Connect with us

espionage

Trudeau Government Unlawfully Halted CSIS Foreign Operation, Endangering Officers and Damaging Canada’s Standing With Allies, Review Finds

Published

8 minute read

Sam Cooper's avatar Sam Cooper

This chain of command suggests the halt originated in the Prime Minister’s Office—not from the CSIS Director or Public Safety Minister, as required under the CSIS Act.

An explosive intelligence review indicates that senior political actors surrounding Prime Minister Justin Trudeau unlawfully intervened in a high-risk Canadian Security Intelligence Service operation targeting foreign threats abroad in coordination with allied nations—a politicized act that placed Canadian operatives in immediate danger and inflicted lasting damage on the country’s international reputation and trust among intelligence partners.

According to the redacted report released Thursday by the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA), the order to halt the operation was the result of “political-level discussions” and “first came from the National Security and Intelligence Advisor to the Prime Minister to the Director of CSIS.”

This chain of command suggests the halt originated in the Prime Minister’s Office—not from the CSIS Director or Public Safety Minister, as required under the CSIS Act.

This latest blow to Canada’s intelligence integrity—suggesting the inappropriate politicization of national security operations—comes amid growing tensions with key allies. In recent months, senior Trump administration official Peter Navarro reportedly raised the possibility of removing Canada from the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, the historic intelligence-sharing partnership founded among Allied nations during the Second World War.

The NSIRA review was triggered in September 2022, when then–Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino requested an examination of whether CSIS and his department had fulfilled their legal responsibilities. Both Prime Minister Trudeau and Mendicino have already faced scrutiny in a separate RCMP external review, which raised questions about whether their government inappropriately politicized national security responses during the so-called “Freedom Convoy” protests that descended on Ottawa during the pandemic.

NSIRA’s months-long investigation into the foreign operation suggests a disturbing pattern: a CSIS mission was suspended or delayed midstream—possibly for partisan or diplomatic reasons—without legal authority. The intervention endangered CSIS personnel, disrupted the agency’s mandate to protect Canada from serious threats, and damaged intelligence cooperation with international allies.

“NSIRA found that the decision to halt this active CSIS operation [REDACTED] was not made by the CSIS Director under section 6(1) of the CSIS Act, and for which there is no written record of a direction coming from the Minister of Public Safety under… the CSIS Act,” the review concluded. “Moreover, [REDACTED] to halt this active operation created unnecessary danger for the CSIS team [REDACTED] and caused harm to Canada’s international reputation.”

The Bureau’s analysis of the redacted report echoes patterns scrutinized during the Hogue Commission, where Trudeau government officials were accused of suppressing or delaying intelligence related to foreign interference in Canadian democracy—reportedly to protect Liberal Party interests. The concerns also recall the SNC-Lavalin affair, in which the Prime Minister and his staff were found by the Ethics Commissioner to have improperly pressured the Attorney General to halt a corruption prosecution.

In a strikingly similar pattern, The Globe and Mail has reported from Canadian military sources that then-defence minister Harjit Sajjan allegedly pressured Canadian special forces during the fall of Kabul in 2021 to prioritize the rescue of Afghan Sikhs—individuals not considered operational priorities at the time.

The new review of CSIS’s compromised foreign operation also revealed a dangerous collapse in control while Canadian officers and a source were evidently in serious danger.

NSIRA wrote: “The review revealed that CSIS senior officials had difficulty in grappling with [REDACTED] to halt the operation; so much so, in fact, that management and control of the operation appeared to cease functioning properly. The Director of CSIS, for instance, evidently no longer had decision-making control over the active operation, when on [REDACTED] he sent an email to senior officials within key security and intelligence portfolios stating: ‘time is quickly running out and the situation is getting much more tense on the ground. We need a decision tomorrow.’”

The Canadian intelligence community is tight-lipped on this sensitive case, but indicating deep concerns, former CSIS counterterrorism officer Andrew Kirsch—who previously worked in both field and policy roles—flagged the report’s most alarming findings on social media, highlighting the unlawful direction from political actors and the operational danger that followed. While Kirsch did not comment further, he linked the report and wrote: “NSIRA’s review identified several significant concerns, including the appropriateness of direction given to CSIS by political-level actors outside the Minister of Public Safety.”

