espionage
Trudeau Admits Missing At Least Five Crucial Reports Or Memos Intended For Him to Authorize Defensive Briefs to MPs
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.
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
|
|
Intelligence officials maintained a chatroom to discuss polyamory and transgender surgeries, internal documents reveal.
The “intelligence community” is one of the most powerful parts of the American national security apparatus. In theory, it works tirelessly to keep the nation safe. But according to internal documents that we obtained, some intelligence agency employees have another on-the-job priority: sex chats.
We have cultivated sources within the National Security Agency—one current employee and one former employee—who have provided chat logs from the NSA’s Intelink messaging program. According to an NSA press official, “All NSA employees sign agreements stating that publishing non-mission related material on Intelink is a usage violation and will result in disciplinary action.” Nonetheless, these logs, dating back two years, are lurid, featuring wide-ranging discussions of sex, kink, polyamory, and castration.
One popular chat topic was male-to-female transgender surgery, which involves surgically removing the penis and turning it into an artificial vagina. “[M]ine is everything,” said one male who claimed to have had gender reconstruction surgery. “[I]’ve found that i like being penetrated (never liked it before GRS), but all the rest is just as important as well.” Another intelligence official boasted that genital surgery allowed him “to wear leggings or bikinis without having to wear a gaff under it.”
These employees discussed hair removal, estrogen injections, and the experience of sexual pleasure post-castration. “[G]etting my butthole zapped by a laser was . . . shocking,” said one transgender-identifying intel employee who spent thousands on hair removal. “Look, I just enjoy helping other people experience boobs,” said another about estrogen treatments. “[O]ne of the weirdest things that gives me euphoria is when i pee, i don’t have to push anything down to make sure it aims right,” a Defense Intelligence Agency employee added.
These revelations come at a moment of heightened scrutiny for the intelligence community. President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard have each made the case that the intelligence agencies have gone “woke,” prioritizing left-wing activism over national security. These chat logs confirm their suspicions and raise fundamental questions about competence and professionalism.
According to our sources, the sex chats were legitimized as part of the NSA’s commitment to “diversity, equity and inclusion.” Activists within the agency used LGBTQ+ “employee resource groups” to turn their kinks and pathologies into official work duties. According to the current NSA employee, these groups “spent all day” recruiting activists and holding meetings with titles such as “Privilege,” “Ally Awareness,” “Pride,” and “Transgender Community Inclusion.” And they did so with the full support of NSA leadership, which declared that DEI was “not only mission critical, but mission imperative.”
In this case, “diversity” was not a byword for racialism, but rather a euphemism for sex talk. Last January, chatroom members discussed their practice of polyamory, or “ethical non-monogamy.” “[A] polycule is a polyamorous group,” one employee explained. “A is my [girlfriend], and B-G are her partners. . . . then B&C are dating but not C&D, nor E, F, or G with any of the others, though there are several MWB (metas-with-benefits) connections.” Another employee claimed to be part of a nine-member “polycule,” adding that “some of our friends are practically poly-mers, with all the connected compounds.”
At other times, the conversations became explicit. The active source at the NSA claimed to have witnessed hundreds of sexually provocative discussions, which, he added, occurred mostly on taxpayer time. The former NSA source who was familiar with the chats recalled being “disgusted” by a particularly shocking thread discussing weekend “gangbangs.”
The NSA sources also raised the question of some staffers’ mental fitness for the job. In one chat, an NSA employee insists on using “it” pronouns in lieu of the human “he” or “she” pronouns. “[I]t/its user here. While I understand we can make some people uncomfortable, keep in mind that the dehumanizing aspect either a) doesn’t apply or b) is a positive effect when we’re requesting it.” A commenter who disagreed was quickly dismissed by employees of the NSA and CIA, who claimed that refusing to use “it/its” pronouns amounted to “erasing” a transgender identity.
“These are folks with top secret clearances believing they are an IT!” said the NSA source.
With the Trump administration taking over, we may see changes. The NSA source said that staffers involved in employee resource groups fear the end of DEI. “[T]here are legal restrictions in place, but this admin has shown they don’t give a f**k about legality,” a staffer in space intelligence remarked about DEI staffers being placed on leave. Others have expressed opposition to Trump’s cabinet nominees.
A conflict is coming. These NSA chat logs suggest the presence of at least hundreds of gender activists within the intelligence services who cannot distinguish between male and female, and who believe that discussing castration, polyamory, and “gangbangs” is an appropriate use of public resources. For psychological and ideological reasons, these kinds of people will not be easily sidelined. The Trump administration should not only dismantle the structure of DEI but also terminate the employees who use it to advance gender activism at the expense of national security.
 |
A guest post by
|
Subscribe to Christopher F. Rufo.
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
From the Fraser Institute
During the Superbowl, Doug Ford ran a campaign ad about fearlessly protecting Ontario workers against Trump. I suppose it’s effective as election theatre; it’s intended to make Ontarians feel lucky we’ve got a tough leader like Ford standing up to the Bad Orange Man. But my reaction was that Ford is lucky to have the Bad Orange Man creating a distraction so he doesn’t have to talk about Ontario’s high taxes, declining investment, stagnant real wages, lengthening health-care wait times and all the other problems that have gotten worse on his watch.
