Slashdot Mirror


President Trump To Use Huawei CFO As a Bargaining Chip (politico.com)

hackingbear shares a report from Politico, adding: "This fuels the suspicion that the Chinese executive is held as a hostage for the ongoing trade negotiation with China." From the report: President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he reserved the right to weigh in on the Justice Department's case against the CFO of Huawei, if it would help him close a trade deal with Beijing or would serve other American national security interests. "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," Trump told Reuters. Trump added that President Xi Jinping of China had not called him about the case, but that the White House had been in touch with both the Justice Department and Chinese officials. Huawei's CFO, Meng Wanzhou, was arrested in Canada earlier this month at the request of American authorities, who allege that she violated U.S. sanctions against Iran. Yesterday, a Vancouver judge ruled that Meng would be released on a $7.5 million bail if she remains in British Columbia.

351 comments

  1. Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That seems like a pretty unhealthy precedent to set.

    1. Re:Hmmm by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That seems like a pretty unhealthy precedent to set.

      Quite so. I believe she is still in Canada. If Canada has any backbone at all, they should refuse to extradite in the wake of these extrajudicial threats.

    2. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Trump and his useless communications style are his own worst enemies..

    3. Re: Hmmm by Desler · · Score: 2

      Please. Cocaine Mitch and they boys will never turn on Trump. Judicial nominees matter more.

    4. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      The warrant and arrest was legitimate. If the Canadian court rules she can be extradited (something outside the US's control) and she makes it to trial in the US, it will be real courts based on real law. The President cannot convene a kangaroo court in the US. What I read Trump's comments to mean, is that if it's beneficial to trade negotiations, he'd be willing to have the Justice Department rescind the charges or to offer a lenient plea. This would likely come with a commitment to stop dealing sanctioned items with Iran.

      He's not holding her hostage. He likely had nothing at all to do with the ongoing investigation which is fairly serious. It's her and her father's company that put her in this situation. She knew of the issue and had been avoiding the US for several months despite having a son in school and business interests. This did not come out of thin air for the sake of negotiating.

    5. Re:Hmmm by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Funny

      That seems like a pretty unhealthy precedent to set.

      Especially odd considering Trumps penchant for thinking things through and considering all the options and future consequences of his thoughts and actions. Quite off his game, I'd say. Perhaps he's distracted. Then again, I don't play 4D chess and can't perhaps see the lack of downsides to this going forward.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    6. Re: Hmmm by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If he understood power politics he would have never made this announcement. He may have just thrown away any chance that Canada will actually agree to extradite her. This is incompetence politics.

    7. Re:Hmmm by Desler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is a joke, right? Nothing good for anyone is gonna come out of this. Why would China not just start trumping up charges to arrest Americans? As soon as they did that, the toddler would back down like the wimpy weenie he is.

    8. Re:Hmmm by Nanoda · · Score: 1

      Too right. I need to contact my MP.

    9. Re:Hmmm by JMJimmy · · Score: 1

      Pretty impossible precedent. She's in the Canadian judicial system - Trump just handed her a get out of jail free card.

    10. Re:Hmmm by sittingnut · · Score: 0

      nothing new here.
      trump is merely expressing openly what this arrest was from the start; typical and customary high handed tactic by usa to get other countries to obey its own absurd laws, and give its own substandard crony companies ( like apple) an unfair advantage.
      that was how chinese treated it from start.

    11. Re:Hmmm by mi · · Score: 0

      Why would China not just start trumping up charges to arrest Americans?

      This may well have been the intent — to add an incentive to American companies to bring their manufacturing back to the US...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    12. Re: Hmmm by mi · · Score: 2

      He may have just thrown away any chance that Canada will actually agree to extradite her.

      Why? The charges against her are as real as they have been.

      What he said may give her a hope for an easier resolution — he didn't threaten her with death penalty, which could've alarmed Canada, he promised, she might be let go.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    13. Re:Hmmm by Desler · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Except they won't. They'd likely just incorporate overseas.

    14. Re:Hmmm by Desler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except Trump is overplaying his hand just like with Kim. China isn't gonna blink, they'll just escalate. The PRC isn't quaking in their boots since they'll be in power long past when this toddler leaves office.

    15. Re:Hmmm by jrumney · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The return to power politics is right up there with "clean coal" when it comes to outdated ideas that have no business being revived in the 21st century.

    16. Re:Hmmm by sexconker · · Score: 0

      Trump is suggesting that he could pardon her, or otherwise make the justice department drop the matter, if it would help national security, relations with China, etc.

      Trump is NOT suggesting that this person will be held hostage as leverage in trade negotiations. At worst, this person will go through the courts for the crimes they are accused of (and absolutely committed). Or are you saying that the sanctions and those who violate them should be ignored?

    17. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somehow I still believe that China escalating is good for me.

    18. Re: Hmmm by Freischutz · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If he understood power politics he would have never made this announcement. He may have just thrown away any chance that Canada will actually agree to extradite her. This is incompetence politics.

      Nah, this is straight out of the N-Korean playbook, take hostages and use them as bargaining chips to extract concessions. Kind of a new low for the US though.

    19. Re:Hmmm by mi · · Score: 1

      They'd likely just incorporate overseas.

      How would this help them avoid trumped-up charges in China? Wherever they incorporate, if the executives are dear to someone in the US, who is in a position to put pressure on government, they will be facing the danger you've alluded to. And to avoid it, they'll try to have less to do with China — which will mean, in many cases, stop owning stuff there.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    20. Re: Hmmm by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      This is incompetence politics.

      Oh c'mon. It's great kabuki to feed the tabloids, what it is meant to be. Nothing "incompetent" about it.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    21. Re: Hmmm by Mistlefoot · · Score: 4, Informative

      US policy on Extraditing people.

      "The political incidence test looks to whether the offence is "part of and incidental to a political struggle". Initially, it did not concern itself with the motives of the offender" from Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_offence_exception

      When the Trump said what he said he basically implied that this was part and incidental to a political struggle. I agree with OP, and bet her Lawyer's will enjoy his words.

    22. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a joke, right? Nothing good for anyone is gonna come out of this. Why would China not just start trumping up charges to arrest Americans?

