Liberal Minority Government 2021 - ????

[Lumber]

I'm going by the facts we have so far and not jumping to the conclusions you guys are.

There are claims it went the Nat Sec advisor, but we don't know if that is true.

There are claims the PM was never informed, but we don't know if that is true.

All we know is CSIS had a report 2 years ago but did not assess it as a major threat. Everything else right now is conjecture.

 

[ArmyRick]

Wouldn't be the first time Trudeau was caught being less than honest or oops forget some major details

 

[Lumber]

Wouldn't be the first time Trudeau was caught being less than honest or oops forget some major details

That is absolutely a possibility and I wouldn't past the him or the LPC to have "ignored" the report because it targeted a conservative.

But we have no shred of evidence that says that's what happened.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I don't think they "hid" it for 2 years. A call was made 2 years ago and the matter was dropped.

Trudeau is like the soldier who always has an excuse for everything and is never at fault.

I don't know. I think most of us would be pretty pissed off if our chain of command knew our family was threatened or at risk over something and decided not to tell us. Maybe that's just me though.

It sounds like Trudeau is having his usual hard time explaining what he knew and what he didn't know, with the regular conflicting information from others.

 

[YZT580]

I'm going by the facts we have so far and not jumping to the conclusions you guys are.

the facts as stated by Justin who is a proven misspeaking of the truth individual. Unfortunately for him, he has a track record of obfuscating so even if he is telling the truth in this case, no one except those who have tasted of the Koolaid will believe him. And that is really sad.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I mean, after the two Michaels, I'd imagine any government would be cautious.

That's the point. Influence a nation by holding a couple of people - cheap win for the Chinese government.

 

[RangerRay]

I heard a former PM Chief of Staff say that there is no way a report of this nature would have been left on someone’s desk and not gone to the highest levels.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I heard a former PM Chief of Staff say that there is no way a report of this nature would have been left on someone’s desk and not gone to the highest levels.

I was looking for that article.

It's probably just a matter of Katie Telford and CSIS just experiencing things differently.

 

[Lumber]

Reading this article in its entirety, it feels more and more like this was just a giant fuck up between CSIS, Public Safety and the PMO instead of a purposeful effort to keep safety/security important information from an MP for political reasons.

Also, from what little they've revealed about the report, it appears that 'targeting Canadians" meant simply that they were assembling information on Chinese-Canadian MPs, not that they had an active program to try and exploit that information. Like, do you not think CSIS is collecting information on politicians from adversary countries as well?

 

[Lumber]

Edit to add the article I was referring to:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-chong-csis-1.6833343

 

[ArmyRick]

Edit to add the article I was referring to:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-chong-csis-1.6833343

Need I remind you that the majority (or 69% ) of CBC funding comes from the Trudeau Government?

And once again, are you for freaking real? You know no limits or boundaries when it comes to defending Justin "Too many Scandals to continue" Trudeau.

And spare us the "facts" argument...

 

[Lumber]

Need I remind you that the majority (or 69% ) of CBC funding comes from the Trudeau Government?

So you're implying that CBC did what? Just made up the quotes in the article? That the line "previously reported by the Globe and Mail" is just a lie?

I'm just giving you my read on the situation based on the article. This article seems to have summed about just about everything that is actually known and to have been said about this situation. Did you even bother reading it? There's no opinion in it or bias in it at all. It's just a series of quotes from people from both parties, as well as the few bits of actual information about the CSIS report that were originally reported by the Glove and Mail.

And once again, are you for freaking real? You know no limits or boundaries when it comes to defending Justin "Too many Scandals to continue" Trudeau.

Once again, are you freaking real? Do you even bother looking at any situation involving Trudeau and the LPC with any sort of critical lens? You're prepared to believe any negative story about Trudeau and the LPC without even bothering to question whether it's true?

If you're going to attack your foe, you attack their actual faults and weakness, not made up or assumed ones.

And spare us the "facts" argument...

Who hurt you Rick? Why do you hate the truth so much? If you just need an echo chamber where people can parrot each others' vitriol about Trudeau and the LPC so you can get your daily dose of validation, then I recommend you try a Reddit subreddit where the Mods will just ban anyone who holds a differing view from the majority.

 

[ArmyRick]

Open your eyes and have a damn good look at Trudeau, who he is and what he does. I seriously question your ability to judge someone's character.
The majority of stories coming out about Trudeau these days are far from positive.

 

[ArmyRick]

So you're implying that CBC did what? Just made up the quotes in the article? That the line "previously reported by the Globe and Mail" is just a lie?