President Trump’s obnoxious and erratic rhetoric also seems to have put his own advisors on the defensive. Peter Navarro, Kevin Hassett and Howard Lutnick have taken pains to clarify that what we are dealing with is a “drug war not a trade war.” This is confusing since many sources say that Canada is responsible for less than one per cent of fentanyl entering the United States. But if we are going to de-escalate matters and resolve the dispute, we should start by trying to understand why they think we’re the problem.
Suppose in 2024 Trump and his team had asked for a Homeland Security briefing on fentanyl. What would they have learned? They already knew about Mexico. But they would also have learned that while Canada doesn’t rival Mexico for the volume of pills being sent into the U.S., we have become a transnational money laundering hub that keeps the Chinese and Mexican drug cartels in business. And we have ignored previous U.S. demands to deal with the problem.
Over a decade ago, Vancouver-based investigative journalist Sam Cooper unearthed shocking details of how Asian drug cartels backed by the Chinese Communist Party turned British Columbia’s casinos into billion-dollar money laundering operations, then scaled up from there through illicit real estate schemes in Vancouver and Toronto. This eventually triggered the 2022 Cullen Commission, which concluded, bluntly, that a massive amount of drug money was being laundered in B.C., that “the federal anti–money laundering [AML] regime is not effective,” that the RCMP had shut down what little AML capacity it had in 2012 just as the problem was exploding in scale, and that government officials have long known about the problem but ignored it.
In 2023 the Biden State Department under Anthony Blinken told Canada our fentanyl and money laundering control efforts were inadequate. Since then Canada’s border security forces have been shown to be so compromised and corrupt that U.S. intelligence agencies sidelined us and stopped sharing information. The corruption went to the top. A year ago Cameron Ortis, the former head of domestic intelligence at the RCMP, was sentenced to 14 years in prison after being convicted of selling top secret U.S. intelligence to money launderers tied to drugs and terrorism to help them avoid capture.
In September 2024 the Biden Justice Department hit the Toronto-Dominion Bank with a $3 billion fine for facilitating $670 million in money laundering for groups tied to transnational drug trafficking and terrorism. Then-attorney general Merrick Garland said “TD Bank created an environment that allowed financial crime to flourish. By making its services convenient for criminals, it became one.”
Imagine the outcry if Trump had called one of our chartered banks a criminal organization.
We are making some progress in cleaning up the mess, but in the process learning that we are now a major fentanyl manufacturer. In October the RCMP raided massive fentanyl factories in B.C. and Alberta. Unfortunately there remain many gaps in our enforcement capabilities. For instance, the RCMP, which is responsible for border patrols between ports of entry, has admitted it has no airborne surveillance operations after 4 p.m. on weekdays or on weekends.
The fact that the prime minister’s promise of a new $1.3-billion border security and anti-drug plan convinced Trump to suspend the tariff threat indicates that the fentanyl angle wasn’t entirely a pretext. And we should have done these things sooner, even if Trump hadn’t made it an issue. We can only hope Ottawa now follows through on its promises. I fear, though, that if Ford’s Captain Canada act proves a hit with voters, the Liberals may distract voters with a flag-waving campaign against the Bad Orange Man rather than confront the deep economic problems we have imposed on ourselves.
A trade dispute appears inevitable now that Trump has signaled the 25 percent tariffs are back on. The problem is knowing whom to listen to since Trump is openly contradicting his own economic team. Trump’s top trade advisor, Peter Navarro, has written that the U.S. needs to pursue “reciprocity,” which he defines as other countries not charging tariffs on U.S. imports any higher than the U.S. charges. In the Americans’ view, U.S. trade barriers are very low and everyone else’s should be, too—a stance completely at odds with Trump’s most recent moves.
Whichever way this plays out Canada has no choice but to go all-in on lowering the cost of doing business here, especially in trade-exposed sectors such as steel, autos, manufacturing and technology. That starts with cutting taxes including carbon-pricing and rolling back our costly net-zero anti-energy regulatory regime. In the coming election campaign, that’s the agenda we need to see spelled out.
How much easier it will be instead for Canadian politicians to play the populist hero with vague anti-Trump posturing. But that would be poor substitute for a long overdue pro-Canadian economic growth agenda.
War against the US? Chrystia Freeland says Canada, allies need to build ‘New World Order’ to combat Trump
Why carbon emissions will fall under Trump
Where’s the data on miscarriages linked to COVID Injections?
We need to get smart about climate
-
National2 days ago
War against the US? Chrystia Freeland says Canada, allies need to build ‘New World Order’ to combat Trump
-
Opinion1 day agoLiberal leadership race guarantees Canadian voters will be guided by a clown show for a while yet
-
Business2 days agoTaxpayers launching court fight against CBC transparency
-
Business1 day agoElon Musk: ‘I’m getting a lot of death threats’ due to DOGE
-
Crime1 day agoCould the UK’s ‘Grooming Gangs’ operate in Canada?
-
Courageous Discourse19 hours agoZelensky Met with Dems Before He Met President Trump
-
Alberta1 day agoCan Trump Revive The Keystone Pipeline?
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta Coordinating law enforcement to fight fentanyl