While much of the NSIRA report is redacted, several critical passages offer a glimpse into the scale and complexity of the abandoned CSIS mission. The review states: “The [REDACTED] story commences… when CSIS first learned of [information that required the planning of a specific category of operation]. CSIS started working with domestic and foreign partners [on an] operation involving [REDACTED].”

The operational consequences were acute. NSIRA wrote: “The CSIS team told NSIRA that they felt abandoned and, they believed that the absence of a Government decision ‘was a decision.’ Facing this untenable situation, the CSIS team felt forced to plan alternative actions to help ensure [their own] safety.”

Other CSIS officers warned that continuing the operation under those conditions would have “caused grave diplomatic harm to Canada’s relationship [REDACTED]” and that the shutdown “would have also signalled that CSIS could not be trusted.” NSIRA concluded that the halt introduced unnecessary danger to the CSIS team and caused harm to Canada’s international reputation.

The review also documents a deeper rift between frontline CSIS operators and their civilian oversight ministry. While Public Safety and CSIS headquarters insisted the relationship remained strong, CSIS employees directly involved in the operation told NSIRA the experience had left a “chilling effect” on their trust in Public Safety Canada. NSIRA warned that confusion between political decision-making and operational independence had created long-term damage.

SIRC, the former review body to NSIRA, had previously examined similar cases and issued recommendations to address legality, internal oversight, risk management, identity management, and foreign strategic orientation. CSIS accepted those recommendations. NSIRA’s findings now suggest those protections were ignored—undone not by technical failure, but by high-level political actors.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Invite your friends and earn rewards

If you enjoy The Bureau, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe.

Invite Friends

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

espionage

Intel official accused of leaking classified info to foreign country to sabotage Trump

Published on

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

A Defense Intelligence Agency official has been arrested for allegedly attempting to leak classified material to a foreign government out of political opposition to President Donald Trump. The FBI says the man sought foreign citizenship and called the Trump Administration “disturbing.”

Key Details:

  • Nathan Villas Laatsch, an IT worker in the DIA’s Insider Threat Division, was arrested after offering to pass classified data to a “friendly” foreign government.
  • Laatsch expressed political frustration in his outreach, writing: “I do not agree or align with the values of this administration.”
  • The FBI posed as foreign agents and arrested him after a pre-arranged handoff of sensitive materials.

Diving Deeper:

A Defense Intelligence Agency employee tasked with protecting national secrets is facing federal charges after allegedly trying to pass classified information to a foreign government—because he was upset with President Donald Trump.

Nathan Villas Laatsch, a civilian DIA employee working in the Insider Threat Division, was arrested in northern Virginia on Thursday after the FBI said he attempted to share sensitive materials with a foreign country he considered an ally. According to court documents, Laatsch first made contact through an unsolicited email, criticizing the Trump administration and offering cooperation.

“The recent actions of the current administration are extremely disturbing to me,” Laatsch wrote. “I do not agree or align with the values of this administration and intend to act to support the values that the United States at one time stood for.”

Unbeknownst to Laatsch, the FBI intercepted the message and launched a sting operation, posing as foreign intelligence agents. An undercover FBI operative responded, “Good afternoon, I received your message and share your concerns,” according to an affidavit from Special Agent Matthew T. Johnson.

Laatsch’s position made the breach especially serious. The Insider Threat Division is the DIA unit responsible for identifying individuals who may pose a national security risk—a division he now allegedly violated himself.

Authorities say Laatsch went so far as to begin seeking citizenship in the unnamed country, citing his disillusionment with America’s political trajectory. “I’ve given a lot of thought to this before any outreach, and despite the risks, the calculus has not changed,” he reportedly wrote. “I do not see the trajectory of things changing, and do not think it is appropriate or right to do nothing when I am in this position.”

FBI agents arrested him following a meeting in which he handed over classified materials. He’s scheduled to appear in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia.

FBI Director Kash Patel underscored the severity of the situation, writing on X: “This case underscores the persistent risk of insider threats. The FBI remains steadfast in protecting our national security and thanks our law enforcement partners for their critical support.”

