Breaking: RCMP reveal that Blair and Trudeau interfered in NS shootings

[George Orwell 1984]

Pretty clear to me who is lying to promote another liberal agenda

[Rat Fink 318]

Pretty clear to me who is lying to promote another liberal agenda

E7E2E337-EF7A-4393-A736-5D399A863212.png

If you've been following my posts here you just might have an opinion on the report and the note as evidence on all its own.

[foenix]

Pretty clear to me who is lying to promote another liberal agenda E7E2E337-EF7A-4393-A736-5D399A863212.png

Yeah RCMP Leather was the head liar......but I'm sure it wasn't about anything Liberal. He was lying from the get go.

[Rat Fink 318]

Here's Jagmeet for the NDP.

https://www.ndp.ca/news/ndp-canadians-n ... terference

NDP: Canadians need answers about troubling allegations of interference

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh made the following statement:

"The allegations that the Prime Minister’s office or the Public Safety Minister’s office directed RCMP Commissioner Lucki to interfere in an ongoing police investigation is very disturbing. Yet again, allegations of interference are raising serious questions about political pressure within the RCMP when they're supposed to be independent. The RCMP must always serve the public interest, not the government’s political interest.

These allegations suggest that pressure from the government risked undermining the investigation into the worst mass-shooting in Canadian history—all for their own political agenda. Nova Scotians have suffered enormous losses and the mishandling of the investigation into this shooting is making it incredibly difficult for the families of those who were murdered. How can Nova Scotians who lost their loved ones in this senseless tragedy possibly trust that they will have the answers and accountability they deserve?

All Canadians have to be able to have trust in their institutions. The idea that this government –that any government—would use this horrific act of mass murder to gain support for their gun policy is completely unacceptable. Not only is this inappropriate, it fuels cynicism about our democracy and the elected officials who participate in it.

While our focus remains ensuring Canadians can have trust in their institutions, we are seeing other political parties try to score political points on this issue. That is wrong. If the Conservative party tries to make this about firearms and Bill-21, they're no different than the government. This inquiry must be about getting answers for the victims and now, Canadians from coast-to-coast-to coast have to know why the government was trying to interfere for their own gain.

New Democrats will be calling for a full investigation into these disturbing allegations so that Canadians have the answers they deserve about any interference from the RCMP or their government.”

My underlining.

So do we want to know the, "why?" Or is this simply about trying to, "score political points?"

Well, maybe Singh has made a good political point.

But then I've already posted my 'why' here earlier on. So I guess if the Liberals do come clean, I'll get to see if we make a match.

[captkirkcanada]

this thread is misnamed, the only people that bungled the shooting was the rcmp, anything that happened after had zero to do with the actual shooting.

[mikest2]

"The Liberals love to exploit the news of the day to further their agenda. Following word that the U.S. Supreme Court was preparing to overturn Roe v. Wade, which protects abortion rights, they announced increased funding for abortion services.

And in the wake of recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York and Uvalde, Tex., they introduced new gun-control legislation, just as they released new restrictions after the Nova Scotia shootings.

To sum up: It is entirely consistent with this Liberal government’s disregard for proper procedure and its eagerness to exploit the news of the day for the Prime Minister’s Office to push for the release of the kinds of guns used in a major crime. It wouldn’t bother anyone in that office in the least."

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion ... B1ailcJy3s

[George Orwell 1984]

this thread is misnamed, the only people that bungled the shooting was the rcmp, anything that happened after had zero to do with the actual shooting.

No, this thread is not misnamed. It is exactly what it should be . The liberals jumped onboard a tragedy to further there gun restrictions agenda and it’s pathetic and wrong . The lot of them need to resign!!

[foenix]

this thread is misnamed, the only people that bungled the shooting was the rcmp, anything that happened after had zero to do with the actual shooting.

'Police don't release information:' Why the RCMP withheld details after N.S. massacre

HALIFAX — At the centre of the political firestorm erupting over the RCMP’s response to the worst mass shooting in Canadian history is a phrase used by police to justify withholding case information.

n the weeks after a gunman killed 22 people during a 13-hour rampage on April 18-19, 2020, Nova Scotia RCMP officers insisted that disclosure of key facts — including details about the weapons used — could “jeopardize the integrity” of their investigation.

But what does that phrase really mean? And were the Mounties' reasons for keeping those details from the public valid?.................

