[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Firebot

"i don't disagree with" but yet won't outright agree to something which may be portrayed that you are criticizing 'your side'

Can you clarify what it is that you are saying I won’t agree to and what “my side” is?

Is it really that hard to just come out and say "There needs to be a public inquiry into Liberal actions, on Han Dong, and how Liberals handled CSIS's information, and on CSIS itself (your highest concern out of all this it seems)"? You can most certainly do both.

Did I say that there shouldn’t be an inquiry? I made a comment based on my observation that people seem to be more concerned with who is currently being accused rather than how this could have happened in the first place. I’m not writing “hey look the articles mentioned conservatives were also involved in interference, rabble rabble rabble” or pretending that this isn’t a big deal.

You can certainly at some point criticize and put some accountability on a party that you affiliate ideologies with, without betraying your ideologies. It won't make you a conservative you know?

Absolutely but there is a big difference between not holding people accountable for their actions and wanting to get the facts before assuming I know what is going to come out of an inquiry as you did by stating that(paraphrasing) “We’re almost certainly going to find out that the PMO was briefed on Dong’s conversations about the 2 Michaels”.

I think you’re getting pretty desperate in your attempts to frame my position as partisan when it clearly isn’t. I get that you don’t like my takes, but you trying to spin what I’m saying into something that I didn’t say by presenting a bunch of assumptions and hypothetical situations isn’t going to change them. Hopefully you’re not too disappointed by that.