Accusations made by unnamed CBC sources that Premier Danielle Smith’s office interfered in the judicial process are explosive — the makings of a massive scandal..A CBC report claimed a Smith “staffer sent a series of emails” to the prosecutors' office, about handling cases before it relating to the Coutts border blockade. Some heavy charges were laid, so any tampering would be serious infractions..A brouhaha fueled by the NDP erupted over emails nobody's seen — not the NDP, not even the CBC..Oops. Was this a little oversight by the folks over at Canada’s public broadcaster in their zeal to publish an exclusive story damaging to Smith?.Initially, the CBC neglected to mention that critical fact in the original story. (A revised version of the story appeared later, mentioning it.).The claim these emails exist has cast a dark shadow on the integrity of Smith and her office. What about the Alberta Crown Prosecutor’s Office, obliged to remain at arm’s length from political interference? If there was interference, was it simply tolerated by these great legal minds?.The Crown said it knows nothing of such communications. And after launching an investigation — a search of nearly a million government emails — Smith said there was no evidence of contact between Alberta premier's office staff and the Crown prosecutor’s office..Yet the CBC stands by its story..In fact, it doubled-down with another anonymously-sourced story claiming Smith “pressured” Justice Minister and Attorney General Tyler Shandro and his staff to intervene in COVID-19-related court cases, including making the prosecution of Pastor Artur Palwoski go away..One of multiple sources said: “I would classify it as inappropriate.”.Who are these sources, who are offering their interpretations? The mind races over the possibilities. NDP sympathizers? Leftovers from the freedom-crushing Jason Kenney era unhappy with the more tolerant new regime? Russian interference? Or legitimate and founded concerns from people who have seen evidence and are qualified to make those judgement calls? Only the CBC knows for sure. Hopefully..If what now are mere anonymous accusations are proven true, then proper action must be swiftly taken..But to date, the ‘proof’ being offered up is wafer thin..Specifics offered about inappropriate content written in the alleged email correspondence? None. Zip. No names. No dates. No content..Not even a tidbit of an excerpt came from the CBC’s unnamed source “with knowledge of the correspondence” who said it’s “so improper on so many levels — it's pure interference with Crown independence.”.Naturally, the allegations got the NDP salivating and scurrying to their soapboxes. With a May 29 provincial election looming, any stain on the UCP, particularly Smith, is glorious — proven or not..Righteously accuse first, toss out accusations of a “coverup” by Smith with no evidence to back that, take personal shots to smear her character — mission accomplished. Bank on the votes..NDP MLA Rakhi Pancholi demanded an investigation into the emails she hasn’t seen. Why bother? She already pronounced Smith guilty of nefarious deeds..“Danielle Smith’s ‘internal review’ is a coverup. Wouldn’t you know it, the government announced today they didn’t find anything. This would be laughable if the matter wasn’t so very serious,” she said in a post on the NDP’s Facebook page..Pancholi accused Smith of “boasting” on three occasions about “deliberately interfering in the justice system.”.That skewing of the truth is a whopper even for the NDP, notoriously known for fighting dirty..The Facebook post points out NDP justice critic MLA Irfan Sabir called for an independent investigation into the premier’s actions just days before the CBC story. What a coincidence..That Smith didn’t rush to obey the order, is apparently evidence that she “has something to hide,” said the NDP..Yet for certain, the only thing being hidden is concrete evidence that the emails exit..Meanwhile, left-wing pundits jumped on the bandwagon to opine about how really, very terrible this alleged email communication is..Again, no one claimed to have seen the emails..Did the CBC even ask to see the emails? If not, why not?.If it did, was the request denied? If so, why?.That would raise red flags. No matter how delicious a story may be, no matter how tempting the lure of a big exclusive, only a foolish journalist doesn’t pause to question motives..Demanding a peek at documents before publishing an explosive story is Journalism 101. No matter how trusted the source, it is reckless and potentially career-damaging to run with a story on a wink and a nod..Smith has never been one to hide from controversy. When she makes a mistake, she owns up to it..Smith is also not one to back down. She was on the defensive responding to allegations about these emails..Wednesday, she came out swinging over the “defamatory” and “baseless” allegations and insinuations in the CBC articles..She demanded a retraction..“This article was then used and editorialized by the Official Opposition to smear the reputations of the Premier, her office staff, Alberta Crown prosecutors and the Alberta Public Service,” wrote Smith in a statement..“The Premier calls on the CBC to retract its outrageous story and, further, that the CBC and the Official Opposition apologize to the Premier, Premier’s Office staff, Alberta Crown prosecutors and those in the Alberta Public Service, for the damage caused to their reputations and that of Alberta’s justice system.”.Will the leftwing CBC take one for the team when those sources, protect their own skin and hide in their closets?.Sources who risk their careers to come forward with sensitive information should be protected at all costs if the promise to conceal their identities is made..But the CBC will only be able to hide behind these anonymous skirts for so long. This story is too damaging to too many not to back it up with proof..Unless the CBC coughs up a little thing called evidence, it is in a pickle.
