Jody Thomas, national security advisor to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, yesterday pointed to protesters’ tweets in justifying her claim the Freedom Convoy was a “threat to national interest.” Thomas was appointed as $306,000-a year security advisor last Jan. 11, just two weeks before protesters arrived on Parliament Hill..“There were people preparing to be violent,” Thomas testified at the Public Order Emergency Commission. “We saw it on social media.”.“There was certainly anti-government sentiment throughout,” said Thomas, a former Coast Guard Commissioner. “The threat, the confidence in government institutions, the rhetoric, we have to look more broadly,” she added..“As national security and intelligence advisor to the prime minister, when I see social media posts growing in number and aggressiveness of language that says somebody should kill the prime minister or someone should kill the deputy prime minister, I have reason to be concerned,” said Thomas, who was cross-examined by Freedom Convoy lawyer Brendan Miller:.Advisor Thomas: “There were threats to people.”Counsel Miller: “By email and Twitter, right?”Advisor Thomas: “I would submit that in the social media era you cannot ignore threats against officials and public office holders just because they are on social media. That would be inexcusably negligent.”Counsel Miller: “Right, but that’s up to the police to deal with, or is that a national emergency?”Advisor Thomas: “It depends on the context in which those threats arise.”.Internal records released by the judicial inquiry indicate Thomas concluded the convoy represented a national emergency only minutes after Trudeau raised the issue with premiers on Feb. 14, the day cabinet invoked the Emergencies Act..At 10:15 am that day Trudeau convened a premiers’ teleconference to announce he would invoke the Act. All but three provinces – British Columbia, Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador – opposed the measure..At 11:44 am Advisor Thomas emailed the Privy Council Office: “I need an assessment about the threat of these blockades, the characters involved, the weapons, the motivation. Clearly this isn’t just COVID and it is a threat to democracy and rule of law.”.At 12:05 pm Advisor Thomas without receiving any Privy Council report emailed the Department of Public Safety: “This is about a national threat to national interest and institutions by people who do not care about or understand democracy, who are preparing to be violent, who are motivated by anti-government sentiment.”.Thomas’ views seemed to contradict advice from law enforcement agencies. The RCMP, Canadian Security Intelligence Service and Ontario Provincial Police in memos and emails concluded “there was no serious violence in Ottawa,” the convoy “was not an extremist movement” and never “constituted a threat to the security of Canada,” “the actual leaders are not violent extremists” and there was “no intelligence to indicate these individuals would be armed.”
Jody Thomas, national security advisor to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, yesterday pointed to protesters’ tweets in justifying her claim the Freedom Convoy was a “threat to national interest.” Thomas was appointed as $306,000-a year security advisor last Jan. 11, just two weeks before protesters arrived on Parliament Hill..“There were people preparing to be violent,” Thomas testified at the Public Order Emergency Commission. “We saw it on social media.”.“There was certainly anti-government sentiment throughout,” said Thomas, a former Coast Guard Commissioner. “The threat, the confidence in government institutions, the rhetoric, we have to look more broadly,” she added..“As national security and intelligence advisor to the prime minister, when I see social media posts growing in number and aggressiveness of language that says somebody should kill the prime minister or someone should kill the deputy prime minister, I have reason to be concerned,” said Thomas, who was cross-examined by Freedom Convoy lawyer Brendan Miller:.Advisor Thomas: “There were threats to people.”Counsel Miller: “By email and Twitter, right?”Advisor Thomas: “I would submit that in the social media era you cannot ignore threats against officials and public office holders just because they are on social media. That would be inexcusably negligent.”Counsel Miller: “Right, but that’s up to the police to deal with, or is that a national emergency?”Advisor Thomas: “It depends on the context in which those threats arise.”.Internal records released by the judicial inquiry indicate Thomas concluded the convoy represented a national emergency only minutes after Trudeau raised the issue with premiers on Feb. 14, the day cabinet invoked the Emergencies Act..At 10:15 am that day Trudeau convened a premiers’ teleconference to announce he would invoke the Act. All but three provinces – British Columbia, Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador – opposed the measure..At 11:44 am Advisor Thomas emailed the Privy Council Office: “I need an assessment about the threat of these blockades, the characters involved, the weapons, the motivation. Clearly this isn’t just COVID and it is a threat to democracy and rule of law.”.At 12:05 pm Advisor Thomas without receiving any Privy Council report emailed the Department of Public Safety: “This is about a national threat to national interest and institutions by people who do not care about or understand democracy, who are preparing to be violent, who are motivated by anti-government sentiment.”.Thomas’ views seemed to contradict advice from law enforcement agencies. The RCMP, Canadian Security Intelligence Service and Ontario Provincial Police in memos and emails concluded “there was no serious violence in Ottawa,” the convoy “was not an extremist movement” and never “constituted a threat to the security of Canada,” “the actual leaders are not violent extremists” and there was “no intelligence to indicate these individuals would be armed.”