When Campbell's notes were made public Tuesday in a report prepared for the public inquiry investigating the tragedy, the opposition federal Conservatives and New Democrats accused the governing Liberals of interfering in a police investigation for political gain.

The Liberals have denied the allegation, saying Lucki wasn't told to do anything.

Lost in the partisan bickering was any discussion over the public's right to know about the firearms in question.

There can be little doubt that most Mounties, like Campbell, were opposed to saying anything about the weapons. They believed the information, if released to the public, could tip off those involved in illegally supplying guns to the killer.

"It is reasonable to believe the (RCMP) had an ongoing investigation into the source of the weapons," said a retired Mountie who asked not to be named to protect his relationship with the RCMP. "It may have involved U.S. partners, which would have made them less inclined to provide any information that could threaten the investigation.".........

A.J. Somerset, author of the 2015 book, "Arms: The Culture and Credo of the Gun," said the release of those details was unlikely to hobble the RCMP's investigation.

"When the shooter is identified, then anybody who had any information about how those guns were obtained would immediately want to avoid talking to police," Somerset sad in an interview.

"I don't see how the identification of the weapons actually leads to that person becoming aware of something they weren't already aware of."

Somerset said the real problem is that law enforcement agencies in Canada have grown accustomed to using the jeopardized-investigation argument as a crutch.

"In Canada, the police don't release information," he said. "We're kind of used to that, compared with the United States, where within an hour of a mass shooting, we know everything about what weapons were used.".......

"In Canada, there's a cultural difference around the idea of who the police are working for," the author said. "Police in Canada, in general, don't view themselves as accountable to the public .... We saw this in (the Nova Scotia mass shooting case). Warnings weren't sent out to the public and the police appeared to be acting in their own interest."

The public inquiry investigating the murders, known as the Mass Casualty Commission, has heard that police knew about an active shooter on the night of April 18, 2020, but no public warnings stating that fact were distributed until the next day — 10 hours after the killing started.

On Aug. 12, 2020, RCMP Sgt. Angela Hawryluk told a court hearing that search warrants used by the Mounties had to remain heavily redacted to ensure the investigation into the mass murder was not compromised.

Search warrants are supposed to be made public after they have been executed, with some exceptions. But in this case, the Crown produced redacted versions that were challenged in court by several media outlets, including The Canadian Press.

Those documents also contained information about the firearms and much of what the RCMP had learned during their investigation.

At one point, Hawryluk told the court, “I had no intention of any of the (search warrants) being revealed to the public."

That kind of hardline approach stands in contrast to the way things used to be in Canada, said Blake Brown, a history professor at Saint Mary's University in Halifax.

On Dec. 6, 1989, soon after a man fatally shot 14 women at Montreal’s École Polytechnique, the public was told about the gun he used: another Ruger Mini-14.

"But at some point, police stopped doing that," said Brown, author of "Arming and Disarming: A History of Gun Control in Canada."

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/p ... li=AAggv0m

[mikest2]

"RCMP officers are not supposed to dance to the tune of their political masters. Everyone — including the many loyal Canadians who lay awake nights dreaming of the day that Trudeau and Blair are driven from office — should be able to trust the Mounties to release information when and how it is in the public interest, not in the interest of whoever happens to be running the government at the moment.

Lucki seems to have conflated the political interest of the Liberals with those of the RCMP."

https://theline.substack.com/p/stephen- ... tter&sd=pf

[rustled]

^^The talking points have been released!

'Police don't release information:' Why the RCMP withheld details after N.S. massacre

HALIFAX — At the centre of the political firestorm erupting over the RCMP’s response to the worst mass shooting in Canadian history is a phrase used by police to justify withholding case information.

"Present Lucki, Blair and Trudeau as heroically trying to uphold the public's right to know which weapons were used. Cuz that will blind the public to how far Blair and Trudeau were prepared to go to use this tragedy for their political advantage."

The excuse-making for Trudeau shows time and again "you can fool some of the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time" - and the Liberal spin machine is hoping they'll get away with it again.

