While David Johnston’s first report into foreign interference disputed claims made about Independent MP Han Dong, the special rapporteur said Tuesday he never spoke to the Toronto-area MP in the course of his investigation.
“We did not reach out to him,” the former governor general told CBC’s Power & Politics Tuesday after appearing before a Commons committee and being grilled by opposition MPs on foreign interference.
“We had a high degree of intelligence, both open and more particularly the classified information, and that permitted us to come to the conclusion that the allegations made about him were not founded. In fact, he was in conversation with the consulate in Toronto of China but was not wittingly being a tool of theirs.”
Johnston was appointed special rapporteur by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in March after a series of news stories by Global News and the Globe and Mail alleged the Chinese government engaged in a range of interference operations in the 2019 and 2021 federal elections.
In his first report, released last month, Johnston disputed several of those reports — including one Global News story that alleged Liberal MP Han Dong urged a Chinese diplomat in February 2021 to hold off on releasing Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor from China’s custody, and others that claimed federal candidates received funds from China during the 2019 federal election campaign.
Johnston says he ‘didn’t reach out’ to MP Han Dong while investigating foreign interference
Special rapporteur David Johnston says he felt that he got the intelligence that permitted him to conclude that Han Dong ‘was not a witting party’ in an alleged foreign interference campaign. Dong stepped down as a member of the Liberal caucus in the wake of allegations that he advised a Chinese diplomat that Beijing should wait to free Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor in February 2021.
After reviewing classified intelligence reports, Johnston did conclude that there were “irregularities” observed with Dong’s nomination for the federal Liberals in 2019 and cited a “well-grounded suspicion that the irregularities were tied to the PRC consulate in Toronto, with whom Mr. Dong maintains relationships.”
“In reviewing the intelligence, I did not find evidence that Mr. Dong was aware of the irregularities or the PRC Consulate’s potential involvement in his nomination,” the report said.
Johnston said his team didn’t reach out to Dong “out of respect” for the Independent MP’s $15 million lawsuit against Global News.
Hear David Johnston’s opening remarks at committee on foreign interference
During his opening remarks at the committee on procedure and house affairs, Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference David Johnston spoke of his work investigating foreign interference and says criticism won’t stop him from completing his mandate.
“We felt that we got both the open intelligence and the classified intelligence that permitted us to come to the conclusion that he was not a witting party to what was suggested in those stories,” Johnston told host David Cochrane.
Dong quit the Liberal caucus after the Global stories broke. Since Johnston’s first report was released, Dong has been seeking to rejoin the Liberal caucus.
Johnston says public hearings will begin next month
On Tuesday, Johnston appeared for more than three hours before a hearing of the standing committee on procedure and House affairs, where he defended his integrity and his decision to hold public hearings instead of a public inquiry.
Johnston has been accused of bias due to his past connections to the prime minister’s family and the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation — allegations he repeatedly tried to swat down.
“I don’t believe I have a conflict of interest and I would not have undertaken this responsibility had I had a conflict of interest,” he told the committee Tuesday.
“So my suggestion, madam chair, is that one looks at a record of service and comes to one’s conclusion about conflict of interest. And I would again plea that you focus the attention on foreign interference, this report which will be reviewed, and others where we must do a much better job.”
In his report, Johnston wrote that while he did not find evidence that Trudeau or his ministers knowingly ignored intelligence, there are problems with the way information flows between cabinet and intelligence agencies.
“I’ve identified significant shortcomings in the government’s ability to detect, deter and combat this threat. This must be remedied urgently,” he told MPs in his opening remarks.
He has promised to hold public hearings, beginning next month, “on the serious governance and policy issues.”
Johnston said the public will be able to hear from government representatives, national security officials and members of the diaspora community.
Chong questions Johnston on foreign interference investigation
During committee, Conservative MP Michael Chong asked David Johnston how he thought he could restore trust from Canadians in his work. Chong was at the centre of the foreign interference story when he was briefed that he was a victim of targeting by Beijing.
Those who fear speaking out publicly because of the risk of retaliation will have the chance to provide testimony in-camera, or can submit information privately, Johnston added.
Conservative MP Michael Chong, who has been targeted by the Chinese government for his work to recognize the Uyghur genocide, argued that the recommendation against a public inquiry undermines public confidence.
“Eight months ago, when this foreign interference scandal first blew wide open, reasonable people could have argued that public trust could be restored without an independent public inquiry. But that door closed a long time ago,” said Chong.
“Do you not see how recommending against a public inquiry undermines confidence in our democratic institutions?”
Johnston has argued that, given the classified nature of the information, a public inquiry wouldn’t build trust.
“I come back to Justice [Dennis] O’Connor, who said that public inquiries in the traditional sense are not particularly useful and can be horrendous in dealing with these things and there are appropriate ways of dealing with them,” said Johnston, referring to the head of the inquiry into the detainment and torture of Maher Arar.
