this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2025
171 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

9278 readers
1162 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

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


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Original reporting by the Globe & Mail is behind a paywall. In any case, it's not a good look for Poilievre that India boosted his candidacy and then he wouldn't get security clearance to be informed of this fact.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Oh, I agree but he still can't talk about details. He only wants to talk details when he's opposition, not when PM. Total weasel move.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Prime Minister gets to decide what he talks about.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Everyone gets to decide what we talk about. PM is no different. Pierre just can't lie about something that has been made aware of.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

There's non disclosure rules if you aren't the one deciding what is and isn't secret, don't play dumb. Fucking CSIS agent letting the globe and mail see what Poilievre couldn't is election interference.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

CSIS has the same rules for all leaders. So no, it's not election interference. Go cry elsewhere.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Someone illegally released a report, to a person with no security clearance, from three years ago about a failed attempt at vote manipulation, 3 days into an federal election and you seriously think it's not an influence attempt? Guess you weren't playing dumb.