Liberal MP describes motion to question Trudeau PMO as a “witch hunt”

If you thought the Liberal promise of transparency actually meant something, think again.

At the Justice Committee meeting that occurred yesterday, Liberal Randy Boissonnault described the motion put forward by the Conservatives as a "witch hunt."

This frame of wording is extremely interesting, as the reports suggesting the PMO pressured Jody Wilson-Raybould came from the Globe and Mail's Robert Fife, a veteran journalist of the highest calibre.

It truly perplexes me as a commentator to see the Trudeau government pick up the exact same wording of the Trump government, while opposing a group which they have repeatedly said they have faith in: mainstream journalists.

Perhaps most perplexing is the action taken by the Liberal Committee, which was all too willing to reassure the Canadian people that nothing had gone wrong, all the while ensuring no proper questioning could take place.

That committee made up of Randy Boissonnault, Ali Ehsassi, Colin Fraser, Iqra Khalid and Ron McKinnon backed their own motion that called on the committee to consider the age-old points of law involved in the case, while actively excluding the key individuals involved in the case.

NDP MP Nathan Cullen was first to point out that it was “more than interesting” that Wilson-Raybould was not among the witnesses the Liberals suggested calling.

Included in the list were only three names: Nathalie Drouin, Michael Wernick and Minister of Justice and Attorney General David Lametti.

Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre said what the Liberals appeared to want was a “legal symposium.”

Most worrying, despite the fact that the committee meeting was called for by the Conservative opposition, the Liberals guided the agenda with their own motion to hold interviews with key witnesses “in camera”, or behind closed doors.

“It means in secret, no media, no transcripts, no public information, nothing. Total silence,” said Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre.

In these closed door meetings, the positive decisions members take will be public but not the negative ones. For instance, if the members decide to question a group of people, only the final list will be displayed.

This is extremely important, as it allows the Liberals to bypass a public record for the decisions they reject -- such as not allowing Jody Wilson-Raybould to speak.

What do you think about this case? Is it all just a political witch hunt?