voluble

Dear downvoter in the thread: just testing something out here-

Parliamentarians who are wittingly working with foreign powers to interfere in Canadian politics, should be expelled from parliament.

Your thoughts?

Out of curiosity, and if you don't mind sharing, do you think the Liberals have done a good job of dealing with election interference issues?

I think a responsible government would be having an open conversation about it, getting consensus from the other parties, and doing something, rather than nothing. That conversation should have started 7 years ago, when the PM was first briefed on election interference. A responsible government wouldn't have tried to minimize or bury the issue.

We've had two federal elections since the PM was first briefed on interference, and are about to have another without a clear plan for how to deal with compromised parliamentarians. As a citizen, I don't find that acceptable.

The line that gets trotted out is that interference "didn't change the outcome of the election" in 2019 and 2021. That is absolutely not a satisfactory threshold for action to be taken. Nobody is talking about how the threshold should be much, much lower. If the current government isn't making an attempt at defining that threshold in an ethical and non-partisan way, that's their failure.

To your question, I think egregious examples of foreign compromise should absolutely be criminalized, and handled by the judicial branch. But the legislative branch needs to be empowered to act swiftly to prevent compromised parliamentarians from operating in Ottawa unhindered.

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?

The issue is that foreign interference isn't properly encompassed by the legal system in Canada. The party in charge doesn't seem to be bothered by this fact, and has done nothing to actively remedy it. They could be setting definitions, and standards for what counts as interference, determining where the bar for intelligence credibility should be set, etc. Instead, they've left the door open to interference, and made it clear that when it happens, nothing will be done about it.

One of the strangest elements of this story is that the Village People and Rufus Wainwright are on the Trump campaign playlist.

PP is going ‘young, hip’

Such a laughable turn. I think it's a marker that literally anybody could be in his shoes, doing and saying anything at all, and they'd be polling well.

Freeland is incredibly capable - but can be tied, hand in glove, with everything Trudeau

Yep. Liberals are zugzwanged.

CBC - Indian officials linked to homicides, violence in Canada, and pose threat to public safety, RCMP alleges

FWIW, in terms of % of the popular vote in 2021, Alberta voted NDP at a higher rate than Ontario. So I think the results of a FPTP election obscure the diversity of views in Alberta.

What I mean to say is not that the LPC's choice for leader would be bullshit, but that, whatever their choice is, it's hard to imagine how they would be able to credibly separate themselves from what has made the LPC so unpopular.

So for that reason, I'm not sure why Freeland would be the obvious choice. If the Liberals want to win a federal election, I think she'd be a poor choice for party leader. Any barbs that could be directed at Trudeau could be easily directed at Freeland. From an optics standpoint, I don't think it's possible to differentiate Freeland from Trudeau, and the Liberal party of the past decade. That's a problem that I think would override who she is or her credentials, at least in the public eye.

Even if the Liberals somehow manage to find a credible, electable leader that doesn't end up being a Michael Ignatieff 2.0, I see no reason to trust that they won't deliver more of the same bullshit.

When it comes to leadership in American politics, it's said that democrats fall in love, and republicans fall in line.

I don't want to fall in love. The past decade of Canadian politics has been a parade of 'charisma' and it hasn't gotten us anywhere. I want a sincere and straightforward leader, who won't get embroiled in scandals, has a strong stance on foreign policy, a plan for foreign interference, the housing & affordability crisis, and an ability to deal with issues in a straightforward and policy-focused way. I guess what I'm trying to say is I want a prime minister with a short skirt and a long jacket.