Justin Trudeau Describes For First Time His View of “PRC Targeting Paper” Held Back By His Advisor in 2023

For the first time, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has testified on his view of two explosive Canadian intelligence reports, including the “Targeting Paper,” which described how Chinese diplomats assessed Canadian MPs based on how helpful or hurtful they could be to Beijing. Trudeau confirmed that this report was not shared with him by his key security advisor, Jody Thomas.

Additionally, Trudeau addressed three memos starting in 2019 that intended to brief him on foreign interference threats, all of which he claimed never reached his desk, with the intended briefings for Parliamentarians, which he was requested to authorize, only occurring in June 2024.

The inquiry into foreign interference in Canada’s elections has uncovered deep, ongoing divisions between Trudeau’s top aides and Canada’s intelligence community, with particular focus on two pivotal reports: the CSIS Targeting Paper and the PCO January 2022 Special Report. These documents, which detail how Beijing has sought to influence Canadian politics, have become central to understanding how the government responded—or failed to respond—to the growing threat of interference.

The CSIS Targeting Paper, drafted in 2021 and circulated to a small number of public servants in 2023, “named names” and outlined how Chinese diplomats categorized Canadian parliamentarians into three groups: those friendly towards Beijing, those neutral or potentially persuadable, and those deemed antagonistic due to their criticism of China’s human rights record, particularly on issues like the Uyghurs and Hong Kong. During his testimony, Trudeau played down the significance of this report, arguing that such categorization is a normal part of diplomacy.

“What the targeting paper actually talks about is that China has broadly classified parliamentarians in their diplomatic activities—some as being positive towards China, others who are neutral or convincible, and others who have spoken out against China,” Trudeau said. He noted that this diplomatic behavior was not surprising or new to him, comparing it to Canada’s own tactics during the NAFTA negotiations with the Trump administration. “That’s just a part of diplomacy right there,” he claimed.

However, Trudeau acknowledged that despite some “interesting tidbits” in the report, his National Security Intelligence Advisor (NSIA) had decided not to pass it on to him in 2021, deeming it not significantly relevant to his understanding of China’s behavior. “I have faith, having looked at the paper, that it was indeed the right decision by the National Security Intelligence Advisor—that it wasn’t a document that significantly added in a relevant way to my understanding of the situation.”

The actual contents of this paper are unknown, and blocked from the Commission by Trudeau’s Attorney General.

The PCO January 2022 Special Report, reviewed by The Bureau, outlines an alarming situation. Based on over 100 CSIS reports, it detailed a covert network that implicated 11 Toronto-area candidates in the 2019 federal election in interference operations, involving clandestine fund transfers from the Toronto Chinese Consulate into proxy networks. This report stemmed from a sensitive investigation in the Greater Toronto Area, culminating in CSIS seeking a technical surveillance warrant in March 2021. The Special Report was flagged as highly sensitive and formed the backbone of the inquiry’s scrutiny of Chinese influence in Canadian elections.

Both of these reports became focal points in the inquiry, revealing deep disagreements between Trudeau’s political aides and intelligence officials. Katie Telford, Trudeau’s Chief of Staff, testified that Global Affairs Canada held a divergent view from CSIS, particularly regarding the scope of foreign interference threats. The inquiry has exposed a consistent reluctance within the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) to act on intelligence warnings, reflecting a broader divide between diplomacy and national security.

Three Memos and Delayed Briefings

In addition to the two reports, Trudeau faced questioning over three memos that called for him to authorize broad briefings on foreign interference risks and plans to brief Parliamentarians. Commission Counsel pressed him on why these memos, intended to reach him in 2019, 2020, and 2021, were not acted on.

“These decision points didn’t get to me,” Trudeau stated, acknowledging the breakdown. “But I made it very clear throughout conversations that I would have approved of, and encouraged, briefings.”

“Nobody flagged this was something of importance that was stalled, and therefore, as you pointed out, they weren’t acted on in my office,” Trudeau concluded.

As a result, Parliamentarians were not briefed on foreign interference threats until June 2024, years after the intelligence reports had first raised the alarm.

“Do you have any idea why no reply was given to all of those seeking authorization?” Commissioner Hogue asked.

“In the third case, it actually didn’t get to my office,” Trudeau said, while offering no explanation for the second, and pointing to COVID-19 in the first.

Trudeau’s testimony, which continues today, combined with that of senior aides such as Telford and Brian Clow, highlighted the troubling rifts between the PMO and Canada’s intelligence agencies. The intelligence community, led by CSIS, has consistently sounded the alarm about Chinese interference in Canadian politics, while the PMO and Global Affairs have often pushed back on CSIS’s assessments.