The case raises new concerns about political ideology interfering with national security work—especially from those entrusted with detecting internal threats.

Continue Reading

espionage

Canada’s Missing Intelligence Command: Convoy Review Takes on New Relevance After FBI Warnings

Published on

Sam Cooper's avatar Sam Cooper

An element overlooked in previous analyses of Natterjack may be its most damning: the complete absence of an organizing vision across Canada’s security and intelligence arms.

As Ottawa faces mounting pressure from Washington to respond to fentanyl trafficking, human smuggling, and terror threats stemming from a convergence of Chinese Communist operatives and transnational mafias from Mexico and Iran, a fresh assessment of Canada’s policing strategy and governance reveals the stunning absence of a “Criminal Intelligence Committee to deal with a number of intelligence policy and related issues”—while simultaneously raising troubling doubts about the RCMP’s capacity to prioritize, analyze, and target serious threats free from political influence.

The Bureau’s comparative analysis is based on a sweeping 2024 external review of the RCMP’s response to the pandemic-era “freedom convoy,” which suggests Canada’s federal police force—working for “clients” who do not understand or value how intelligence should shape decision-making—bent under severe political pressure, compromising its intelligence collection and reporting integrity, and helping execute an unprecedented crackdown on citizens’ financial freedoms during the winter 2022 protests in Ottawa.

The 92-page report, produced under a post-operation initiative called Project Natterjack, paints a portrait of intelligence breakdowns, governance failure, and inappropriate political influence—particularly from senior officials in Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government. The review, first obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act, included survey responses from 1,641 RCMP officers and personnel deployed during the protests, which paralyzed downtown Ottawa and disrupted key international border crossings.

Yet an element overlooked in previous analyses of Natterjack may be its most damning: the complete absence of an organizing vision across Canada’s security and intelligence arms.

This structural vacuum comes at a time when the national security threats facing Canada are increasingly hybridized—blending terrorism, organized crime, election interference, cyber warfare, and financial infiltration. These are precisely the kinds of threats Washington is now pressing Ottawa to address, including investigations into fentanyl superlabs and hostile networks tied to the Chinese Communist Party, Mexican cartels, and Iranian and Russian threat actors.

Amid what the U.S. government sees as a growing vulnerability that Ottawa has failed to address in coordination with Washington under Trudeau’s Liberals, the Natterjack report highlights a deeply relevant structural failure in Canadian policing.

“Many interviewees expressed a level of concern that beyond the informal networks that loosely bind criminal, tactical, and strategic analysts from a variety of law enforcement and security and intelligence agencies, there is not a recognized national body that comes together to advocate, address and advance issues in criminal analysis,” the report states. “The absence of a Criminal Intelligence Committee to deal with a number of intelligence policy and related issues appears glaringly missing and should be explored.”

Regarding the “freedom convoy,” the review’s most serious suggestion is that RCMP intelligence officers felt pressured to present the protests through the lens of “ideologically motivated violent extremism”—a national security framework typically reserved for terrorism investigations. Intelligence teams were subjected to hourly briefing demands from federal officials and were forced to issue rapid assessments under tight timelines, with resulting reports often presenting skewed or misattributed findings.

“Interviewees also indicated that there were issues with information and intelligence that was disseminated to external Government of Canada agencies,” the report states. “Specifically, some Government of Canada partners would misrepresent the information or misattribute third-party information as RCMP information… Interviewees and survey respondents felt immense pressure from the Government of Canada to be briefed on a regular basis… in particular when briefings were requested on an hourly basis.”

As the review notes bluntly: “When there is that much pressure to produce a report within an hour or a few hours’ time, it is not productive.”

Taken together, the findings paint a sobering portrait of a federal police force struggling to preserve its independence and credibility under political strain. While officers were deployed to confront a disruptive but largely peaceful protest, critics inside and outside government have pointed to the RCMP’s relative inaction toward far more dangerous networks—namely, fentanyl trafficking cartels, Chinese underground banking structures linked to the same political influence operations involved in federal election interference, intelligence-connected money laundering syndicates, and hostile state-sponsored actors operating inside Canada.

