Slashdot Mirror
China Calls For Release of Arrested Huawei CFO Detained In Canada (nbcnews.com)
China is demanding the release of a senior executive at Huawei after she was detained in Canada on extradition charges to the U.S. Wanzhou Meng, who is also the deputy chair of Huawei's board and the daughter of company founder Ren Zhengfei, is suspected of violating U.S. trade sanctions against Iran. NBC News reports: The arrest of Meng Wanzhou, chief financial officer and daughter of the company's founder Ren Zhengfei, spooked investors with U.S. stocks tumbling on fears of a flare-up in Chinese-U.S. tensions. She was arrested in Vancouver, British Columbia, on Dec. 1. China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said officials have been contacted both in the U.S. and Canada to demand Meng's release. Geng Shuang, a spokesman for the ministry, said her detention needed to be explained, and both countries had to "effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of the person concerned." A spokesperson for Huawei said in a statement that it "complies with all applicable laws and regulations where it operates, including applicable export control and sanction laws and regulations."
What if the shoe was on the other foot? What if an American citizen was arrested in a 3rd country and extradited to China? What would Donald Trump do? The Andrew Brunson affair indicates he would not accept it passively.
1. Can't compete with Huawei 5G.
2. Can't get real advantage as claimed by Donald's tweets
3. Made up and exaggerated accusation as before the Iraq War.
4. Held the daughter of a VIP as hostage for negotiation.
Sounds like a plot from terrorist country like Iran.
I wish they would prosecute board members of US companies for financial crimes and monopolistic practices.
Trump isn't actually in control of this. It would be illegal and improper for him to intervene, in fact he wasn't even notified by DOJ that the action was pending. It's unclear he even has actual pardoning power for this,
but certainly not before the charges have even been brought, that's just a misapprehension about how DOJ works even as it is an Exec branch Dept.
It sounds like there's a counter-espionage aspect of this case as well, further reducing any chance of even a fucking moron like the aforementioned involving himself inappropriately... but then, you never know do you.
Might have something to do with this;
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46352336
Chinese officials have defended their decision to bar three US citizens from leaving the country, saying they are suspected of "economic crimes". Victor and Cynthia Liu, children of a fugitive businessman, and their mother, Sandra Han, have been detained since June, the New York Times reported. The US Department of State confirmed to the BBC that they are in "close contact" with the adult Liu children. Their father, Liu Changming, is wanted in a $1.4bn (£1bn) fraud case in China.
FYI - Victor, 19, was born in the U.S. The Chinese are holding a US citizen hostage and then have the nerve to complain?
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Wait a minute, I want to reply to this but I have to stop shaking with laughter first.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Obama - visited the troops. Bush - visited the troops. Clinton - visited the troops. Bush - visited the troops, was the troops. Carter - visited the troops, was the troops.
Trump - "My feet hurt and it's raining" - golfed 4x more than Obama, lied 400,000 more than anyone else alive on Earth, and sucks Putin's dick 400 times harder than Melania ever sucked his.
Say hi to Roger Stone for me when you plead the "fif" - which only the mob does, right traitor? Fuck off back to Leavenworth or Moscow, your pick, but go now before you lose the option.
China arrests Americans all the time for much dumber reasons. Turnabout is fair play.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Sorry, why are you expecting Trump to have consistent behavior?
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Geng Shuang, a spokesman for the ministry, said her detention needed to be explained, and both countries had to "effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of the person concerned."
And if you disagee, China will subtract 50 from your Communist Black Mirror score, and too low means Bryce doesn't get to borrow anymore.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
US Constitution Article II, Section 2 states plainly that the President has pardon power for any offense with the sole exception being cases of impeachment.
Since at least Andrew Jackson in 1865, Presidents have use pardon prior to indictment to spare the country the turmoil of a controversial indictment and trial (in the case of a Confederate officer, for Jackson). The Supreme Court has upheld this repeatedly.
Imagine you seen a sign saying "no parking on Sundays 9AM-11AM". By law that implies that parking is allowed any other time. (exceptio probat regulam, in casibus non exceptis).
The Constitution is even more clear. It specifically says "all cases except impeachment". If it meant "all cases except impeachment and when AC doesn't like it", it would say that. It explicitly states the sole case in which the President does not have pardon power.
The defendant isn't being impeached, so clearly the President absolutely has an unquestionable Constitutional right to pardon her. Whether or not he SHOULD is an entirely different question. His legal power to do so is very clearly stated in the supreme law of the land, the Constitution.
I can't speak about Korea, but I do know that the only reason we pulled out of Vietnam is that the anti-war movement persuaded Congress that we couldn't win. Both Tet and the Easter offensive were absolute disasters for the Viet Cong and the NVA, respectively.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Donald J. Trump is the President of the United States of America, and as such is the head of Executive branch of the federal government, and as such has control over the DOJ. Further, he can pardon anyone he damn well pleases with one exception. Yes, he can even pardon himself if it came down to it and that one exception wasn't in play.
Grow up.
The US never went to war with Vietnam. That's a big reason we didn't nuke it. We were there as pretty much the only fucking ones doing the fucking dirty work of our shitty fucking alliances.
The conflict dragged on and people in the US hated it. If congress had declared war it would've ended differently, and much more quickly. But Congress didn't want the optics of the US going to war again, and preferred to just send a generation of men into a pointless meat grinder. See Korea for the sequel, and the middle east spin off series if you want to know more.
