this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2024
12 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7161 readers
350 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Regions

🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

💻 Universities

💵 Finance / Shopping

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social & Culture

Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
12
Five key takeaways from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's testimony on foreign interference (www.cbc.ca)
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

When questioned by Conservative Party lawyer Nando De Luca, Trudeau also said the names of Liberal parliamentarians and individuals from other parties are on the list of parliamentarians at risk of being compromised by foreign interference.

Wow, what a cudgel.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

It's an unusual axe to choose to grind during testimony. Take it from two former CSIS directors:

Richard Fadden and Ward Elcock — two former CSIS directors — told CBC News' Power & Politics on Wednesday that Trudeau probably shouldn't have taken such a partisan turn in his testimony.

"He lapsed into really extreme partisanship when he made this accusation and he made it in terms that could not help but enrage the Conservative leader. So that was his objective. I think it worked," Fadden told host David Cochrane.

"Did it advance the cause of national security? Did it advance the interest of the inquiry and the commissioners' work? I'm not so sure."

Source: CBC - "Why won't Trudeau release classified names — and why won't Poilievre get a security clearance?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 34 minutes ago

“Did it advance the cause of national security? Did it advance the interest of the inquiry and the commissioners’ work? I’m not so sure.”

If it leads to Polievre getting his fucking security clearance, I would argue it does.

There would be no "partisan turn" to take if he would meet this basic expectation.