      They already do for business reasons. Have for decades. That sort of bad behavior is older than daily Chinese government attempts to hack American businesses. Check your firewall logs.

      As soon as they did that, the toddler would back down like the wimpy weenie he is.

      He hasn't.

      Regardless of what you think about the president, start paying attention. Reality isn't what you feel it is.

    23. Re: Hmmm by mi · · Score: 0

      "The political incidence test looks to whether the offence is "part of and incidental to a political struggle".

      She is not part to a political struggle — she is not even a US citizen. She may be part of a trade-war between countries, but that's not political at all.

      When the [sic] Trump said what he said he basically implied that this was part and incidental to a political struggle

      He said nothing of the kind. The media's disease of putting words into Trump's mouth has, evidently, infected their best customers...

      He said, he might allow her to go, if China cooperates — the charges are perfectly real and not political.

      bet her Lawyer's [sic] will enjoy his words.

      They might, but any judge agreeing with them will be wrong.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    24. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Donald would you like a state visit to China?

    25. Re: Hmmm by AmazingRuss · · Score: 1

      Pants-on-your-head Politics

    26. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get real. The US doesn't have allies, it has bitches.

    27. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey lets force everyone to buy a product OR ELSE get fined.

      You don't actually know jack shit about anything do you? Just repeat what the tv tells you to.
      Such a good little NPC.

    28. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Quite so. I believe she is still in Canada. If Canada has any backbone at all, they should refuse to extradite in the wake of these extrajudicial threats.

      Indeed.

      Canada acted in good faith in accordance with international law. Canada's politicians do not have the ability to tell the legal system what to do, because it's independent.

      If Canada has been played in Trump's pissing contest with China ... and certainly Trump is suggesting he'd exert influence over the US legal system to get his way .. then I agree with this entirely, and hopefully the judiciary deems that since the US didn't act in good faith we consider the matter dropped.

      This is no different from Russian sending out INTERPOL red notices to suppress dissent.

      Trump seems to be literally suggesting he'd actively pressure the department of justice to either stage this, or to drop charges.

      This is some scary shit, and if this is the kind of ally the US is, then I will likely never go there again. The US is on a path of becoming a very scary and dangerous nation in terms of what it is willing to do with its friends to prove a point.

      Fuck you, America.

    29. Re:Hmmm by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I don't know what forked universe you are in, but please invite me for a nice long visit.

    30. Re: Hmmm by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Kind of a new low for the US though.

      Does projecting ethics onto geopolitics make things simpler for you?

    31. Re: Hmmm by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      Why? The charges against her are as real as they have been.

      Nobody told you that there is NO formal charge against her so far, only a provisional charge? And if the news reporting is right, this case was dated back to 2009-2014. Not to mention this whole Iran sanction thing is a falsified accusation without any backing from the UN.

      Of course, now she's a hostage. Whether there will be a charge made up depending on how China responds.

      It is apparent the real terrorist state is not Iran but the US.

    32. Re:Hmmm by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1, Informative

      Canada's politicians do not have the ability to tell the legal system what to do, because it's independent.

      The politicians can't tell the courts how to rule, but the PM can drop the extradition request.

      So Justin can't extradite without court approval, but he can unilaterally decide to NOT extradite.

    33. Re: Hmmm by mi · · Score: 0

      NO formal charge against her so far, only a provisional charge

      Distinction without difference.

      this case was dated back to 2009-2014

      All the less grounds to suspect, it was motivated by a desired to twist China's arm.

      Not to mention this whole Iran sanction thing is a falsified accusation

      Is it? Then the lady will have her day in court!

      without any backing from the UN

      That's completely irrelevant. US can impose its own sanctions.

      Of course, now she's a hostage

      Of course, she is not.

      It is apparent the real terrorist state is not Iran but the US.

      Learn Farsi and fuck off.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    34. Re:Hmmm by mlyle · · Score: 1

      It really sucks, but we have a history of letting people go when it's politically expedient -- e.g. swaps with the russkies.

    35. Re:Hmmm by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think it depends.

      If there is probable cause to arrest her and a reasonable chance of a successful prosecution, we are technically in our rights to ask Canada to extradite this person. And then if China offers a deal to get her back, it wouldn't be that unusual to let her return. We do that with spies all the time. With other types of convicted criminals sometimes the home country agrees to detains them for the rest of their American sentence, but that's not strictly necessary.

      But to publicly announce that you are using somebody held in custody as a bargaining chip is astonishingly stupid. There is nothing to be gained by saying that, and the instant you do everyone starts operating off the assumption that this was a political arrest. This not only puts you at a disadvantage, you really encourage the other country to collect bargaining chips of their own.

      This man is catastrophically incompetent. To be fair, political posturing is a big part of being president, and he's actually pretty good at that. But no amount of bullshitting brilliance can do the whole job for you.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    36. Re: Hmmm by mlyle · · Score: 1

      > NO formal charge against her so far, only a provisional charge?

      ?? There's an arrest warrant. If you find out someone is going to Canada that you have a warrant for, you send a provisional request to Canada so they can act immediately. Then within 45 days you follow up with a formal extradition request. That's what the treaty says.

    37. Re: Hmmm by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      How about we just live in the US, but with the world's biggest loser and largest orange colored turd in jail where he belongs. Don't like that option? Too bad. It is an eventuality.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    38. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Try Australia
      New Zealand
      Finland
      Sweden
      Germany
      etc
      All these countries (and others) are:
      More democratic than the USA, better healthcare, freedom of speech, the people are happier, your kids can go to school without fear of being executed, etc etc etc.

      There are many countries in the world that make the USA look like a shithole.

    39. Re: Hmmm by Immerman · · Score: 1

      You sure Pence wouldn't tow the line?

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    40. Re: Hmmm by Waveevaw · · Score: 2

      If he understood power politics he would have never made this announcement. He may have just thrown away any chance that Canada will actually agree to extradite her. This is incompetence politics.

      I'm Canadian. Canadians follow the rules to a fault. She will almost certainly be extradited.

    41. Re:Hmmm by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1, Troll

      That seems like a pretty unhealthy precedent to set.

      Quite so. I believe she is still in Canada. If Canada has any backbone at all, they should refuse to extradite in the wake of these extrajudicial threats.