[hozzle]

Well its obvious in other hearings with Lucki, she wants to follow in the footsteps of the delusional Blair and be a potential Liberal MP.
Her actions were concerning enough to have the superintendent make notes of interactions with her. Discussions and emails were intense enough for some to come to tears. The PMO & Blair requested or coerced Lucki and she was complicit. ALL this goes against the standard procedure the RCMP have in place of details regarding an investigation during an incident of this nature.
Plain & simple this is political interference in an investigation. If some on the board cannot see this then there is no way they will ever understand common sense:
The Liberals put propaganda for legislation of a gun ban over proper investigation of the tragic shootings in NS... it's like they were wanting and/or waiting for this to happen.

[foenix]

"RCMP officers are not supposed to dance to the tune of their political masters. Everyone — including the many loyal Canadians who lay awake nights dreaming of the day that Trudeau and Blair are driven from office — should be able to trust the Mounties to release information when and how it is in the public interest, not in the interest of whoever happens to be running the government at the moment.

Lucki seems to have conflated the political interest of the Liberals with those of the RCMP."

https://theline.substack.com/p/stephen- ... tter&sd=pf

Who do they answer to then? Isn't that what this investigation is showing is that the RCMP's doesn't answer to anyone and that's why they are being rightly criticized for misinformation, withholding and at times outright lying to the public. What is the big deal about releasing the type of weapon that was used in the massacre? Just because as in this case is not an answer.......and how come in the past, those types of information by the RCMP was routine?

[Merry]

I can not think of any good reason why an RCMP Officer would lie in his notes about what happened.

Therefore, I believe that he WAS admonished by Commissioner Lucki for not following her instructions and releasing the information about the firearms used.

The RCMP Officer involved clearly felt he was caught between a “rock and a hard place”, given that he’d received conflicting orders from two different levels of superiors about the release of this information, so he covered his rear end by writing down what each had told him to do.

A very wise move on his part, and a tactic often used by employees given conflicting, or inaccurate commands.

The question becomes WHY Commissioner Lucki would issue a command that was in conflict with this Officer’s immediate superiors? If Commissioner Lucki felt the Officers immediate superiors were wrong, WHY didn’t she discuss it directly with them, instead of circumventing the usual chain of command?

It seems strange to me that the RCMP Commissioner would get personally involved in issuing commands to someone so far down the command chain from her.

So the question becomes, WHY? Why would the Commissioner ignore the normal chain of command like that?

Pressure from her political masters to do so is certainly a very plausible explanation. But whether or not we’ll ever be told the truth about this is doubtful, given the Liberals track record regarding transparency and accountability.

Time for a change!

[rustled]

Well its obvious in other hearings with Lucki, she wants to follow in the footsteps of the delusional Blair and be a potential Liberal MP.
Her actions were concerning enough to have the superintendent make notes of interactions with her. Discussions and emails were intense enough for some to come to tears. The PMO & Blair requested or coerced Lucki and she was complicit. ALL this goes against the standard procedure the RCMP have in place of details regarding an investigation during an incident of this nature.
Plain & simple this is political interference in an investigation. If some on the board cannot see this then there is no way they will ever understand common sense:
The Liberals put propaganda for legislation of a gun ban over proper investigation of the tragic shootings in NS... it's like they were wanting and/or waiting for this to happen.

While I wouldn't say they wanted it to happen, they are obviously political opportunist of the worst sort: "How can we use this tragedy to further our agenda?"

Using this tragedy to their advantage was more important to them than staying out of where politicians have no business being involved. They showed once again they have no respect for Canadian institutions, and will push past any barriers and safeguards we have in place to prevent our government from using our institutions to further the ruling party's agenda.

[hozzle]

"RCMP officers are not supposed to dance to the tune of their political masters. Everyone — including the many loyal Canadians who lay awake nights dreaming of the day that Trudeau and Blair are driven from office — should be able to trust the Mounties to release information when and how it is in the public interest, not in the interest of whoever happens to be running the government at the moment.

Lucki seems to have conflated the political interest of the Liberals with those of the RCMP."

https://theline.substack.com/p/stephen- ... tter&sd=pf

Who do they answer too then? Isn't that what this investigation is showing is that the RCMP's doesn't answer to anyone and that's why they are being rightly criticized for misinformation, withholding and at times outright lying to the public. What is the big deal about releasing the type of weapon that was used in the massacre? Just because as in this case is not an answer.......

Malarkey... they have procedures in place and Lucki did not follow them. Information like what weapons were use could compromise investigation into the source of the firearms, who supplied them, where they came from, etc, etc. I hope that makes sense.