I'm just giving you my read on the situation based on the article. This article seems to have summed about just about everything that is actually known and to have been said about this situation. Did you even bother reading it? There's no opinion in it or bias in it at all. It's just a series of quotes from people from both parties, as well as the few bits of actual information about the CSIS report that were originally reported by the Glove and Mail.



Once again, are you freaking real? Do you even bother looking at any situation involving Trudeau and the LPC with any sort of critical lens? You're prepared to believe any negative story about Trudeau and the LPC without even bothering to question whether it's true?

If you're going to attack your foe, you attack their actual faults and weakness, not made up or assumed ones.


Who hurt you Rick? Why do you hate the truth so much? If you just need an echo chamber where people can parrot each others' vitriol about Trudeau and the LPC so you can get your daily dose of validation, then I recommend you try a Reddit subreddit where the Mods will just ban anyone who holds a differing view from the majority.

and you need to pay attention. Many on here have called you out for this non stop defense or excusing Trudeau. I am probably the most direct and blunt about it.
Believe me, I am saying what many are thinking.

 

[Remius]

Need I remind you that the majority (or 69% ) of CBC funding comes from the Trudeau Government?

That article is fairly neutral and to be fair doesn’t exactly paint Trudeau in a good light at all.

And once again, are you for freaking real? You know no limits or boundaries when it comes to defending Justin "Too many Scandals to continue" Trudeau.

I didn’t see him defend Trudeau either. Not sure why his take on the situation is what I would call a defence of the man.

And spare us the "facts" argument...

Ah yes, facts are so inconvenient for some.

No offense, but you really make a lot of accusations when some try to critically analyze or offer an opinion of a situation. Not foaming at the mouth doesn’t mean “defending” what you hate. And even if they were defending what you hate you really are difficult to converse with despite your claim to want to elevate the conversation (you posted a very good post a while ago and choose to completely ignore your own advice).


And yes. I am saying out loud what a lot here are thinking as well.

 

[Remius]

Anyways…

If anyone wants to see what things to come with the LPC here is the latest from their convention.

Liberals reject balanced budget and mandatory voting as official policy

The Liberals have rejected a policy resolution that would have called on them to make a balanced budget part of their next election platform.

www.ctvnews.ca

Balanced budgets won’t be thing and neither will mandatory voting.

 

[RangerRay]

The latest from The Line

Dispatch from the Front Lines: We love you, but you're not serious people

Plus, Alberta's election drama, more guns legislation, and your MIA Line editors explain themselves

theline.substack.com

This summed up everything nicely.

Look, we’ve seen this game before, countless times, with this government and this prime minister. Trudeau’s habit of responding to allegations of wrongdoing or incompetence or mismanagement by first denying any knowledge of the issue, then discrediting the source, and finally throwing unidentified third parties under the bus, is a well trod path for this deeply unserious man.

Given the pattern, we’re pretty skeptical of Trudeau’s claim that he’d been given incomplete information. Honestly, it wouldn’t surprise us in the slightest if it turns out that he just made the whole thing up.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Anyways…

If anyone wants to see what things to come with the LPC here is the latest from their convention.

Liberals reject balanced budget and mandatory voting as official policy

The Liberals have rejected a policy resolution that would have called on them to make a balanced budget part of their next election platform.

www.ctvnews.ca

Balanced budgets won’t be thing and neither will mandatory voting.

Of course both aren’t. They don’t win elections for them. Responsible government? Not on their watch. Mandatory voting? Odds are they won’t vote liberal.

 

[TacticalTea]

Anyways…

If anyone wants to see what things to come with the LPC here is the latest from their convention.

Liberals reject balanced budget and mandatory voting as official policy

The Liberals have rejected a policy resolution that would have called on them to make a balanced budget part of their next election platform.

www.ctvnews.ca

Balanced budgets won’t be thing and neither will mandatory voting.

Hah!

I take some personal pride in the fact it was my old acquaintances of the Quebec wing who put the budget resolution forward...

Not surprised at the failure in the general convention, though. That Party has gone insane.

 

[Lumber]

Anyways…

If anyone wants to see what things to come with the LPC here is the latest from their convention.

Liberals reject balanced budget and mandatory voting as official policy

The Liberals have rejected a policy resolution that would have called on them to make a balanced budget part of their next election platform.

www.ctvnews.ca

Balanced budgets won’t be thing and neither will mandatory voting.

So what did they leave in their platform?

Also, regarding proportional representation, given than:
1. It was assumed the Libs dropped it because it would favour the Cons; and
2. Their dropping it pissed off a lot of people;
I'm surprised the CPC hasn't made it part of their platform.