      As a Canadian I'm offended that your dotard in the Oval Office thinks our justice system is just another toy to play with. Pretty sure I speak for about 90% of my fellow Canadians as well.

      You should lock him in his playpen, he is an embarrassment to your country.

    42. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The immigration and border control discussions in the US made me think Trump brings European winds into US politics and brings up the border control into a level of a modern state. Now I'm starting to think he might want actually to be a Roman Emperor.

    43. Re: Hmmm by quantaman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "The political incidence test looks to whether the offence is "part of and incidental to a political struggle".

      She is not part to a political struggle — she is not even a US citizen. She may be part of a trade-war between countries, but that's not political at all.

      How is a trade war not political?

      When the [sic] Trump said what he said he basically implied that this was part and incidental to a political struggle

      He said nothing of the kind. The media's disease of putting words into Trump's mouth has, evidently, infected their best customers...

      Damn fake news at it again! Putting words in Trump's mouth by printing them verbatim!!

      He said, he might allow her to go, if China cooperates — the charges are perfectly real and not political.

      The arrest didn't seem to be political, but now she's in custody Trump is talking about using the charges for political gain.

      On the one hand that could mean "we got a deal, drop all charges!!"

      But it could also mean "I don't care if the case is falling apart, I need the leverage! Keep her in custody!!"

      Hence the reason why a Canadian Judge, even if they think the charges are legitimate, could refuse the extradition request on the grounds she won't be subjected to a fair legal process.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    44. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You shouldn't talk to your mother like that. Whatever incestuous tryst brought your misshapen and grotesque form into being, your mother should have been put down to ease her suffering and prevent any more of you from coming out of her festering stab-wound of a cooze. But you have no grounds to speak to her like that, worm.

    45. Re: Hmmm by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      US can impose its own sanctions.

      And the rest of the work can ignore them, and mostly are.

    46. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      When the Trump said what he said he basically implied that this was part and incidental to a political struggle. I agree with OP, and bet her Lawyer's will enjoy his words.

      That is up for the CA courts to decide, and not the CA government. The best thing Ottawa can do is play things as close to the book as possible.

    47. Re:Hmmm by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The President cannot convene a kangaroo court in the US.

      That is what Guantanamo is for.....

    48. Re:Hmmm by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 2

      Yet we are not allowed to be offended that you refer to our President as a dotard in a playpen.

    49. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This looks a lot like a hostage situation.

    50. Re: Hmmm by c6gunner · · Score: 2

      So am I. Prior to this comment she almost certainly would have been. Now it's a whole new ballgame. I can absolutely see a judge deciding that Trumps comments indicate that the US is looking to hold her for political reasons.

      Funny enough, while checking google for Canadian extradition policies just now I stumbled on this article:

      https://globalnews.ca/news/475...

      Looks like the Canadian government has taken his comments in the same light as I have, and they've already made a public response.

    51. Re:Hmmm by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      He isn't. January 20, 2017 happened.

    52. Re:Hmmm by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1, Troll

      Yet we are not allowed to be offended that you refer to our President as a dotard in a playpen.

      You are totally allowed. We'd think you would be used to it by now.

    53. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      toe the line

    54. Re:Hmmm by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The Canadian government is in too late mode. Way too late to do anything but make it worse. Reality is they got sucked in by the US government because the US government was pissed about the Canadian government bragging about the extra trade they picked up at US trade war expense. Make no mistake it is a US scam and the Canadians were just the idiot sheep that got it's hind legs stuck in the American herders gum boots and is now getting ridden hard. America plays the game and Canada pays the price and make no mistake, the government of China will seek to turn Canada into a lesson and warning for others, they can really fuck over Canada and the US knew this and the US also knew that they could not be targeted as effectively, they set the Canadian morons up. Still does not matter to the Government of China, it is Canada who will pay the severe long term penalty as an example to the rest of the world, China can simply not let this 'er' diplomatic opportunity pass. Hey, I'm Australian and it means much more trade for Australia and Australian extradition laws are far tighter with extremely limited opportunity for abuse. Tough luck Canada, the only rewards for stupidity are the make believe ones in movies and TV. The US picked Canada on purpose, two for one, oh yeah.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    55. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If he understood power politics he would have never made this announcement. He may have just thrown away any chance that Canada will actually agree to extradite her. This is incompetence politics.

      Nah, this is straight out of the N-Korean playbook, take hostages and use them as bargaining chips to extract concessions

      No wonder that Kim Mushroomhead and Trump get along so well

    56. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The one statement is equivalent to the other. Trump says he could pardon her -- that's a fact. He further says he might do so if it would help his negotiations with China. Chinese officials and Huawei will rightly interpret this to mean "if negotiations don't go as Trump wants, then Trump will not make use of his power to pardon." Which is the same as holding her hostage. "If I get what I want, I can set you free" is the same as saying "If I don't get what I want, I won't bother to free you, even though I could."

      This is the way America makes enemies. We've been doing this kind of thing for decades. The enemies seem to have much longer memories, I'm not sure if maybe it's something in our (America's) water system or what. Ten years from now, there will be rampant rip-offs of "intellectual property" by Chinese companies, aided and abetted by the Chinese state, and Americans will claim to not understand why. Trump is such an idiot.

    57. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      oh for fucks sake, how intentionally dense can you be.

      Every major business in China is owned by a party member's child.

      Holding a major business owner hostage (and _yes_ "just putting it out there" that the President could make the problem go away, is absolutely threatening that he may do the opposite as well), is going to get the party pushing Xi Jingpin to act directly, or any of their children may be subject to the same treatment, particularly since China has been a major trading partner with Iran for the past 40 years and you could paint any Chinese company with the same 'crimes' that Huawei faces.

      Of course, the President is just acting like the petty criminal that he is, and really has no idea about what it means for him to try and gimcrack the Chinese government. He (and your intentional density) is completly ignoring all norms of diplomacy and the long history of wars that has taught people to rely on diplomacy and not bs like this administration is pulling

    58. Re: Hmmm by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      The was pretty good, but you should have written it directly to Trump, or better yet sent it to him as an audiobook. I doubt he'll read it here. If you haven't heard, reading isn't really something he has managed to learn to do very well.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    59. Re: Hmmm by gravewax · · Score: 1

      She may be part of a trade-war between countries, but that's not political at all.