Accusations made by unnamed CBC sources that Premier Danielle Smith’s office interfered in the judicial process are explosive — the makings of a massive scandal..A CBC report claimed a Smith “staffer sent a series of emails” to the prosecutors' office, about handling cases before it relating to the Coutts border blockade. Some heavy charges were laid, so any tampering would be serious infractions..A brouhaha fueled by the NDP erupted over emails nobody's seen — not the NDP, not even the CBC..Oops. Was this a little oversight by the folks over at Canada’s public broadcaster in their zeal to publish an exclusive story damaging to Smith?.Initially, the CBC neglected to mention that critical fact in the original story. (A revised version of the story appeared later, mentioning it.).The claim these emails exist has cast a dark shadow on the integrity of Smith and her office. What about the Alberta Crown Prosecutor’s Office, obliged to remain at arm’s length from political interference? If there was interference, was it simply tolerated by these great legal minds?.The Crown said it knows nothing of such communications. And after launching an investigation — a search of nearly a million government emails — Smith said there was no evidence of contact between Alberta premier's office staff and the Crown prosecutor’s office..Yet the CBC stands by its story..In fact, it doubled-down with another anonymously-sourced story claiming Smith “pressured” Justice Minister and Attorney General Tyler Shandro and his staff to intervene in COVID-19-related court cases, including making the prosecution of Pastor Artur Palwoski go away..One of multiple sources said: “I would classify it as inappropriate.”.Who are these sources, who are offering their interpretations? The mind races over the possibilities. NDP sympathizers? Leftovers from the freedom-crushing Jason Kenney era unhappy with the more tolerant new regime? Russian interference? Or legitimate and founded concerns from people who have seen evidence and are qualified to make those judgement calls? Only the CBC knows for sure. Hopefully..If what now are mere anonymous accusations are proven true, then proper action must be swiftly taken..But to date, the ‘proof’ being offered up is wafer thin..Specifics offered about inappropriate content written in the alleged email correspondence? None. Zip. No names. No dates. No content..Not even a tidbit of an excerpt came from the CBC’s unnamed source “with knowledge of the correspondence” who said it’s “so improper on so many levels — it's pure interference with Crown independence.”.Naturally, the allegations got the NDP salivating and scurrying to their soapboxes. With a May 29 provincial election looming, any stain on the UCP, particularly Smith, is glorious — proven or not..Righteously accuse first, toss out accusations of a “coverup” by Smith with no evidence to back that, take personal shots to smear her character — mission accomplished. Bank on the votes..NDP MLA Rakhi Pancholi demanded an investigation into the emails she hasn’t seen. Why bother? She already pronounced Smith guilty of nefarious deeds..“Danielle Smith’s ‘internal review’ is a coverup. Wouldn’t you know it, the government announced today they didn’t find anything. This would be laughable if the matter wasn’t so very serious,” she said in a post on the NDP’s Facebook page..Pancholi accused Smith of “boasting” on three occasions about “deliberately interfering in the justice system.”.That skewing of the truth is a whopper even for the NDP, notoriously known for fighting dirty..The Facebook post points out NDP justice critic MLA Irfan Sabir called for an independent investigation into the premier’s actions just days before the CBC story. What a coincidence..That Smith didn’t rush to obey the order, is apparently evidence that she “has something to hide,” said the NDP..Yet for certain, the only thing being hidden is concrete evidence that the emails exit..Meanwhile, left-wing pundits jumped on the bandwagon to opine about how really, very terrible this alleged email communication is..Again, no one claimed to have seen the emails..Did the CBC even ask to see the emails? If not, why not?.If it did, was the request denied? If so, why?.That would raise red flags. No matter how delicious a story may be, no matter how tempting the lure of a big exclusive, only a foolish journalist doesn’t pause to question motives..Demanding a peek at documents before publishing an explosive story is Journalism 101. No matter how trusted the source, it is reckless and potentially career-damaging to run with a story on a wink and a nod..Smith has never been one to hide from controversy. When she makes a mistake, she owns up to it..Smith is also not one to back down. She was on the defensive responding to allegations about these emails..Wednesday, she came out swinging over the “defamatory” and “baseless” allegations and insinuations in the CBC articles..She demanded a retraction..“This article was then used and editorialized by the Official Opposition to smear the reputations of the Premier, her office staff, Alberta Crown prosecutors and the Alberta Public Service,” wrote Smith in a statement..“The Premier calls on the CBC to retract its outrageous story and, further, that the CBC and the Official Opposition apologize to the Premier, Premier’s Office staff, Alberta Crown prosecutors and those in the Alberta Public Service, for the damage caused to their reputations and that of Alberta’s justice system.”.Will the leftwing CBC take one for the team when those sources, protect their own skin and hide in their closets?.Sources who risk their careers to come forward with sensitive information should be protected at all costs if the promise to conceal their identities is made..But the CBC will only be able to hide behind these anonymous skirts for so long. This story is too damaging to too many not to back it up with proof..Unless the CBC coughs up a little thing called evidence, it is in a pickle.
