Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[GGG]

Anonymous and unnamed sources are to different things. In general journalists have fairly good standards for what meets the standard for evidence and public interest. Remember that the government is being sent this info for comment before it’s released. The government could pursue a nothing to hide strategy and react with an appropriate amount of concern

The answer in either scenario of China infiltrating government or csis has been infiltrated is a public inquiry. The government does not show an appropriate level of concern for either.

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1639968012789858306

https://twitter.com/user/status/1639754897552822274

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

This is uncomfortably similar to the kind of attacks being conducted down south to sow division and distrust in institutions and to attack political opponents.

There needs to be very strong evidence of any of this kind of stuff, not just anonymous sources, otherwise it's just tearing the institutions apart for the sake of some clicks.

If there's evidence, produce it.

I'll refer back to Snowden again. When he had something extremely important to blow the whistle on, he provided something like 10,000 documents to the press as evidence. Arguably, what he was blowing the whistle on was maybe less serious than what's being insinuated in these kinds of tweets and reports, but these leaks for some reason don't come with receipts?

Reporting that "The source said they captured a conversation" is insufficient. If they're a credible source and they believe in this enough to risk their career and freedom, they should actually provide the evidence. As is, the primary effect they're having is damaging faith in the critical institutions themselves, including CSIS, while not providing anything definitive to the public.

Because of the way that the Liberals and Trudeau have treated this. IE Fillibusters and playing games at the committee level.

Trudeau ignoring all recommendations from his own anti-interference mechanisms.

Ignoring questions or not answering them and being incredibly evasive.

They took control of this issue out of their hands.

In a police world what is coming out is a strong case of probable cause. If it was one source that's one thing, but for the most part we're seeing multiple sources in the same story.

The only way that the Liberals can clear this up is with at the very least a public inquiry, though I do believe that given the subject matter here that politics of any kind have to be removed. We can't have the Liberals appointing a friendly family friend at the head of a public inquiry for example. This should really have been a RCMP counter espionage investigation.

[JohnnyB]

The liberals have certainly made things worse in their response. The conservatives are contributing as well in seizing the opportunity to attack the liberals in some ways that are further feeding into the loss of faith in core institutions.

A public inquiry may be the only way to save faith in institutions at this point, but a lot more damage can be done along the way before it's done, by both the Liberals and the Conservatives as well as the press and the leakers.

If we end up with the NDP pulling their support from the Liberals and the country being thrown back into an election before this is resolved, it could be very ugly and very bad for trust in institutions on all sides of the political spectrum.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by GGG

Anonymous and unnamed sources are to different things. In general journalists have fairly good standards for what meets the standard for evidence and public interest. Remember that the government is being sent this info for comment before it’s released. The government could pursue a nothing to hide strategy and react with an appropriate amount of concern

The answer in either scenario of China infiltrating government or csis has been infiltrated is a public inquiry. The government does not show an appropriate level of concern for either.

The guy was shopping around his tale to grind his ax. First went to the Globe and Mail and it did not meet their editorial standards and they passed on the story because they did not have confidence in the story. Found Sam Cooper and Global and they were willing to publish the story.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by timun

Is there a credible alternative?

Where's the line where that no longer matters due the immense corruption and capture of the ruling party by a rival foreign power?

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by GGG

Anonymous and unnamed sources are to different things. In general journalists have fairly good standards for what meets the standard for evidence and public interest. Remember that the government is being sent this info for comment before it’s released. The government could pursue a nothing to hide strategy and react with an appropriate amount of concern

Anonymous sources are used all the time, but it's also important for journalists to treat them critically. And I'm not sure Cooper and Global are really doing that. There are notable inconsistencies that they effectively ignore, the biggest one being why would Dong or the Liberals not want Spavor and Kovrig released before the 2021 election? Them being released would only serve to benefit the party in government, yet we're told that they actually wanted to delay things because they didn't want the opposition party to benefit? How does that make any sense?

