Yeah you are and the proof is you stand by the yahoos and twats of the Freedum Convoy who occupied a city and blocked a bridge.
Court has ruled Emergencies Act during Trucker convoy was unconstitutional
- Thread starter Phil C. McNasty
- Start date
Thank you.
It's like pulling teeth with you sometimes.
You compared the situation to Trump's, implying that people who thought he had to step down while Trudeau did not were being hypocritical.
Except, of course, there is a legal requirement in the USA for someone to be disqualified from office and - as you've finally acknowledged here - there is no such equivalent in Canada.
So hopefully that will be the end of that little detour.
So I will take this as you saying Yes to question #2 (and presumably #3 if Trudeau fails to step down).
Cool.
Given that - as far as I can tell - no Prime Minister has stepped down for violations of people's rights before (and it has never been the primary voting issue in an election), I feel you are going to be disappointed.
But thank you for finally answering.
I didn't ask you how you intended to vote, nor did I tell you how you should vote.
Shoe doesn't fit, since I am not a member of the Liberal party. (If you are using the term in a more general sense, then sure, I guess that's as a good a word as any.)
Not sure what voting stations have to do with this conversation, but yes, I am quite familiar with the need for basic rights.
This is certainly not the thing that is going to be the single and irrevocable decider of whether or not the Liberals deserve another term for a couple of reasons.
One, you should have figured out by now that I always vote in the context of what is on offer in the election. Therefore the odds of one single thing being "the reason" I vote are very slim.
The liberals will "warrant" another term based entirely on who their opposition is.
Secondly, I have never voted for Trudeau. Nor have I voted for any Liberal candidate under Trudeau's leadership.
This isn't going to make me stop voting for him since I never started.
I agree, whether they were or were not seeking to overthrow the government wasn't the point of his legal analysis.
He acknowledged some in the convoy were and moved on.
I'm trying to remember the last time a Prime Minister violated peoples rights and froze their bank accounts. Or did any of the stupid shit JT has done since becoming Prime Minister.
Froze their bank accounts is new.
People wanting to argue that this time is something special and particularly pernicious is probably the only way it is going to matter electorally.
Like I stated. I'm trying to remember. So refresh my memory about something similar that happened in Canadian history.
Hope The Citizens of Ottawa rightfully get compensated for what they went through for over a month from the unreal behaviour of this FREEDUMB as HELL Convoy!!
Lawsuit against convoy organizers moves forward
Decision pitted Ottawa residents' property rights against protesters' right to use pressure tactics
A $300-million class-action lawsuit filed against Freedom Convoy protesters, donors and organizers on behalf of downtown Ottawa residents and businesses is moving forward after a judge ruled against a motion filed by the defendants.
Superior Court Justice Calum MacLeod heard arguments in December for and against a motion brought under anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) legislation.
The legislation serves to protect people from vexatious lawsuits filed to silence opponents through legal and financial intimidation. Convoy organizers filed the motion in an attempt to have the lawsuit tossed, arguing it amounted to an attack on freedoms of expression.
Lawyers representing the defendants, who include Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, argued political expression is fundamental to society.
But in his decision released Tuesday, MacLeod sided with residents and businesses by dismissing the motion.
He wrote that the case pitted the rights of individuals to use their property and public streets against the rights of protestors to make their grievances heard by using pressure tactics against the government.
Plaintiffs' case 'meritorious,' judge finds
The defendants argued that because their use of free expression was in the public interest, the plaintiffs did not meet the threshold required to launch a lawsuit.
MacLeod disagreed, writing in his decision that the plaintiffs have a "meritorious case."
"There is evidence that certain plaintiffs were subjected to what they contend to have been extreme amounts of noise, horn honking, incessant diesel fumes and other pollution, blockage of the streets and intimidation. There is evidence that plaintiffs had difficulty accessing their properties and that business was disrupted, reservations cancelled, and revenue negatively impacted," the decision reads.
While recognizing the defendants deny having had a common intention to block streets or pressure government by creating hardship on residents, MacLeod wrote it could still be concluded that disrupting daily life in the city is what organizers and participants were after.