      WTF? you don't get much more political than a trade war.

    60. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wtf, is your 'Canadian disguise' posting from an iPhone?

      clever sock puppet

    61. Re: Hmmm by gravewax · · Score: 1

      It is when it is done as a political bargaining chip.

    62. Re: Hmmm by sit1963nz · · Score: 1
    63. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US is on a path of becoming a very scary and dangerous nation in terms of what it is willing to do with its friends to prove a point.

      Haven't you been paying attention to the whole Skripal thing? America and its cronies are already fucking insanely dangerous.

    64. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have been to those places too, multiple times , and if you are an example of "an american", then I think the point is successfully proven, the USA is a shit hole.

      And to be honest, I doubt you have even made it to Canada, let alone outside of your home state, you come across as too inbred.

    65. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you were really offended you wouldn't have elected a dickhead like Trudeau.

    66. Re: Hmmm by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Why? The charges against her are as real as they have been.

      Which charges would those be? The charge of a Chinese citizen in China not complying with a unilateral declaration of "sanctions" by the USA which isn't even recognized by the UN? That's not a charge, it's a farce and a pretext. US law stops 12 miles offshore. Chinese citizens can do whatever they want under Chinese law while in China.

      I can't wait for Saudis to start grabbing American tourists for extradition from Dubai for consuming alcohol, fornication and blasphemy while in the US.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    67. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Canadians followed rules she would not have been arrested. In fact, no one would even have known she was on the plane, since the manifests are only supposed to be looked at to prevent terrorism. Is she a terrorist?

    68. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the Chinese grabbed a Canadian who was part of trudeau' s trip to China some months ago , !

    69. Re:Hmmm by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      No but tell us how you really feel.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    70. Re: Hmmm by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      voting

      Hahahahahaha good one.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    71. Re:Hmmm by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between prosecution and persecution. Chinese citizens are not subject to US dictates while in China. There's this little thing called sovereignty.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    72. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It "potentially" is, as long as you are not in China or the US and you are in a position to displace the supplies from one to the other. Everyone else though suffers from it greatly, especially if you are unfortunate enough to be in China or the US.

    73. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should be sad rather than offended but you are free to be either or both. most of the world have a far worse opinion than a dotard in a playpen when they think of him and sadly he tarnishes the worlds views of Americans in general.

    74. Re:Hmmm by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As an American, I see no reason to be offended by people making statements of fact. And as an American, you should be offended that we have such an embarrassment in office who has forever diminished the stature of the US and it's image across the world and done so much harm by alienating us fro our allies wile cozying up to anti-democratic despots for the sake of profits for the Trump family

    75. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The President cannot convene a kangaroo court in the US

      why not? we have a kangaroo administration and white house already.

    76. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoosh !

    77. Re: Hmmm by KeensMustard · · Score: 1

      It is hard to fit it into his busy schedule.

    78. Re: Hmmm by reanjr · · Score: 1

      China knows it's the U.S. When it comes to funding Iran, the international system is draconian. No reasonable member of NATO would refuse such a request.

    79. Re:Hmmm by dryeo · · Score: 2

      Actually it is a Minister that can decide not to extradite due to the political shit. Forget whether it is the Minister of Justice or international Affairs. Though that step happens after the extradition hearing.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    80. Re: Hmmm by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Actually the Canadian government gets the last word in when it comes to extraditions, it's usually yes but politics is one reason they can say no.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    81. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Context is important.

      The PM can't do anything. The Minister of Justice decides.

      Further, the Minister can't decide not to extradite without cause. There are many specific conditions, all laid out in the act:

      https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-23.01/page-5.html#h-21

      On top of this, there is common law to consider, which influences *how* these legislative clauses are interpreted.

      Lastly.. bear in mind that if one reads a section and says "Ah-ha!", that one should err on the side of "No, that's not an out".

      Because this isn't TV, and fancy hand waving doesn't make anything one does OK. For example the whole "political' side of things?

      This ain't it. Huawei has been in US sights for a LONG time:

      https://www.ft.com/content/cd394398-eb78-11df-b482-00144feab49a

      The whole Iran sanction violation was just 'more of the same'.

      The US warrant isn't political. And Trump uttering blather isn't going to make it political, unless it appears that the US won't follow its own justice system.

      (EG, Trump says many things, that doesn't make them so)

    82. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's very American. That is the problem.

    83. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Arresting an innocent company executive on made-up charges for use as a bargaining chip is, though.

    84. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US only has kangaroo courts...

    85. Re:Hmmm by AxeTheMax · · Score: 1

      At worst, this person will go through the courts for the crimes they are accused of (and absolutely committed). Or are you saying that the sanctions and those who violate them should be ignored?

      It appears that you are already certain that she did what she is accused of. You must have some secret knowledge, please let everyone have the evidence.

    86. Re:Hmmm by mnemotronic · · Score: 2

      That seems like a pretty unhealthy precedent to set.

      Quite so. ...snipsnip...

      Agreed. I wonder if our new Messiah Donald has heard the phrase "What goes around comes around". I.e. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, or He that soweth iniquity shall reap calamity; And the rod of his wrath shall fail.

      And I think the failing rod has long since come to pass.

      --
      The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
    87. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey he did get Nk boy to shut his yapper.
      That was out crazy if crazy.
      I mean I'm no fan of the el Cheeto but I mean even assholes are decent at one thing.

      Getting rid of shit.

    88. Re:Hmmm by fred911 · · Score: 1, Informative

      No, it's not for criminals. It's for "enemy combatants ". Enemy combatants aren't afforded civil rights by the Constitution, their rights are afforded by conventions of war.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    89. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey lets force everyone to buy a product OR ELSE get fined.

      You don't actually know jack shit about anything do you? Just repeat what the tv tells you to. Such a good little NPC.