One telling passage indicating a scramble within RCMP command to produce findings on ideological extremism—whether fully valid or not—reads: “Ideologically Motivated Criminal Intelligence Team and the Joint Intelligence Group were both operating to provide the strategic threat picture, and reaching in directly to the Divisions for intelligence updates. As such, some interviewees noted that they were inundated by requests for intelligence updates from different intelligence teams at National Headquarters.”

In parallel, the federal cabinet invoked the Emergencies Act—suspending civil liberties and activating sweeping enforcement powers that allowed financial institutions to freeze protestors’ bank accounts. Between February 15 and 23, 2022, the RCMP’s Federal Policing Criminal Operations Financial Crimes Unit made 57 disclosures to banks and other institutions, targeting 62 individuals and 17 businesses for asset freezes.

The report pointedly states: “The act of participating in a demonstration is not in itself a form of ideologically motivated violent extremism.” Yet that nuance appeared largely lost amid the political urgency to classify the protests as a national threat.

Interviewees also noted limitations in their ability to disseminate protected information and intelligence to certain external agencies and private financial institutions. Specifically, they indicated that encryption was not consistently available across these external channels.

Perhaps most revealingly, the review found that senior officials—referred to as intelligence “clients”—did not appear to value intelligence or allow it to meaningfully guide decision-making during the crisis. “Interviewees and survey respondents expressed the need to educate intelligence clients on the value of intelligence and how it can be used for decision making,” the report notes. “Interviewees noted that the role of intelligence was not valued during the convoy-related events.” The admission sits uneasily beside the broader findings: that RCMP intelligence was not only shaped to support a political narrative that exaggerated the role of ideological extremism in the protests, but ultimately sidelined when it failed to serve that narrative.

The report also paints a picture that fits with a serious assertion previously conveyed to The Bureau by an RCMP source: that in the days following the convoy’s dispersal, investigators felt they were pressured to reconstruct investigative timelines to match political expectations—to sustain a national security narrative even when the underlying evidence did not necessarily meet threshold.

The Emergencies Act was revoked after just nine days. In January 2024, a federal judge ruled that the Trudeau government’s invocation of the Act was both unnecessary and unlawful, concluding that the legal threshold for a national emergency had not been met.

According to the review, RCMP officials shared protected personal information with financial institutions using processes that lacked consistent legal oversight. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner raised formal concerns, citing the RCMP’s reliance on open-source and social media research to flag individuals—many of whom had no demonstrated connection to criminal activity.

The Natterjack review further confirms that RCMP intelligence operations during the protests were defined by duplication, confusion, and political interference. At least three separate intelligence units—the Ideologically Motivated Criminal Intelligence Team, the Combined Intelligence Group, and the Joint Intelligence Group—were simultaneously tasked with protest reporting, resulting in overlapping and sometimes circular intelligence products. RCMP sources said the structure was unsustainable and exacerbated by National Headquarters’ failure to provide unified command or governance.

Meanwhile, on Sunday, in a televised interview that sent shockwaves through Washington, Ottawa, and Victoria, FBI Director Kash Patel warned that a new axis of global threat actors—consisting of Chinese Communist Party operatives, Iranian proxies, and Mexican cartel networks—is exploiting Canada’s lax border enforcement, immigration systems, and critical infrastructure in Vancouver to move fentanyl and terror suspects into the United States.

“Where’s all the fentanyl coming from still? Where are all the narco traffickers going to keep bringing this stuff into the country? The northern border,” Patel said. “Our adversaries have partnered up with the CCP and others—Russia, Iran—on a variety of different criminal enterprises. And they’re going and they’re sailing around to Vancouver and coming in by air.”

Patel’s public assessment aligns disturbingly well with the key findings of a Bureau investigation first published in August 2024. That report, based on testimony and documentary evidence from former Canada Border Services Agency officer Luc Sabourin, warned that systemic corruption and compromised enforcement at Canada’s ports of entry had already created the kind of vulnerabilities now cited by the FBI.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Invite your friends and earn rewards

If you enjoy The Bureau, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe.

Invite Friends

Continue Reading

Trending

X