The inquiry has revealed that Global Affairs and the PMO tended to downplay foreign interference concerns, particularly those involving China, in favor of maintaining diplomatic and economic ties. This stance has been at odds with CSIS, which has taken a much more hawkish view, warning of serious threats to Canada’s democratic system.

From The Center Square

By Bethany Blankley

A new report published by the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security states that “foreign jihadist networks and homegrown violent extremists” represent a “persistent terror threat to America.”

It identifies more than 50 cases in 29 U.S. states between April 2021 and September 2024, including dozens of attempts to provide material support to Islamic designated foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs), ISIS, Hezbollah and al Qaeda, with individuals receiving military type training from ISIS and Hezbollah, and committing fraud.

The states where jihadist cases were identified include Alabama, California, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Washington.

The committee notes that increased threats to Americans heightened after an ISIS-K-orchestrated terrorist attack in Afghanistan on Aug. 30, 2021, that killed 13 U.S. service members. Terrorism threats also escalated after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terrorist attack against Israel, which killed an estimated 1,200 with 200 hostages taken.

“From the Biden-Harris administration’s chaotic Afghanistan withdrawal and the spillover effects of the October 7 Hamas terrorist attacks against our ally Israel to the vulnerabilities caused by our wide-open borders, the United States is facing a dynamic and worsening terror threat landscape,” Committee Chairman Mark Green, R-Tenn., said.

“Foreign jihadist networks like ISIS and Hizballah, as well as homegrown violent extremists ideologically motivated by these terrorist groups, present security threats to the homeland. The Department of Homeland Security’s mission is to protect the American people from every threat at our doorstep. The system is blinking red yet again, as even the head of the FBI has noted. Despite heightened threats from terrorists, the Biden-Harris administration continues to demonstrate weak leadership on the world stage and fails to admit its policy failures that brought us here. We must change course and take the necessary actions to protect the homeland.”

The report lists examples of convictions of foreign nationals and American citizens, nearly all Muslim men, in 29 states. Of the dozens cited, some include:

• a Turkish man in Kentucky convicted of providing material support and receiving military-type training from ISIS;
• two Jordanian illegal border crossers attempted to breach Marine Base Quantico;
• a British Muslim held hostage Jewish parishioners in a Colleyville, Texas, synagogue;
• a Pakistani man with ties to Iran charged in New York with attempting to commit an act of terrorism and murder-for-hire to assassinate American politicians;
• a Moroccan man in Minnesota sentenced to prison for joining and fighting with ISIS in Syria, receiving military training from ISIS and providing assistance to ISIS;
• a Muslim man in Florida sentenced to prison for supporting an FTO;
• a Pakistani man in Minnesota sentenced to prison for multiple offenses including planning to conduct “lone wolf” terrorist attacks in the U.S.;
• two brothers in Indiana sentenced to prison for providing material support to a terrorist organization, including manufacturing and selling weapons;
• a Kosovo man in Brooklyn, New York, sentenced to life in prison for providing material support to ISIS and serving as a high-ranking member of ISIS;
• an Uzbekistan national sentenced to centuries in prison for carrying out a terrorist attack in the name of ISIS in lower Manhattan in October 2017, killing eight;
• a Muslim man in Pittsburgh sentenced to prison for attempting to provide material support to ISIS and planning to bomb a church in the name of ISIS; among others.

The report also highlights actions taken by the Departments of Justice and Treasury against individuals and groups connected to Islamic terrorist organizations.

It was released 23 years after 19 al Qaeda men hijacked four airplanes to commit the largest terrorist attack in U.S. history, killing nearly 3,000 people.

It was also released after the U.S. Department of Homeland Security issued its threat report for 2025, warning of terrorism threats surrounding the November election and the Israel-Hamas war. Prior to that, an international rescue organization issued an alert to Jews and Americans to remain vigilant in light of heightened terrorist threats leading up to the one year anniversary of the Oct. 7 terrorist attack and Jewish holidays.

In 2002, Congress passed the Homeland Security Act, creating the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to consolidate multiple federal agencies with one goal: to defend Americans from terrorist and national security threats. Twenty-three years later, DHS has serious deficiencies, and its policies are potentially creating national security risks, according to multiple reports published by the Office of Inspector General.

In the most recent report released, the OIG said current U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement practices “cannot ensure they are keeping high-risk noncitizens without identification from entering the country.” Likewise, the Transportation Security Administration “cannot ensure its vetting and screening procedures prevent high-risk noncitizens who may pose a threat to the flying public from boarding domestic flights.

“CBP and ICE have policies and procedures for screening noncitizens, but neither component knows how many noncitizens without identification documents are released into the country.”