      There are all kinds of governments around the world who'd like to arrest any of several hundred US CEO's who's companies sell weapons to their enemies or separatist/rebel forces but these governments have resisted the temptation to do so when the opportunity to arrest one of them presented itself in order to not start some asinine tit-for-tat game of hostage taking. The US has so far played along with that non-written agreement, this is now at an end. It will be fun to hear what you have to say when the Chinese arrest some US executive for supporting the Tibetan exile government, selling weapons to Taiwan or something and then demand political concessions during trade negotiation in return for that person's release: OUTRAGE!!! AMERICAN PATRIOT CEO OF COLT ARMS COMPANY ARRESTED BY CHINA FOR SELLING WEAPONS TO TAIWAN!!!

    90. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He understands, why else do you think he lets his best friend the Saudi murderer off scot free?
      You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.
      He is just showing the Chinese he's willing to make a deal.

    91. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because fuck globalism bitch! Let the EU implode!

    92. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who was the hostage in the North Korea situation?

    93. Re: Hmmm by gtall · · Score: 1

      Nonsense, just get a bit of time on FOX. You don't even have to time it well, he's got all their time covered.

    94. Re:Hmmm by gtall · · Score: 1

      Now now, in Trump's defense, he isn't really sure just where Canada is or if it is a country. He thinks it is one of the states in the mid-west, say, just north of S. Dakota, and Trudeau is from France. I'll grant you he isn't sure where France is either, just another province in that amorphous blob called the EU.

    95. Re: Hmmm by gtall · · Score: 1

      China has responded, they stole a Canadian and raised the ante by stealing another one. Trump may think this is a one-off, but China will not treat it that way in the future.

    96. Re: Hmmm by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Which charges would those be? The charge of a Chinese citizen in China not complying with a unilateral declaration of "sanctions" by the USA which isn't even recognized by the UN? That's not a charge, it's a farce and a pretext. US law stops 12 miles offshore. Chinese citizens can do whatever they want under Chinese law while in China.

      Your UID tells me you're probably senile, so I'll try to be gentle:

      1. The UN doesn't need to recognize US law. As a general rule, the UN does not get involved with the laws of ANY country, though they will occasionally criticise ones which infringe on basic human rights.

      2. You have no clue if her crime was commited while she was in China; you're just assuming it. This may be a revelation to you, but Chinese people do actually leave China once in a while. They even travel to the USA now and then.

      3. Even if she had never left China, that doesn't mean she couldn't have broken a US law. Canada exports a lot of Canola to China. If I were to contaminate one of those shipments with ricin, I would very much be breaking Chinese law. If I were to then travel to (or through) a country which has an extradition treaty with China, the Chinese would be fully within their rights to demand that I be extradited on the charge of murder.

      I can't wait for Saudis to start grabbing American tourists for extradition from Dubai for consuming alcohol, fornication and blasphemy while in the US.

      The Saudis do not have laws against US citizens consuming alcohol while in the US. If they did then yes, they absolutely could do that; and the US would advize it's citizens not to travel to Saudi Arabia.

    97. Re: Hmmm by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      Like with the ballooning national debt with his 1% tax cuts: he wont be here.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    98. Re:Hmmm by sacrilicious · · Score: 1

      Agreed. And I just had a flight of fancy where Trump himself gets arrested and held in China, and when they make demands for his return, we just shrug and say, "whatever, you can keep him." Now THAT would make my day.

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
    99. Re: Hmmm by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Informative

      They came up with the "enemy combatant" term to specifically get around the Geneva convention.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    100. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The evidence against her is that she operated a subsidiary of Huawei disguised in a way to avoid ties to Huawei, and used that subsidiary for the problematic trade deals. Many news outlets have already reported on this.

    101. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CFO is charged with structuring a subsidiary of Huawei in a manner to purposely hide ties to the parent company and mislead investigators. Then they used this subsidiary to trade with sanctioned countries. The case against her is legitimate, there's nothing underhand going on.

    102. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The evidence against her is that she operated a subsidiary of Huawei disguised in a way to avoid ties to Huawei, and used that subsidiary for the problematic trade deals. Your statement about hostages is hyperbolic and stupid. If she didn't break the law nothing would have happened.

    103. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China are murderous, thieving lying spying scum.Go live there you FUCKING ASSHOLE PUSSY SHIT.

      The fucktard of a US president just admited he's holding her hostage to "make a better deal".

      Your ability to be a world role model is seriously tainted.. and when China does the same thign your government has just done... morons like you will be here complaining how unfair they are.

      As for "murderous"....
      you have the death penalty
      you "nuked" your own citizens
      you have stories like the My Lai Massacre in your own past
      your "industrial revolution" was powered by widespread IP theft
      https://www.bloomberg.com/opin...

      try reading for a change.

    104. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rabid AC posting about all the places they have been to.. Right..

      Still live in your parents basement?

      PS - how do you know they dont live in one of the countries they listed?

      PSS. Why is the US not number one in teh catagories they listed :
      Democratic
      healthcare
      freedom of speach
      happyness (US is number 18, in case you are curious).

      but are number one in the bad stuf:
      Gun violence
      school executions

    105. Re: Hmmm by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Cozying up to anti-democratic despots is normal business for politicians

    106. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why does independent reivews always disagree with your statement?

      The US consistantly ranks between 6 and 8 on these sort of reports. Dont let facts get in the way of a good internet flame war right?

      Here are the top 10 best countries as detailed in the 2018 U.S. News & World Report:
      Switzerland.
      Canada. ...
      Germany. ...
      United Kingdom. ...
      Japan. ...
      Sweden. ...
      Australia. ...
      United States. ...

      what "rights" are you missing in the countries they listed? Only one i can think of is teh "right to bear arms".. Do you think this relates to your massive gun violence issues?

    107. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would China not just start trumping up charges to arrest Americans?

      It's easier, or perhaps less provocative, for them to start arresting Canadians instead. China does have a bit of a history, when it comes to their international relations, of intimidating small nations and soft-soaping the large ones. Hopefully, from China's perspective, Canada blinks first and releases Ms. Meng, leaving Canada to face the ire of the US and further deflecting attention from China.

      Can't help feeling a little bit sorry for Canada in this situation.

    108. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canadian politicians have no backbone whatsoever.

    109. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you wonder why the world doesnt like you?

      your power days are weaning.. you should be considering how you will function in a world which no longer usese the US as a "world currency", and what this means to your massive debt.

      try being nice instead of always thinking you can throw your power around, as your power wont last forever. Look at some of the world superpowers of the past.
      Rome
      China..

      you think you are special, and your "sole superpower" status will last forever?

