The argument over Pierre Poilievre’s security clearance has focused on what he can’t know. There’s another question worth asking: what happens when the people who do know can’t fully answer him?
I don’t think it’s as simple as PP not wanting to be muzzled. I do believe there has to be another reason why he does not want security clearance. Having security clearance means your background is thoroughly vetted. Just saying…
Agreed, Ginny. This all ties-in to the infamous "authoritarian playbook". I would have given him the benefit of the doubt, if not for all the other actions he does that support the same multi-step checklist.
Regarding the rules, this is why things blew up on Maxime Bernier when he was a minister in Harper's government: He had the clearance, had classified papers in his briefcase, took them with him on vacation (with a girlfriend who most definitely was NOT cleared for anything), and was reading away at the cabin's kitchenette over breakfast or some such. Point was, she could easily have checked the material while he was sleeping, in the bathroom/shower, etc. Or the cleaning staff could, etc., etc.
I think that every time PP raises his "no security clearance" argument, others in the House should push back, saying it is irresponsible of him. He's just showing that he would be an inadequate leader, because he can't demonstrate that he can handle sensitive information/issues.
Maybe they should audit how he made 20 million from being a career politician. That might give them a clue as to why he won’t get a security clearance.
Personally, I think he’s hiding something that would be a problem for him if it were known. I suspect on the basis that he lies, and lies, and lies, and misrepresents pretty much everything out of his mouth.
I don’t think it’s as simple as PP not wanting to be muzzled. I do believe there has to be another reason why he does not want security clearance. Having security clearance means your background is thoroughly vetted. Just saying…
Agreed, Ginny. This all ties-in to the infamous "authoritarian playbook". I would have given him the benefit of the doubt, if not for all the other actions he does that support the same multi-step checklist.
Bravo, Fred!
Well-covered, and thoroughly explored.
Regarding the rules, this is why things blew up on Maxime Bernier when he was a minister in Harper's government: He had the clearance, had classified papers in his briefcase, took them with him on vacation (with a girlfriend who most definitely was NOT cleared for anything), and was reading away at the cabin's kitchenette over breakfast or some such. Point was, she could easily have checked the material while he was sleeping, in the bathroom/shower, etc. Or the cleaning staff could, etc., etc.
I think that every time PP raises his "no security clearance" argument, others in the House should push back, saying it is irresponsible of him. He's just showing that he would be an inadequate leader, because he can't demonstrate that he can handle sensitive information/issues.
Great observation!
I think not knowing the facts leaves the door open for criticism and provides plausible deniability. 701 knows what he's doing.
That's a good read. That makes me think differently about how useless politicians are globally. And yours don't affect me and vice versa.
Maybe they should audit how he made 20 million from being a career politician. That might give them a clue as to why he won’t get a security clearance.
Personally, I think he’s hiding something that would be a problem for him if it were known. I suspect on the basis that he lies, and lies, and lies, and misrepresents pretty much everything out of his mouth.