Wednesday, August 21, 2019

UPDATED: Wheels Coming off Trudeau Liberal Bus with Latest Court Docs on Huawei Extradition Case

UPDATED:  August 21, 2019 Please see the comments at the bottom of this post for an update that I've added in the form of a comment after spending three hours watching today's Emergency Meeting of the Commons Justice Committee following the release of the Report of the Ethics Commissioner on the SNC Lavalin Affair.  Spoiler:  The Liberals voted down the motion to call the Ethics Commissioner to testify before the Justice Committee.

Huawei CEO Meng Wanzhou was denied
Charter Rights when arrested in 2018

Question: What do you have when you have two mentally unbalanced clowns running two neighbouring countries?  Answer:  A Clown Circus;

Folks, I spent five years working at a Canadian law school.  I remember the first year law students coming in every fall, innocent as babes in the woods, and thereafter being taught the rigour of the rules of laws via centuries of precedents.  Well, a first year law student in September, could have given better advice to Trudeau and Trump than the idiots who allowed them to trample on the most basic, the most fundamental principles as described by Meng Wanzhou's lawyers in the global news report below.  Please read and I will have more comments to follow:


Meng Wanzhou lawyers lay out ‘abuse of process’ claims, citing Trump, FBI, CBSA, RCMP

Lawyers acting on behalf of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou have laid out claims alleging abuse of process by the United States, the FBI, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and the RCMP in connection with her extradition case.

They argue that the extradition proceedings against the executive should be stayed. And U.S. President Donald Trump’s own words are cited as evidence of that alleged abuse.

The allegations are laid out in an “unusual” release of hundreds of pages’ worth of court documents and video ahead of Meng facing an extradition hearing.

In a “Memorandum of Fact and Law” that was included in the release, lawyers alleged that the abuse is twofold.

They alleged that [1] the U.S. has abused the extradition process after “attempting to use these extradition proceedings for economic and political gain, as evidenced by the statements of the president of the United States.

The documents alleged that the pre-arrest conduct of both the United States and Trump specifically was “threatening in nature, corrosive of the rule of law, and abusive of the processes of the Extradition Act and the Charter.”

They specifically cited remarks that Trump made to Reuters on Dec. 11, 2018, when he was asked whether he would intervene in the case personally:

“If I think it’s good for what will be certainly the largest trade deal ever made — which is a very important thing — what’s good for national security — I would certainly intervene if I thought it was necessary.”

The second part of the abuse allegations concerns [2] actions by CBSA, the RCMP and American authorities including the FBI.

Meng’s lawyers alleged that these authorities “carried out a plan to unlawfully detain, search and interrogate her on Dec. 1, 2018.”

They claimed that those authorities engaged in a “‘covert criminal investigation’ under the guise of a routine examination” under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) and the Customs Act.

Meng’s lawyers alleged that the authorities delayed the executive’s arrest by defying a court order, deceiving her about the nature of the detention in order to “avoid the constraints of the Charter,” and “abusing compulsion/search powers granted to CBSA officers for the purpose of collecting evidence for the FBI.”
Meng and her lawyers asked the court to disclose documents related to these allegations.

Ultimately, her legal team said that if abuse of process allegations are established, then that would result in a stay of her extradition proceedings.

Meng’s detention was set in motion on Nov. 30, 2018, when RCMP Const. Winston yep swore an affidavit in support of an application for an arrest warrant, the documents alleged.

Justice Fleming issued the warrant that day, ordering “all peace officers having jurisdiction in Canada… to immediately arrest Wanzhou Meng.”

Sometime between that day and the following one, authorities in both Canada and the U.S. came up with a strategy whereby the RCMP would “intentionally delay” Meng’s arrest so that CBSA officers could detain her for what looked like a “routine immigration check.”

By doing this, the CBSA could exercise inspection powers that would allow them to obtain evidence they could pass along to the FBI and other authorities, Meng’s lawyers said.

Meng arrived at YVR at 11:15 a.m. She was then detained by three CBSA officers as two Mounties stood and watched.

The Huawei executive wasn’t actually arrested, nor was she informed why she was being held, the documents said.

This, said her lawyers contravened s. 10(a) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which gives everyone the right to be informed of the reasons for a detention.

Meng was subsequently held for three hours — which violates Charter s. 9, guaranteeing everyone the right “not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned,” her lawyers alleged.

Nor was she advised of her right to counsel — also a right protected under the Charter, they said.

The documents alleged further Charter violations following the seizure of Meng’s electronic devices.

The executive was eventually handed to the RCMP at 2:15 p.m., and only then was the arrest warrant executed, the documents alleged.

Only at that time was she advised of why she was being arrested and her right to counsel, they added.

Meng’s lawyers also alleged that President Trump has “explicitly threatened to interfere in this matter.”

Citing the Reuters quote, her lawyers said that Meng is being used as a “bargaining chip in an ongoing trade dispute between China and the U.S.”

Those remarks, they said, came in the context of what they called a “targeting of Huawei and its executives,” which they say followed a “recommendation in 2017 that the U.S. government begin issuing indictments to advance its interests in its broader geopolitical struggle with China.”