    110. Re:Hmmm by Sqweegee · · Score: 1

      China arrested two Canadians, Michael Spavor, and former diplomat Michael Kovrig for "endangering national security". There was an official notification to the Canadian consulate, but no one has had contact with them in the days since, knows where they are or what the actual case might be against them.

      So they might have started with Canadians first.

    111. Re: Hmmm by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Holding someone and then "pardoning them" is still holding someone againist their will. Trump is using presidential pardons as a netgoating tactic is a hostage situation.

      To date that is the first Impeachable offense I have heard him do. Trump is subverting rule of law for personal gain.

      The rest of it is standard campaign tricks to hide past indescretions. Stupid but not impeachable.Though if Hillary was caught making payments like that then every single Republicans would be rioting.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    112. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we should release all foreign spies and let them do whatever they want to us.

      Orange man bad!!!

    113. Re:Hmmm by Desler · · Score: 1

      Aww, I'm shedding so many crocodiles tears for you, Trumpkin snowflake.

    114. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >If you don't let your nation be destroyed by foreign invaders you are inbred

    115. Re: Hmmm by dextarz · · Score: 1

      TDS ???

    116. Re:Hmmm by cmdr_klarg · · Score: 1

      That seems like a pretty unhealthy precedent to set.

      Quite so. ...snipsnip...

      Agreed. I wonder if our new Messiah Donald has heard the phrase "What goes around comes around". I.e. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, or He that soweth iniquity shall reap calamity; And the rod of his wrath shall fail.

      And I think the failing rod has long since come to pass.

      I prefer the phrase "Do unto others; then split."

      --
      THE SOFTWARE, IT NO WORKY!!!
    117. Re: Hmmm by mi · · Score: 1

      And the rest of the work can ignore them

      Sure! If they don't want to do business with the US (and its friends) or travel here.

      and mostly are.

      Citations?

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    118. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh great, that means the ICC can begin war crime investigations of US citizens. The US has been very vocal about preventing that, as they claim it infringes on their sovereignty. How is this any different?

    119. Re: Hmmm by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      No idea what is going on in the real world?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    120. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OH BOY! I can hardly wait for China and others to demonstrate what a great idea this is!

      If I were an American Tech exec I do not think I would be making any trips overseas any time soon

      The tangerine terrorist strikes again!

    121. Re:Hmmm by omnichad · · Score: 1

      "Power politics" is an odd term to use for anti-diplomacy.

    122. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think Trump could play 1D chess.

    123. Re: Hmmm by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Or Canada should ignore Trump and go by what US prosecutors say. I'm guessing Trump thinks this declaration helps him look tough with trade negotiations but it only undermines the US position. It gives the impression that serious charges might be used a tool by the US in trade talks.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    124. Re: Hmmm by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Hey now, Trump didn't win the popular vote so he certainly doesn't speak for all of America. "Fuck you Trump" is more like it.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    125. Re:Hmmm by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Enemy combatants aren't afforded civil rights by the Constitution, their rights are afforded by conventions of war.

      And when was the last time there was a declaration of war in the US? 1942.

    126. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We stopped taking our yearly Autumn trip to Burlington last year. Granted, Vermont is probably the safest border crossing in the states, but we're gonna wait a few years to see if the US border calms down. It's no joke. (Griffintown representin')

    127. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US policy on Extraditing people.

      I'm not on the other side of the argument but shouldn't you be arguing about Canadian extradition law, not US extradition law?

    128. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well said, Well fucking said. 3

    129. Re:Hmmm by GregMmm · · Score: 1

      Please don't put your perspective (As an American, you should be offended...) on us all. Please keep an open mind and don't tell other what to do. Feel free and express your opinion, and give reasons why you feel that way. You never know you might change someones mind. What you've done is simply galvanize points of view and divide people.

      Now, the real topic. Gee, you don't think this hasn't been going on since the beginning of this country? (or any country for that matter, including Canada) What I'm personally tired of is how EVERYTHING President Trump does is WRONG/BAD. I personally don't like how he communicates, I think he's impulsive (good and bad) and is a hard personality to take for very long. But no one gives him credit for what he is good at: negotiating. This is one reason why he was put in the office in the first place. And yes I would want him on my side of the table. From the outside, this looks like a good move in my opinion. Of course I don't know all the details involved.

    130. Re: Hmmm by j-beda · · Score: 2

      Oh great, that means the ICC can begin war crime investigations of US citizens. The US has been very vocal about preventing that, as they claim it infringes on their sovereignty. How is this any different?

      Many many many countries try to do this all the time, the US is no exception beyond our large power. "Your laws do not apply in our country, but our laws apply to yours." might be hypocritical, but it is not uncommon.

    131. Re: Hmmm by mi · · Score: 0

      How is a trade war not political?

      The cited Political Incidence Test quite obviously refers to domestic politics. It was written to thwart efforts of a foreign government to pursue opposition that managed to escape their reach in the country. Indeed, the Wikipedia article on the subject clarifies the test to apply only, when the fugitive is at odds with the state that applies for his extradition on some issue connected with the political control or government of the country .

      This is why "political incidence" does not apply, and your highly-moderated follow-up — stupid.

      Putting words in Trump's mouth by printing them verbatim!!

      False. The words I objected to started with "he basically implied ..." — that's the opposite of "verbatim".

      But it could also mean "I don't care if the case is falling apart, I need the leverage! Keep her in custody!!"

      American President has no such power — and Canadians know this. Trump can pardon/release anyone, but he can not detain...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    132. Re: Hmmm by mi · · Score: 1

      WTF? you don't get much more political than a trade war.

      The Political Incidence Test is limited to domestic politics of the country requesting the extradition. It applies only, when "the fugitive is at odds with the state that applies for his extradition on some issue connected with the political control or government of the country".

      Jul pna'g V unir fzneg bccbaragf sbe bapr? Jul ner lbh nyy fhpu n fghcvq naq vtabenag ohapu?

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    133. Re:Hmmm by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Yet we are not allowed to be offended that you refer to our President as a dotard in a playpen.

