking of information to journalists deemed “friendly” to the Canadian Forces. In a September 2015 interview with the Ottawa Citizen, Vance acknowledged using the term but denied it was about strategically leaking information. Norman’s supporters question whether a double-standard is at play.
The Liberals obtained confidential information about the shipbuilding program while still in opposition, including internal Department of Defence documents. Norman’s supporters question why he seems to have been singled out when others in Ottawa, from journalists to lobbyists to political parties, have obtained sensitive shipbuilding information in the past and without any apparent police investigation.