None of the allegations have been proven in court."


Greencrow says:  The allegations in the Memorandum of Fact and Law as set out above, coupled with the Report of the Ethics Commissioner in his investigation into the SNC Lavalin affair amount to the inescapable conclusion that the Canadian government of Justin Trudeau is rotten to the core.

I find it difficult to believe that all the "September first year law students'" legal advice that created both scandals were made without the tell-tale input of the drama/art student Trudeau.  The Huawei and SNC Lavalin "Travesties of Justice" both have his personal hallmarks:  reckless, arrogant, mind numbingly stupid, willful, cowardly, and sneaky.

Both cases have the potential to destroy centuries of legal precedents set up to protect citizens from tyranny.  One of them, the Huawei matter..has the potential to destroy the Charter of Rights and Freedoms [the lifework of le Dauphin's own father, Pierre Trudeau, who has been spinning in his grave for so long that his coffin must be shaped like a corkscrew].  The other one, the SNC Lavalin case, has the potential to destroy the principle of prosecutorial independence---that politicians can't decide who to prosecute and who to let off.

Folks, we are left wringing our hands...hoping that in both cases...that the fundamental principles of justice will survive the attacks of these stupid, scofflaw clown vandals, Trudeau and Trump.  How did this come to pass?  Well, all I can reference is that old theory about car accidents at intersections...Most of these collisions are caused when two very bad drivers show up at the intersection at the very same time...aka the "perfect storm" theory.

That's what happened here.  At this intersection in history...two corrupt, stupid, clownish and non-compos mentis leaders met...and the results are a political and judicial car wreck.


Northerntruthseeker said...

sadly... latest canadian "polls" show the sicko Liberals are actually gaining on the Conservatives under the equally heinous Scheer....

What will become of Canada come this October? It looks like, in spite of the criminality of Justin and his cronies, the Canadian people are truly this stupid and will have them re-elected!

greencrow said...


I just spent the last three hours watching the Justice/Ethics Committee of the Canadian Federal Parliament debate three motions resulting from the Report of the Ethics Commissioner into the SNC Lavalin Affair. This report, ominously enough, is called "Trudeau II" due to it being the second time he's been accused [and found guilty] of contravening the ethics codes and laws of Canada.

Of course the Liberal majority voted down the three motions for further investigation because they've been directed to "shut the thing down" by Trudeau. Trudeau himself was giving a distracting speech in Montreal on foreign policy and his tiny image appeared smiling and gesticulating in the corner right of the TV screen as the committee members debated. It added a ludicrous "clownish" touch to the proceedings.

I learned a lot of new things as a result of listening to the parliamentarians discuss the report. A lot of the finer points were made clearer to me. The most impressive speaker was the Green Party's Elizabeth May...which was a surprise to me as she's not a lawyer and because I haven't often listened to her speak in the past I was unaware of her eloquence.

May said that the most important take aways from the SNC Lavalin Affair were the clear implications that the corruption was just not Trudeau but it was "systemic"...the rot ran throughout the governmental bureaucracy as well as through the elected officials. She said that SNC Lavalin has a horrific reputation internationally [building torture chambers for Ghadaffy, working against "climate change", bilking third world nations etc., etc., so the international community will not get a good impression of Canada because of this].

Interestingly, May twice said something that I've also said on this blog...she said she believes that Trudeau still does not understand WHAT he did wrong. She says she thinks he acted through ignorance of the law and not necessarily intentionally. She said he needs to understand that what he did was wrong and to apologize to Wilson-Raybould, Philpott and the Canadian public.

I used to believe that Trudeau acted in ignorance of the law...he IS totally clueless. But now, with the Report out and all the ink spilled in the press...if Trudeau does not understand now what he did wrong...then it IS intentional and he DOES intend to permanently corrupt the Canada judicial system on behalf of his 1% friends.

So now I am more inclined to accept the position of other members on the Justice Committee, Lisa Raitt, Charley Angus and Pierre Poilievre [incidentally, all fabulous speakers...I was very proud as a Canadian to hear them speak]. These speakers said that Trudeau was acting solely on behalf of the 1%, the company lawyer, Iacobucci [a former Supreme Court Judge] and the several bankers who are on the board of SNC Lavalin and who stand to have their reputations ruined if the company is found guilty in court.

The above three speakers absolutely demolished Trudeau's oft-repeated claim that he was standing up for jobs. They cited his lack of backing this assertion with ANY evidence throughout the process even though the Liberals were repeatedly asked to provide some statistics showing job loss would result.

The opposition members clearly made the point that the obstruction of justice continues with this latest shutting down of the Committee so that it cannot even question the author of the Ethics Committee Report [even though it has done so in the past].

So now it rests in the hands of the RCMP to lay charges against Trudeau in the matter. But, sadly, after learning last night about the despicable role played by the RCMP in contravening the Charter of Rights and Freedoms the night that Huawei CEO Meng Wanzhou was hopes that the RCMP has not been entirely corrupted [along with the other Canadian governmental institutions] have greatly diminished.