Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Robbob]

At this point, knowing an election is coming, and still not getting your security clearance is a pretty big red flag. If I was on the fence his kicking the can down the road would make me think twice. Honestly to be a leader of a federal party, the security clearance should be a prerequisite.

[Mr.Coffee]

Pretty obvious something weird going on with the security clearance thing.

They’re all corrupt, let’s be honest.

[GGG]

I think the security thing is purely political.

If he knows things he no longer can speculate on things. He doesn’t want to lose that ability.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by GGG

I think the security thing is purely political.

If he knows things he no longer can speculate on things. He doesn’t want to lose that ability.

Security is a dodgy thing to play politics with though.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Security is a dodgy thing to play politics with though.

I agree it’s terrible and should be considered a strong negative.

I don’t think there is are any reasons he could not get security clearnace.

[BoLevi]

Why do people keep saying pp can't get security clearance. Of course he can... But he is refusing to for very rational reasons.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Why do people keep saying pp can't get security clearance. Of course he can... But he is refusing to for very rational reasons.

People are saying that for the same reason he hasnt gotten it - cynical political gain.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Why do people keep saying pp can't get security clearance. Of course he can... But he is refusing to for very rational reasons.

I agree that it's not an issue of whether he can get the top level security clearance and there is no reason think he couldn't, but I am having trouble seeing what benefit there is to him not getting it other than having plausible deniability if what Trudeau said is true.

I'm not against Poillievre and if the election was tomorrow, I'd be more inclined to vote for the Conservatives than any other party at this point, but I am having trouble understanding his point on this. I am not saying he doesn't have a good point, but if he does, I'm not getting it.

[Regorium]

The point is that selling a dream and asking questions is way more profitable than reality.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Why do people keep saying pp can't get security clearance. Of course he can... But he is refusing to for very rational reasons.

…. Where are “people” saying that? Not on this page or last… like one post?

It’s a stupid game he’s playing and people are rightfully tired of it.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Why do people keep saying pp can't get security clearance. Of course he can... But he is refusing to for very rational reasons.

The only rational reason he wouldn’t get it is that he can’t. If he can get it and is refusing, then it isn’t rational.

It’s the latter, and it’s weird his supporters are going along with it.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

The only rational reason he wouldn’t get it is that he can’t. If he can get it and is refusing, then it isn’t rational.

It’s the latter, and it’s weird his supporters are going along with it.

Take for example the political interference issue. If he knows the actual classified information he can no longer make speculative accusations of the liberals being corrupt and him being unaware of any issues in his party because he will know the specifics and unable to disclose anything.

Compare this with no one who would vote for him carrying about the issue

So the rational choice is don’t get clearance.

Just because you disagree with something doesn’t make the behaviour not have a rational electoral basis.

[puffnstuff]

Speculative accusations? Isnt that just code for lying?

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by GGG

Take for example the political interference issue. If he knows the actual classified information he can no longer make speculative accusations of the liberals being corrupt and him being unaware of any issues in his party because he will know the specifics and unable to disclose anything.

Compare this with no one who would vote for him carrying about the issue

So the rational choice is don’t get clearance.

Just because you disagree with something doesn’t make the behaviour not have a rational electoral basis.

Ding ding. We have a winner.

Christ guys, even the CBC is saying that we don’t have any traitors in politics when it comes to to foreign interference. It’s a political play.

That is all.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

Ding ding. We have a winner.

Christ guys, even the CBC is saying that we don’t have any traitors in politics when it comes to to foreign interference. It’s a political play.

That is all.

The CBC aren't "saying" anything, they are reporting the news. I know it's unusual for you to hear such a thing, given where you tend to get your news from, but this is how it is supposed to work.

If what GGG is suggesting is the truth, PP could just admit he'd rather remain ignorant so he can take cheap political shots that his base laps up, and that is more important than being an informed leader of the official opposition. Or he can keep being a smarmy bitch, his choice I guess. Voters too, when it comes down to it.

[Geraldsh]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

Ding ding. We have a winner.

Christ guys, even the CBC is saying that we don’t have any traitors in politics when it comes to to foreign interference. It’s a political play.

That is all.

When the judge said there was no interference I didn’t believe her, probably because I don’t have the clearance to see for myself.

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by GGG

Take for example the political interference issue. If he knows the actual classified information he can no longer make speculative accusations of the liberals being corrupt and him being unaware of any issues in his party because he will know the specifics and unable to disclose anything.

Compare this with no one who would vote for him carrying about the issue

So the rational choice is don’t get clearance.

Just because you disagree with something doesn’t make the behaviour not have a rational electoral basis.

Ok so there’s a rational “political” reason for it, but how about stepping up to the plate and being a leader. Get informed, and then stop spreading misinformation to your base in order to score political points.

[PepsiFree]

Sad to see that the standard has gotten so low that people are defending PP simply for having a reason for getting it, regardless of how stupid and dangerous that reason is. “Well, he has a reason” is not enough.

Regardless, the same probe that finds there to be no “traitors” (as in, nobody in the government acting on behalf of a foreign entity) did find evidence of persuasion and attempts to influence, something PP should want to know if he’s a rational person who is not merely pretending to care about foreign interference. The probe also makes the conclusion that party leaders should, as soon as possible after they become leaders, get the necessary security clearance.

PP might have a reason. Golly, what an accomplishment. But while it’s consistent with his desire to play games and spread misinformation, it’s inconsistent with someone who cares about foreign interference, so he should shut his mouth and let the adults who actually know something about it handle the talking.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Regardless, the same probe that finds there to be no “traitors” (as in, nobody in the government acting on behalf of a foreign entity) did find evidence of persuasion and attempts to influence, something PP should want to know if he’s a rational person who is not merely pretending to care about foreign interference. The probe also makes the conclusion that party leaders should, as soon as possible after they become leaders, get the necessary security clearance.

The report also finds that:

the government’s response has been far from perfect:
• I have observed that the government has sometimes taken too long to
act, and that coordination between the various players involved has
not always been optimal.
• Processes by which information had to be passed on to certain
decision-makers, including elected officials, have not proved as
effective as they should have been.
• In addition, the government has proven to be a poor communicator
and insufficiently transparent when it comes to foreign interference.

[shotinthebacklund]

Things do not line up here between Justice hogue's report and what we were being told at the inquiry by the Prime minister. He either lied in that public hearing or Hogue is now. Two very different stories and its hard to see how its possible both had that different of opinions on the information that was given to them.