The first report from David Johnston, Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, is shown as he appears as a witness at the Procedure and House Affairs Committee in Ottawa on Tuesday, June 6, 2023. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)
“What we have recommended and what we intend to do in the next five months is to have public hearings on these very important questions of, are our systems adequate? They are not.”
Johnston said he expects his second report, which is due in October, will recommend shoring up Canada’s two intelligence review bodies — the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians and the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency.
Opposition parties voted for Johnston to resign
Johnston spent much of the committee hearing defending his ability to continue on as special rapporteur.
Last week, the House of Commons passed an NDP motion, with Conservative and Bloc Québécois support, calling for Johnston to be ousted from high-profile role.
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre accused Johnston of helping “Trudeau cover up the influence by Beijing in our democracy.” NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has said “the appearance of bias is so strong” that Johnston cannot continue.
Despite the vote, Johnston told the committee said he intends to stay on and finish his work. He said he respects the House’s right to express its opinion but his mandate comes from the government.
Conservative MP questions David Johnston on his relationship with Trudeau
Conservative MP Larry Brock asks special rapporteur David Johnston about the history of his relationship with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Johnston has said that while he was friends with Pierre Trudeau and skied with the Trudeau family back when Justin Trudeau and his brothers were children, he hasn’t had any meetings, dinners or personal contacts with Trudeau in the past 40 years.
During today’s hearing, Johnston also defended the record of Sheila Block, a lawyer he hired to assist with his mandate. The Globe and Mail reported Tuesday morning that Block has donated to the Liberal Party in the past.
Johnston also told the committee that about 10 days ago, he began receiving unpaid informal advice from Don Guy, former chief of staff to former Ontario Liberal premier Dalton McGuinty, and Brian Topp, chief of staff to Rachel Notley when she was the NDP premier of Alberta.
Navigator calls itself a “high-stakes strategic advisory and communications firm” that offers a range of services. Its slogan is, “When you can’t afford to lose.”
When asked Monday if hiring a crisis communicator was a good use of public funds, Trudeau defended Johnston and accused Poilievre of participating in “baseless smear jobs.”
“I’m not going to speak to decisions that the independent special rapporteur and his team are making to manage the toxic climate that they’re operating in,” said Trudeau.
Some foreign interference stories ‘don’t add up,’ Johnston says
Special rapporteur David Johnston concedes that Erin O’Toole’s claim that his campaign was targeted by China in the 2021 election, and the lack of supporting evidence reported by Johnston, calls for closer investigation.
NEW YORK (AP) — In a new video posted early Election Day, Beyoncé channels Pamela Anderson in the television program “Baywatch” – red one-piece swimsuit and all – and asks viewers to vote.
In the two-and-a-half-minute clip, set to most of “Bodyguard,” a four-minute cut from her 2024 country album “Cowboy Carter,” Beyoncé cosplays as Anderson’s character before concluding with a simple message, written in white text: “Happy Beylloween,” followed by “Vote.”
At a rally for Donald Trump in Pittsburgh on Monday night, the former president spoke dismissively about Beyoncé’s appearance at a Kamala Harris rally in Houston in October, drawing boos for the megastar from his supporters.
“Beyoncé would come in. Everyone’s expecting a couple of songs. There were no songs. There was no happiness,” Trump said.
She did not perform — unlike in 2016, when she performed at a presidential campaign rally for Hillary Clinton in Cleveland – but she endorsed Harris and gave a moving speech, initially joined onstage by her Destiny’s Child bandmate Kelly Rowland.
“I’m not here as a celebrity, I’m not here as a politician. I’m here as a mother,” Beyoncé said.
“A mother who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in, a world where we have the freedom to control our bodies, a world where we’re not divided,” she said at the rally in Houston, her hometown.
“Imagine our daughters growing up seeing what’s possible with no ceilings, no limitations,” she continued. “We must vote, and we need you.”
Harris used the song in July during her first official public appearance as a presidential candidate at her campaign headquarters in Delaware. That same month, Beyoncé’s mother, Tina Knowles, publicly endorsed Harris for president.
Beyoncé gave permission to Harris to use the song, a campaign official who was granted anonymity to discuss private campaign operations confirmed to The Associated Press.
Outside of sports and a “Cold front coming down from Canada,” American news media only report on Canadian events that they believe are, or will be, influential to the US. Therefore, when Justin Trudeau’s announcement, having finally read the room, that Canada will be reducing the number of permanent residents admitted by more than 20 percent and temporary residents like skilled workers and college students will be cut by more than half made news south of the border, I knew the American media felt Trudeau’s about-face on immigration was newsworthy because many Americans would relate to Trudeau realizing Canada was accepting more immigrants than it could manage and are hoping their next POTUS will follow Trudeau’s playbook.