The US has not been at war since WWII.
Can someone explain he crime to me? She is not an US national, her company is in China, but she was arrested in Canada because the US says its a crime for her company to trade in Iran? The trade did no occur in US soil. None of the parties in the trade are under US jurisdiction, not even the arrest was made on US soil.
That is a pretty dumb comment, even for you. They are shipping US origin products to Iran. There is a US sanction against Iran. Hope you understand, but I doubt you will.
"the only reason we pulled out of Vietnam is that the anti-war movement persuaded Congress that we couldn't win."
Well, that and the fact that we weren't winning, and couldn't win, regardless of any protests.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
"Vietnam...See Korea for the sequel"
Your time machine is borken.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
The Aussies were there with us too. France was there about a decade before us but mucked it up (not that we did much better). And Korea had a crapload of different countries fighting as well.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Winning would mean ending the insurgency. It was clear by the early 60s that that wasn't going to be possible. You could win in the same way you've won in Afghanistan - that is, you can park soldiers on everything important in the and bleed blood and treasure forever. You couldn't end the insurgency and go home.
How many times, over how many centuries, does the Supreme Court have to keep ruling on this before you recognize the stare decisis?
You say "arguably" - that was argued in 1865, and SCOTUS ruled that the Constitution means what it says. Most famously in the last fifty years, Ford pardoned Nixon, so the country could move forward from that mess - without an indictment or arrest.
> when an actual arrest has been made, it becomes increasingly difficult for a President ...
> acting before would likely create a Constitutional crisis of some sort.
So your argument is that "power to pardon any ..." means not before it goes to court, and not after?
The question *could* have caused a Constitutional crisis - in the 1800s, but it didn't. SCOTUS decided the question, as is their role, and that was that. A hundred years later most people thought the President SHOULDN'T pardon Nixon, but nobody made a serious claim that he COULDN'T.
Here's a question SCOTUS has NOT yet ruled on.
Can a President pardon *himself*?
Most legal scholars say "yes, but Burdick v. United States would almost guarantee impeachment".
Under Burdick, accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt. If a President were to pardon himself, he would be admitting guilt. Based on this admission (and the ugliness of pardoning oneself), impeachment would follow.
Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.
Your comment seems to be predicated on Huawei being some kind of behemoth which it is not.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
That's not 'winning a war.' That's terraforming. Other people in neighboring countries would frown on it. Places like China come to mind.
If we could just get Mark Zuckerberg and Donald Trump to travel to Bejing we could instantly solve two major problems in the US
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
They are shipping US origin products to Iran.
This.
But this (and the ZTE embargo) will just motivate China to roll their own version of 5G and fab their own chips. Back when 3G was on the drawing board, China was considering developing their own protocols. US chip makers went to our government and begged them not to. It doesn't look like they (China) got strong enough concessions in return for giving up their own R&D. This time may be different.
Have gnu, will travel.
> Can a restaurant comp an appetizer if you never ordered an appetizer?
Yes. Hopefully they bring me free mozzarella sticks.
> if they haven't actually been given a sentence to pardon?
A *sentence* is commuted. A *person* is pardoned. Two tially different things.
So basically you said "how kiss a person if they haven't been given a toilet to flush?"
In 1866, the question came up of whether a President can pardon someone who hasn't been charged. The answer was yes. SCOTUS ruled then, and a couple times since then. If you were paying attention in history class, you might recall most Americans were unhappy when President Ford pardoned Nixon, who hadn't been charged with anything.
We should be Canadian about this - "So sorry for arresting you. We're putting you an a plane for Beijing in an hour. No hard feelings eh. Here, have some maple syrup and smoked salmon. Oh wait, here's some BC bud too."
None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
Japan got nuked because the USA were the first to get nukes. Now that many countries have them, try to do it. Try to nuke China and you will see the USA turned into a radioactive wasteland.
We're still in Korea. So, uh... The Vietnam War ended a long time ago. Korean War, not ended so much. Just smoldering endlessly.
Cross your fingers, maybe next year!
Another asshole who wants a war with Iran, eh. I get it, I get it.
It makes no sense why anybody would want it, but some people do. I get that much.
Don't think whining and crying will save America's enemies. Sanctions are the most peaceful option on the table.
All civilized countries cooperate regarding law enforcement.
It is governed by existing treaties.
The More You Know!
Well they going to need...
Retard tense?
with big nukes.
will just motivate China to roll their own version of 5G
Huh? What do you mean own "version"? If you're talking about America actually being the technological leader here you've already lost. Huawei is already a large developer of 5G modems, and ZTE already a developer of 5G infrastructure.
There is zero incentive for them to do something incompatible with the rest of the world just because they are having a spat with the USA. The only country really that has something incompatible IS the USA and is rightfully seen all over the world as an incredibly dumb situation to be in.
Yet the two knuckleheads above didn't get that.
You still bombed the hell out of it and not declaring a war makes no difference.
No, we didn't bomb the hell out of it.
We should have done nothing or gone to war. Instead we engaged in stupid proxy bullshit and sent thousands of marines to defend locations of no importance out in the jungle.
If we had declared war, we would have had an objective and support. Instead we sent men to sit in hell and wait to die for no reason. But Congress didn't want to declare war, because of the red scare.
Korea's still going on. Trump may be the one to finally end it.
That's interesting, thanks