      You can be offended if you wish. Although expect us to think less of you for your defense of your dotard in a playpen in chief.

    134. Re: Hmmm by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      She is not part to a political struggle — she is not even a US citizen.

      You just managed to prove to all of slashdot that you don't have the slightest clue about the topic at hand.

    135. Re: Hmmm by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      this is straight out of the N-Korean playbook

      N-Korea likely is of higher class than this. They at least worked hard to developed nuclear bombs and missiles that prove its worthiness on the negotiation table. (They have jailed some Americans, one end up dead; but as far as we have been told by the press, there was zero proof that they used these prisoners as bargaining chip in any negotiation; we may insist that's the case, but that's purely opinion, whereas we have the POTUS openly calling for such tactic here.)

    136. Re: Hmmm by mi · · Score: 1

      Rule n+1st: never reply until you've read the entire thread.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    137. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a textbook example of internet tough guy.

    138. Re:Hmmm by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      In other words, Trump has decided to put Canada into a no-win situation. Either deny the extradition request and piss off the US for not kissing Trump's ass (which Trump will use to start a whole new pissing match with Canada), or piss off China for giving her to the US to use as a petty hostage tactic.

      When Trump was voted in, I knew it couldn't possibly end well. What I couldn't have anticipated was just how much of a total clusterfuck he would cause.

    139. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [...] the Canadians were just the idiot sheep that got it's hind legs stuck in the American herders gum boots and is now getting ridden hard.

      What's with the sheep-shagging metaphors?

      Hey, I'm Australian

      Never mind.

    140. Re: Hmmm by William+Baric · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure how Trump making a deal to favor the US exports to China is "personal gain" for Trump. This tactic of taking one person hostage is even extremely insignificant compared to what the US usually does to favor its economy. Usually, the US is quite a lot more brutal. (Hint : look at the US military budget.)

    141. Re:Hmmm by hey! · · Score: 1

      They are subject to US laws when transacting business in the US, however.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    142. Re: Hmmm by drsquare · · Score: 1

      It should also advise them not to travel to Canada, as Canada is now involving itself in disputes between other countries.

    143. Re: Hmmm by drsquare · · Score: 2

      Did no-one tell him that you're supposed to get the hostage first before using them as a bargaining chip.

    144. Re:Hmmm by drsquare · · Score: 1

      "He won't interfere politically, he'll only interfere if it's beneficial politically."

      Why do AC exist again?

    145. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you should be offended that we have such an embarrassment in office who has forever diminished the stature of the US and it's image across the world

      OMG hyperbole is so in this season.

    146. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are very wrong to believe it was this terms president that has brought about decline in your nation, this has been going on for decades. In-fact, back to the 60's if I'm not mistaken.
      Your "gradual" decline has seen your world devolve into what the Chinese have been for millennia.
      That is NOT what your forefathers wanted when they drew up the declaration of independence. But it is what you have got now, this is for certain.

    147. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Furthermore to add: Trump is the straw that broke the camels back.

    148. Re:Hmmm by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      It really sucks, but we have a history of letting people go when it's politically expedient...

      And sometimes even when it isn't

      .

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    149. Re: Hmmm by Rujiel · · Score: 1

      "The warrant and arrest was legitimate" It's only "legitimate" in a "what we say goes" context, i.e. one where our invasions of Iraq were legitimate.. which is to say, totally illegitimate from the perspective of anyone but the US government. We are punishing an international corporation for doing business with a state tuat we have delegated an enemy for daring to oppose the US' own hegemony and corporations. You're right, the president isn't holding her hostage. But our country certainly is, even if she's being detained by an ally, no different than Assange.

    150. Re:Hmmm by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Wait, did she violate the Iran sanction while in the US, or are you holding a CFO responsible for the doings of a multi-national corporation and grabbing her when near the US? Be careful what you wish for, there are a lot of multinational corporations breaking any number of laws all around the world.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    151. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not the first time that Canada national interest was hurt by US. You can google âoeAgent of Influenceâ or âoeJames Watkinsâ.

    152. Re: Hmmm by quantaman · · Score: 1

      How is a trade war not political?

      The cited Political Incidence Test quite obviously refers to domestic politics. It was written to thwart efforts of a foreign government to pursue opposition that managed to escape their reach in the country. Indeed, the Wikipedia article on the subject clarifies the test to apply only, when the fugitive is at odds with the state that applies for his extradition on some issue connected with the political control or government of the country .

      The CFO for a major corporation in a Country you're in a trade war with is easily an "issue connected with the political control or government of the country". And Trump just associated her extradition with the trade war meaning the test passes. Even the original charges of violating Iranian sanctions could probably pass the test but tying it to the trade war makes it a much easier case.

      The historical focus on Domestic crimes is only because it was historically rare that you could commit a crime against Country A without living in Country A, but the Internet and Multinational corporations change that.

      False. The words I objected to started with "he basically implied ..." — that's the opposite of "verbatim".

      The implication came from his words verbatim. It's hard to take his phrase as anything other than an intent to use her as a political bargaining chip.

      But it could also mean "I don't care if the case is falling apart, I need the leverage! Keep her in custody!!"

      American President has no such power — and Canadians know this. Trump can pardon/release anyone, but he can not detain...

      He's also made it very clear that he expects the Justice Department to protect him. If he hasn't been able to stop investigations against his allies and trigger them against his enemies it's not for lack of trying. And he currently has a hand-picked un-confirmed AG, if I were subject to an investigation with major political implications I'd be very concerned about Trump's influence.

      You're missing the forest through the trees. A President is saying "I'm planning to use this prisoner as leverage in a trade war". How is that not political?

      --
      I stole this Sig
    153. Re: Hmmm by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      A lot of other companies, including US companies, broke the same sanctions but only got to pay a fine. For some reason she got arrested instead.

    154. Re: Hmmm by gravewax · · Score: 1

      under that definition she most definitely won't be extradited as it is most definitely connected with political control.

    155. Re: Hmmm by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      The ones I'm aware of all did it unintentionally. I can't think of any example of a US company intentionally violating sanctions, and actively working to try and hide it.

    156. Re:Hmmm by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Few really care what you think.

      Results are what really matter, and if the flotsam that in the end swirls down the drain includes Trump himself, that's fine with most of us.

