Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyB
Well, the specific allegation made in the Global article was
And the Globe apparently has a senior source saying no such conclusion could be drawn.
So, seems dubious.
It certainly could be true, but the reporting so far is hardly persuasive, especially given the seemingly illogical rationale Global alleges he had. Nobody should be rushing to convict the guy based on what's out there now.
|
Doesn’t the senior government source from the globe state there was “No Actionable Evidence”
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/...g-allegations/
That is pretty different than saying no conclusion could be drawn which is not a quote from the source and instead is at best paraphrased.
Secondly you notice the Senior Government source does not say that Dong advocated for the Michael’s release whereas Dong said he did on the call in question.
https://globalnews.ca/news/9570437/l...s-sources/amp/
Quote:
In an emailed statement to Global News sent Tuesday, Dong confirmed that he had a discussion with Consul General Han, but disputed that he initiated it and also denies that he advised Beijing to delay releasing Kovrig and Spavor from prison.
“I raised the status of Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig and called for their immediate release,” he wrote.
|
So we have 3 sources right now who have seen the transcript. 2 who confirm to global and 1 government source to the globe. All agree this call between the consulate and an MP took place without any government direction.
Unproven is a better word than Dubious. It’s interesting the push back this release around the two Michael’s is getting as opposed to the election fraud component.
If you notice the attack on Globals reporting doesn’t discuss Dongs selection as candidate. It is focusing very narrowly on one specific part of one specific conversation. I believe this is an intentional plan by the government in dealing with this crisis. Goes back to the JWR columnists that could be lined up to support the decision.