And then there's the question of which anonymous CSIS sources to believe? The G&M ran a story in December (also based on two anonymous CSIS sources) saying that Trudeau was briefed in the fall of 2022 that 11 candidates were targeted by the Chinese consulate, but that there was no evidence of covert funding or any evidence that any of the candidates were compromised. Taken at face value, that contradicts most of Cooper's reporting.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The guy was shopping around his tale to grind his ax. First went to the Globe and Mail and it did not meet their editorial standards and they passed on the story because they did not have confidence in the story. Found Sam Cooper and Global and they were willing to publish the story.

I find myself wondering about the leakers, are these people not senior enough to have access to all the evidence and documents themselves? If they're not, then are they senior enough to be making assessments on how these situations are being handled in the big picture, even putting their own assessments above the assessments of the office of the Prime Minister? If they are senior enough and can access the documents, then why aren't they actually putting them on the table? Is it self-interest, that they don't want to put themselves at risk and are willing to let conjecture get spun into a damaging political maelstrom rather than face personal consequences?

In the absence of the documents themselves, imaginations run wild about what could have been the content of a call, or the content of a report, or a record of some transaction etc. Politicians, media, and the public discourse use the space left open and run with it in whichever speculative direction suits their bias or interests. It's a very destructive process, and one that could be substantially restricted if the goods were just laid on the table.

If serious enough stuff is going on that it's worth calling core institutions of government into question and it can only be dealt with via whistle-blowing, then gather up all the evidence and give it to the public. These half-way leaks are doing a lot of damage without really exposing truth.

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Where's the line where that no longer matters due the immense corruption and capture of the ruling party by a rival foreign power?

This is exactly the kind of thing that the leaks without evidence are enabling. Are we heading for, or already in, a situation where a substantial chunk of the Canadian population believes that the ruling government is illegitimate despite no hard evidence being laid out?

It is eerily similar to the stolen election ideology down south where people don't believe Biden is a legitimate president.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

This is exactly the kind of thing that the leaks without evidence are enabling. Are we heading for, or already in, a situation where a substantial chunk of the Canadian population believes that the ruling government is illegitimate despite no hard evidence being laid out?

It is eerily similar to the stolen election ideology down south where people don't believe Biden is a legitimate president.

Nope, not at all. I'm not saying the Government is illegitimate, the opposite actually. I'm saying that the Canadian people need to vote out the LPC government ASAP because at best they look the other way to the CCP operating their campaigns of influence over their diaspora population in Canada and steal Canadian / US IP through their operations in Canada of which there's plenty of actual evidence of. At worst the points leveled against them meddling in Canadian elections and actively being embedded in the LPC while Trudeau looked the other way is true.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Nope, not at all. I'm not saying the Government is illegitimate, the opposite actually. I'm saying that the Canadian people need to vote out the LPC government ASAP because at best they look the other way to the CCP operating their campaigns of influence over their diaspora population in Canada and steal Canadian / US IP through their operations in Canada of which there's plenty of actual evidence of. At worst the points leveled against them meddling in Canadian elections and actively being embedded in the LPC while Trudeau looked the other way is true.

Okay. I'm not sure I really get what you mean then. I understand you see the current ruling party as captured by a foreign country and governing in ways that undermine the interests of the electorate to instead serve the interests of a foreign country, but you also see the government as legitimate. Is your view that despite those things the government is legitimate because the election process was still legitimate?

Not debating. Just trying to understand where you're coming from.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

Okay. I'm not sure I really get what you mean then. I understand you see the current ruling party as captured by a foreign country and governing in ways that undermine the interests of the electorate to instead serve the interests of a foreign country, but you also see the government as legitimate. Is your view that despite those things the government is legitimate because the election process was still legitimate?

Not debating. Just trying to understand where you're coming from.

I'm not questioning the overall result of the election as legitimate and democracy is ultimately what determines legitimacy in my eyes. So if in light of the evidence before it the Canadian people still keep electing the LPC then it's still the 'legitimate' government in a sense it was elected. But yes, this Canadian government has been compromised on many issues related to China due to many of the influences it's been under.