Canada, with lots of space and lacking convenient geographical ways for illegal immigrants to enter the country, though still many do, has a global reputation for being incredibly accepting of immigrants. On the surface, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver appear to be multicultural havens. However, as the saying goes, “Too much of a good thing is never good,” resulting in a sharp rise in anti-immigrant sentiment, which you can almost taste in the air. A growing number of Canadians, regardless of their political affiliation, are blaming recent immigrants for causing the housing affordability crises, inflation, rise in crime and unemployment/stagnant wages.
Throughout history, populations have engulfed themselves in a tribal frenzy, a psychological state where people identify strongly with their own group, often leading to a ‘us versus them’ mentality. This has led to quick shifts from complacency to panic and finger-pointing at groups outside their tribe, a phenomenon that is not unique to any particular culture or time period.
My take on why the American news media found Trudeau’s blatantly obvious attempt to save his political career, balancing appeasement between the pitchfork crowd, who want a halt to immigration until Canada gets its house in order, and immigrant voters, who traditionally vote Liberal, newsworthy; the American news media, as do I, believe immigration fatigue is why Kamala Harris is going to lose on November 5th.
Because they frequently get the outcome wrong, I don’t take polls seriously. According to polls in 2014, Tim Hudak’s Progressive Conservatives and Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals were in a dead heat in Ontario, yet Wynne won with more than twice as many seats. In the 2018 Quebec election, most polls had the Coalition Avenir Québec with a 1-to-5-point lead over the governing Liberals. The result: The Coalition Avenir Québec enjoyed a landslide victory, winning 74 of 125 seats. Then there’s how the 2016 US election polls showing Donald Trump didn’t have a chance of winning against Hillary Clinton were ridiculously way off, highlighting the importance of the election day poll and, applicable in this election as it was in 2016, not to discount ‘shy Trump supporters;’ voters who support Trump but are hesitant to express their views publicly due to social or political pressure.
My distrust in polls aside, polls indicate Harris is leading by a few points. One would think that Trump’s many over-the-top shenanigans, which would be entertaining were he not the POTUS or again seeking the Oval Office, would have him far down in the polls. Trump is toe-to-toe with Harris in the polls because his approach to the economy—middle-class Americans are nostalgic for the relatively strong economic performance during Trump’s first three years in office—and immigration, which Americans are hyper-focused on right now, appeals to many Americans. In his quest to win votes, Trump is doing what anyone seeking political office needs to do: telling the people what they want to hear, strategically using populism—populism that serves your best interests is good populism—to evoke emotional responses. Harris isn’t doing herself any favours, nor moving voters, by going the “But, but… the orange man is bad!” route, while Trump cultivates support from “weird” marginal voting groups.
To Harris’s credit, things could have fallen apart when Biden abruptly stepped aside. Instead, Harris quickly clinched the nomination and had a strong first few weeks, erasing the deficit Biden had given her. The Democratic convention was a success, as was her acceptance speech. Her performance at the September 10th debate with Donald Trump was first-rate.
Harris’ Achilles heel is she’s now making promises she could have made and implemented while VP, making immigration and the economy Harris’ liabilities, especially since she’s been sitting next to Biden, watching the US turn into the circus it has become. These liabilities, basically her only liabilities, negate her stance on abortion, democracy, healthcare, a long-winning issue for Democrats, and Trump’s character. All Harris has offered voters is “feel-good vibes” over substance. In contrast, Trump offers the tangible political tornado (read: steamroll the problems Americans are facing) many Americans seek. With Trump, there’s no doubt that change, admittedly in a messy fashion, will happen. If enough Americans believe the changes he’ll implement will benefit them and their country…
The case against Harris on immigration, at a time when there’s a huge global backlash to immigration, even as the American news media are pointing out, in famously immigrant-friendly Canada, is relatively straightforward: During the first three years of the Biden-Harris administration, illegal Southern border crossings increased significantly.
The words illegal immigration, to put it mildly, irks most Americans. On the legal immigration front, according to Forbes, most billion-dollar startups were founded by immigrants. Google, Microsoft, and Oracle, to name three, have immigrants as CEOs. Immigrants, with tech skills and an entrepreneurial thirst, have kept America leading the world. I like to think that Americans and Canadians understand the best immigration policy is to strategically let enough of these immigrants in who’ll increase GDP and tax base and not rely on social programs. In other words, Americans and Canadians, and arguably citizens of European countries, expect their governments to be more strategic about immigration.
The days of the words on a bronze plaque mounted inside the Statue of Liberty pedestal’s lower level, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” are no longer tolerated. Americans only want immigrants who’ll benefit America.