"It cannot be said on the limited evidentiary record available on this motion that any of the potential defences are likely to prevail," the decision says.
Paul Champ, the lawyer who is bringing forward the class action, said in a statement he was "pleased" with the outcome.
"Another attempt by the defendants to derail this litigation has proven unsuccessful," his statement read. "We remain committed to obtaining justice and redress for the people of downtown Ottawa."
Lawyers representing the defendants say they are reviewing the decision and did not have any immediate comment.
Lawsuit against convoy organizers moves forward
Decision pitted Ottawa residents' property rights against protesters' right to use pressure tactics
A $300-million class-action lawsuit filed against Freedom Convoy protesters, donors and organizers on behalf of downtown Ottawa residents and businesses is moving forward after a judge ruled against a motion filed by the defendants.
Superior Court Justice Calum MacLeod heard arguments in December for and against a motion brought under anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) legislation.
The legislation serves to protect people from vexatious lawsuits filed to silence opponents through legal and financial intimidation. Convoy organizers filed the motion in an attempt to have the lawsuit tossed, arguing it amounted to an attack on freedoms of expression.
Lawyers representing the defendants, who include Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, argued political expression is fundamental to society.
But in his decision released Tuesday, MacLeod sided with residents and businesses by dismissing the motion.
He wrote that the case pitted the rights of individuals to use their property and public streets against the rights of protestors to make their grievances heard by using pressure tactics against the government.
Plaintiffs' case 'meritorious,' judge finds
The defendants argued that because their use of free expression was in the public interest, the plaintiffs did not meet the threshold required to launch a lawsuit.
MacLeod disagreed, writing in his decision that the plaintiffs have a "meritorious case."
"There is evidence that certain plaintiffs were subjected to what they contend to have been extreme amounts of noise, horn honking, incessant diesel fumes and other pollution, blockage of the streets and intimidation. There is evidence that plaintiffs had difficulty accessing their properties and that business was disrupted, reservations cancelled, and revenue negatively impacted," the decision reads.
While recognizing the defendants deny having had a common intention to block streets or pressure government by creating hardship on residents, MacLeod wrote it could still be concluded that disrupting daily life in the city is what organizers and participants were after.
"It cannot be said on the limited evidentiary record available on this motion that any of the potential defences are likely to prevail," the decision says.
Paul Champ, the lawyer who is bringing forward the class action, said in a statement he was "pleased" with the outcome.
"Another attempt by the defendants to derail this litigation has proven unsuccessful," his statement read. "We remain committed to obtaining justice and redress for the people of downtown Ottawa."
Lawyers representing the defendants say they are reviewing the decision and did not have any immediate comment.
channel changing. Absolutely jack to do with a govt that doesn’t meet the legal threshold to employ its very hand, or using measure that infringe on people rights. Can’t you do better?
The convoy only had about 10% support from Canadians.
It was a very popular move.
Nailing foreign money from influencing Canadian politics is smart.
The mistake was unfreezing the accounts. All the yahoos should be living in a cardboard box under a bridge.
They're suing the convoy for disrupting businesses but not the government for shutting them down.
I don't know when the last time foreigners funded truckers to protest about getting health care and tried to force the government to resign.
You got me.
The FREEEEEEEEDUMB twat Yahoo's shut down businesses during their illegal occupation.
Everything to do with why the Govt. had to come to the rescue of these citizens who were practically hostage to these FREEDUMB Convoy dummies for over a month.
Even DOFO was in agreement with the Federal Govt. as he could not cope with these nutcases!!
Lmao you are seriously triggered.
In plain English. Did the judge care?
You guys are a joke. It’s so bloody straightforward and simple.
Yes.
You are a public servant in health care who supports anti vaxxers and thinks it horrid that the government tried to crack down on anti vaxxers.
LMAO, this is not the end of the story. Wait for the appeal to take place.
You right wingers are the biggest joke. Down South when Trump loses most of his Court cases, yet you guys go to his defence.
One lost case by the Liberal Govt. and shit hits the fans with you right wingers.
Wait and see once the appeal gets going, and we also will also see how the Ottawa Citizens fare with their case against these FreeDumb Convoy!!