[Northendzone]

I feel like the majority of those “questioning” the election results are liberals seemingly suggesting the cons are saying the election results are suspect - I guess it is somewhat crafty as they can make the trump connection

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1639954070323511299

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Yoho

https://twitter.com/user/status/1639954070323511299

just going by the headline, the column is probably silly.
How can you drag down someone who for years has been wallowing in the same sty as you?

[TheIronMaiden]

Is there a credible alternative?

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Where's the line where that no longer matters due the immense corruption and capture of the ruling party by a rival foreign power?

Full disclosure, this is not meant to deflect from the LPC or the trouble at hand. They need to be held accountable.

That said, is there any limit foreign influence if the CPC is in power? Seems to me that no one is, was or will be immune to Chinese interference. Least of all voters.

Again, the LPC needs to be held accountable, all the same it is dangerous thinking to suggest that any political party is the antidote and not the same pill in different packaging.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

just going by the headline, the column is probably silly.
How can you drag down someone who for years has been wallowing in the same sty as you?

Guess you’ll have to read the article to find out .

[Slava]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Full disclosure, this is not meant to deflect from the LPC or the trouble at hand. They need to be held accountable.

That said, is there any limit foreign influence if the CPC is in power? Seems to me that no one is, was or will be immune to Chinese interference. Least of all voters.

Again, the LPC needs to be held accountable, all the same it is dangerous thinking to suggest that any political party is the antidote and not the same pill in different packaging.

I just can't on-board with that line of thought. Are we just taking a "boys will be boys" approach to corruption now? I think that PP is brutal, but at least there's no evidence of corruption at this point. If my choice is between a corrupt, bumbling idiot or just a plain bumbling idiot, I'm skipping the corrupt option.

[CaptainCrunch]

Maybe the Federal Government needs to updated its version of quickbooks. We saw 10's of billions unaccountable in terms of Infrastructure when McKenna ran the department. Now the auditor General is shrugging her shoulders in terms of Foreign affairs and whats happening with projects where the money is going.

https://globalnews.ca/news/9581108/f...neral-reports/

Global Affairs Canada has no sense of whether development aid meant to help women and girls abroad is actually advancing gender equity, according to an audit tabled in Parliament on Monday morning.
“It was highly problematic that critical information, such as project progress reports, could not be readily found,” reads a report by auditor general Karen Hogan.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Slava

I just can't on-board with that line of thought. Are we just taking a "boys will be boys" approach to corruption now? I think that PP is brutal, but at least there's no evidence of corruption at this point. If my choice is between a corrupt, bumbling idiot or just a plain bumbling idiot, I'm skipping the corrupt option.

I am not sure how you gleaned this from my post.
The existential threat of foreign influence is large, much larger than party lines. Now is the time to hold everyone accountable.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I'm not questioning the overall result of the election as legitimate and democracy is ultimately what determines legitimacy in my eyes. So if in light of the evidence before it the Canadian people still keep electing the LPC then it's still the 'legitimate' government in a sense it was elected. But yes, this Canadian government has been compromised on many issues related to China due to many of the influences it's been under.

Okay. I get where you're coming from now. I still don't think we've seen evidence of the ruling party being captured by a foreign government, or that it's even really compromised, but we clearly agree on the importance of protecting the electoral process and legitimacy of any elected government via that process.

Regarding the criticism of the LPC wrt protection of Chinese diaspora, I think it's worth pointing out that this is a community no party cared about protecting from influence despite concerns apparently having been voiced for decades. These calls from political leaders to protect Chinese diaspora have now only been raised when useful as a tool of political attack, so I'm skeptical it's an issue that really matters to any party at all. The fear drummed up by the broader red peril rhetoric will likely also bring harm to this same community and push more members of that community out of political participation while other politicians grandstand about protecting them and simultaneously disregard voices from the community that actually do favour good relations with China.

I'm not very hopeful that the current professed interest in the Chinese diaspora concerns are anything more than passing matters of convenience in political messaging for any of the parties, or that their primary audience for that message is even the Chinese diaspora community.