Does Trump demagogue the immigration issue with xenophobic and racist tropes, many of which are outright lies, such as claiming Haitian immigrants in Ohio are abducting and eating pets? Absolutely. However, such unhinged talk signals to Americans who are worried about the steady influx of illegal immigrants into their country that Trump can handle immigration so that it’s beneficial to the country as opposed to being an issue of economic stress.
In many ways, if polls are to be believed, Harris is paying the price for Biden and her lax policies early in their term. Yes, stimulus spending quickly rebuilt the job market, but at the cost of higher inflation. Loosen border policies at a time when anti-immigrant sentiment was increasing was a gross miscalculation, much like Trudeau’s immigration quota increase, and Biden indulging himself in running for re-election should never have happened.
If Trump wins, Democrats will proclaim that everyone is sexist, racist and misogynous, not to mention a likely White Supremacist, and for good measure, they’ll beat the “voter suppression” button. If Harris wins, Trump supporters will repeat voter fraud—since July, Elon Musk has tweeted on Twitter at least 22 times about voters being “imported” from abroad—being widespread.
Regardless of who wins tomorrow, Americans need to cool down; and give the divisive rhetoric a long overdue break. The right to an opinion belongs to everyone. Someone whose opinion differs from yours is not by default sexist, racist, a fascist or anything else; they simply disagree with you. Americans adopting the respectful mindset to agree to disagree would be the best thing they could do for the United States of America.
PHOENIX (AP) — Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent proponent of debunked public health claims whom Donald Trump has promised to put in charge of health initiatives, said Saturday that Trump would push to remove fluoride from drinking water on his first day in office if elected president.
Fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces cavities by replacing minerals lost during normal wear and tear, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The addition of low levels of fluoride to drinking water has long been considered one of the greatest public health achievements of the last century.
Kennedy made the declaration Saturday on the social media platform X alongside a variety of claims about the heath effects of fluoride.
“On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S. water systems to remove fluoride from public water,” Kennedy wrote. Trump and his wife, Melania Trump, “want to Make America Healthy Again,” he added, repeating a phrase Trump often uses and links to Kennedy.
Trump told NBC News on Sunday that he had not spoken to Kennedy about fluoride yet, “but it sounds OK to me. You know it’s possible.”
The former president declined to say whether he would seek a Cabinet role for Kennedy, a job that would require Senate confirmation, but added, “He’s going to have a big role in the administration.”
Asked whether banning certain vaccines would be on the table, Trump said he would talk to Kennedy and others about that. Trump described Kennedy as “a very talented guy and has strong views.”
The sudden and unexpected weekend social media post evoked the chaotic policymaking that defined Trump’s White House tenure, when he would issue policy declarations on Twitter at virtually all hours. It also underscored the concerns many experts have about Kennedy, who has long promoted debunked theories about vaccine safety, having influence over U.S. public health.
In 1950, federal officials endorsed water fluoridation to prevent tooth decay, and continued to promote it even after fluoride toothpaste brands hit the market several years later. Though fluoride can come from a number of sources, drinking water is the main source for Americans, researchers say.
Officials lowered their recommendation for drinking water fluoride levels in 2015 to address a tooth condition called fluorosis, that can cause splotches on teeth and was becoming more common in U.S. kids.
In August, a federal agency determined “with moderate confidence” that there is a link between higher levels of fluoride exposure and lower IQ in kids. The National Toxicology Program based its conclusion on studies involving fluoride levels at about twice the recommended limit for drinking water.
A federal judge later cited that study in ordering the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to further regulate fluoride in drinking water. U.S. District Judge Edward Chen cautioned that it’s not certain that the amount of fluoride typically added to water is causing lower IQ in kids, but he concluded that mounting research points to an unreasonable risk that it could be. He ordered the EPA to take steps to lower that risk, but didn’t say what those measures should be.
In his X post Saturday, Kennedy tagged Michael Connett, the lead attorney representing the plaintiff in that lawsuit, the environmental advocacy group Food & Water Watch.
Kennedy’s anti-vaccine organization has a lawsuit pending against news organizations including The Associated Press, accusing them of violating antitrust laws by taking action to identify misinformation, including about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines. Kennedy is on leave from the group but is listed as one of its attorneys in the lawsuit.
What role Kennedy might hold if Trump wins on Tuesday remains unclear. Kennedy recently told NewsNation that Trump asked him to “reorganize” agencies including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and some agencies under the Department of Agriculture.
But for now, the former independent presidential candidate has become one of Trump’s top surrogates. Trump frequently mentions having the support of Kennedy, a scion of a Democratic dynasty and the son of former Attorney General Robert Kennedy and nephew of President John F. Kennedy.
Kennedy traveled with Trump Friday and spoke at his rallies in Michigan and Wisconsin.
Trump said Saturday that he told Kennedy: “You can work on food, you can work on anything you want” except oil policy.
“He wants health, he wants women’s health, he wants men’s health, he wants kids, he wants everything,” Trump added.
