Setting aside the public inquiry issue, the report actually has some interesting things in it. And some parts (if it's correct and credible) poke a fair number of holes in the reporting around this. A few examples (again, assuming the report is credible):
-the leaked memo about potential interference before the 2019 election was a preliminary draft that wasn't shared outside CSIS. The final version that was shared with the PMO had fairly different language and was more general in nature without any specific recommendations.
-the allegation that people were donating to campaigns favored by China, receiving tax refunds from the deductions, and then were reimbursed the difference was just a general tactic that China sometimes uses around the world. But CSIS has no evidence that this was actually occurring in Canada. [this was actually pretty obvious to me based on how it was written in the original article, which raises the question of why even include things that aren't actually being alleged without clarifying that?]
-there were irregularities in the Han Dong nomination process and CSIS suspected that they were tied to the PRC Consulate.
-the allegation that Dong advised the PRC Consulate to extend the detention of Kovrig and Spavor is false based on the intelligence provided by CSIS.
-PRC officials did take preliminary steps to gather information about Michael Chong's family and CSIS was aware of this. Trudeau claimed that this was not shared outside of CSIS, but that's not correct, as it shared with the National Security Advisor. So Trudeau was either misled or was lying.
Maybe the report is BS and full of misinformation, but I don't really find that to be all that plausible. The Liberals aren't going to be in government forever, so I'm kind of skeptical that Johnston would outright fabricate information when it could easily be uncovered in the near future.
|