Watch his testimony.When did he say they haven't found anything since?
Watch his testimony.When did he say they haven't found anything since?
Its "parts of the evidence" now.he confirmed that parts of the evidence was provided to the Indian Govt.
The only line was 'at that point', no reference to what the know now.Watch his testimony.
You mean wishy washy like this?Its "parts of the evidence" now.
"parts of the evidence" is just code for intel. Not actual evidence.
This along with Trudeau's testimony confirms there was no evidence.
This wishy washy approach is not going to be entertained by any country.
That is what I want Trudeau to do.You mean wishy washy like this?
That was the last status update on that, so as of now, there is no evidence.The only line was 'at that point', no reference to what the know now.
Again, that's not his job.That is what I want Trudeau to do.
Charge with evidence.
No, he was talking about the initial investigation and communications with India, not the present.That was the last status update on that, so as of now, there is no evidence.
I am the one telling you that what we do know, is what Trudeau has told us.Again, that's not his job.
So you complain that you think Trudeau, the RCMP and CSIS have no evidence but you have even less.
Yet you are incredibly sure you know more than they do.
Why?
The status of that investigation has not changed.No, he was talking about the initial investigation and communications with India, not the present.
If it was just Trudeau you'd have an argument, but Singh and May back him up.I am the one telling you that what we do know, is what Trudeau has told us.
Which is that we dont have evidence.
You are claiming you know more than what you have been told.
I said Trudeau has not provided evidence.You are claiming you know he's lying.....
You don't know that, he said 'at that time' they had intel, not evidence.I said Trudeau has not provided evidence.
Trudeau said he did not have evidence.
He said 'at that time'.We know that.
He said that.
I am the one telling you that what we do know, is what Trudeau has told us.
Which is that we dont have evidence.
You are claiming you know more than what you have been told.
That statement of "No evidence" has been debunked when the RCMP announced it on Thanksgiving Day.Its "parts of the evidence" now.
"parts of the evidence" is just code for intel. Not actual evidence.
This along with Trudeau's testimony confirms there was no evidence.
This wishy washy approach is not going to be entertained by any country.
From your post:That statement of "No evidence" has been debunked when the RCMP announced it on Thanksgiving Day.
Again those are further ongoing investigations oft threats with other Indian individuals involved with it.. But clearly they have the evidence of the Indian Diplomats involvement in those threats plus the killing of Nijjar Singh. You are being a mouthpiece for the Indian Govt!!From your post:
"....about investigating allegations of the Indian government being linked to a campaign of violence on Canadian soil. Plus, a conversation with Moninder Singh, a B.C. Sikh activist, and Gurpatwant Pannun, a Canadian American Sikh activist who have both been allegedly threatened by India for their support of a Sikh state."
"allegedly" is not evidence.
Trudeau said he did not have evidence, only intel.
Law enforcement does not put on a big show of "having evidence", while not charging a single criminal entity or government official.
The Americans had such evidence and they charged someone even though they did not have him in custody.
Why hasnt the RCMP?
RCMP and Trudeau are in bed with each other to drag down Pierre's campaign.
So why haven't they charged someone?But clearly they have the evidence...
How can they charge someone who does have Diplomatic Immunity?So why haven't they charged someone?
Why is this response possible from the US but not Canada?