    157. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. And you'll notice the term 'trade war' includes the word 'war'. Why not, at some point, extend the phrase "enemy combatant" to include those trying to "bring down your country by damaging its economy"?

    158. Re: Hmmm by mi · · Score: 1

      under that definition she most definitely won't be extradited as it is most definitely connected with political control.

      Extradition of a Chinese citizen to the US "connected with political control" of the US? Ok...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    159. Re: Hmmm by mi · · Score: 1

      If he hasn't been able to stop investigations against his allies and trigger them against his enemies it's not for lack of trying.

      You are confirming my point — he does not dare to even pardon his friends, which is his legal prerogative. Much less can he order anyone locked up, just as I said.

      A President is saying "I'm planning to use this prisoner as leverage in a trade war". How is that not political?

      It is political, but the politics are foreign, not domestic. For the test to pass, it has to be domestic politics.

      The way you are trying to interpret it, every prosecution is political — if the prosecutor is (or may be) eyeing running for an office, as so many do.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    160. Re: Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is federal case numb nuts. President could simply pardon her. You have an obvious case of TDS.

  2. Ugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too funny. This news is so yesterday

  3. Ah... Where will this end? by PuddleBoy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This seems like a dangerous/crazy step to take. How does this type of negotiation tactic end? (ie - has someone thought out the likely reactions and steps the Other Side is likely to take?) What's to stop other countries from following suit?

    Traditional diplomacy rested on a sort of 'gentleman's agreement'. While some of that diplomacy took forever and yielded less than we wished, at least (on the surface) it was civilized and seemed to prevent harm. Our current course could get unpleasant quickly.

    Or am I just overthinking this?

    1. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or am I just overthinking this?

      Yes.

      Countries have laws, when (suspected to be) broken, law enforcement there tends to investigate/detain/prosecute those it believes did so.

      Sometimes these cases involve different governments trying to find a solution over a particular case (or more).

      Take this one where an American national was arrested by the Chinese: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/07/23/american-student-arrested-china-has-been-freed/503511001/

      Or this involving a former American diplomat: https://www.newsweek.com/2016/08/19/mark-swidan-american-jailed-china-488457.html

      The moral of the story: aside from obey the law, is to avoid traveling to countries with extradition treaties with those who you may have committed crimes against. Assange chose poorly WRT where he fled. Snowden, smarter.

    2. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by sdinfoserv · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is Tzar Trumpkin I : Hanlon's razor in full operation
      Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

    3. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      China already responded by detaining Michael Kovrig. It's time for every American national who do business in China to get out.

    4. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      This seems like a dangerous/crazy step to take.

      Dangerous for sure. Does that make it crazy... I dunno. I would say it's too risky to do, but that doesn't make it irrational.

      has someone thought out the likely reactions and steps the Other Side is likely to take?

      Seems extremely unlikely. It's not likely Trump is keeping the people who's job it is to think about stuff like that informed, and even if they have, there doesn't seem to be any evidence he listens to their advice.

      What's to stop other countries from following suit?

      Probably a desire to avoid an escalating tit-for-tat. Absorbing this loss this one time is worth keeping the global world order (probably).

      Traditional diplomacy rested on a sort of 'gentleman's agreement'.

      This is true. And those norms are mostly not written down. Diplomacy is boring, because it's trying to prevent all the exciting things (wars - trade or regular, etc.)

      Or am I just overthinking this?

      Not in general. But, everyone's ignoring the fact that she might really be guilty.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    5. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Desler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Right, because China only arrests people who have committed crimes? They've never capriciously jailed and executed people without even needing a reason. Nope, not once.

    6. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Streetlight · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Exactly my thoughts expressed in another /. thread. How many Americans in China on business that will be detained will it take to free the woman should she be extradited to the US?

      --
      In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
    7. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Streetlight · · Score: 2

      Diplomats with diplomatic passports have immunity and cannot be arrested. Doesn't matter if they're from the US serving in China or from China serving in the US. However, diplomats can be sent back to their home country.

      --
      In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
    8. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not in general. But, everyone's ignoring the fact that she might really be guilty.

      Fuck US sanctions against Iran. America has been drooling over Iran's oil since before the Iran/Iraq war that America started. Isn't it bad enough you've sent their culture back 500 years?
      Let them live in fucking peace you goddamn puppet regime installing, democratically elected government overthrowing cunts.

    9. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > people who's job

      People who is job? That guy from the bible who was tested, you mean?

    10. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Diplomatic immunity aren't absolute. Countries revoke immunity if the diplomat committed serious crime like murder or drug smuggling. Not revoking immunity in those cases will result in a diplomatic row.

    11. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      She's accused of violating the old, global sanctions against Iran. You know, the ones the EU, Russia, etc. agreed to. Heck, I think even China agreed to them.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    12. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Assange is just an unhygienic little weasel trying to escape rape charges. His only goal in life is to become famous and spread conspiracy theories, particularly Russian ones. He's basically a greasier, lazier version of Alex Jones.

    13. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      Come on, it's only speculation. "This fuels the suspicion that the Chinese executive is held as a hostage". Even it'd be so, the gov will never admit it.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    14. Re: Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm... You know that China has already arrested a Canadian in retaliation to this right?

    15. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by sit1963nz · · Score: 1

      And how many millions of people have american made weapons killed ?

    16. Re: Ah... Where will this end? by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Journalists have probably tracked down an instance of somebody arrested in China who they can make a claim like that about. China is a big country, and there are plenty of Canadians there.

    17. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by stinerman · · Score: 2

      Yeah, that's based on international law and norms. However, if a superior orders someone to arrest a diplomat, the diplomat will be arrested. It's not like the handcuffs won't lock or something.

      We're so far off the reservation right now, I could easily see the FBI arresting a diplomat and holding them for an extended stay. We're getting pretty close to the point that there are no consequences for high level executive branch employees breaking the law.

    18. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All fair comment. However, I got to thinking that maybe they had another look at the brief and it's a stinker that's never going to get up. Playing a 'presidential pardon' for something in a deal is a lot better outcome than how it will unfold if the case turns out to be a joke and she walks.

    19. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or am I just overthinking this?

      You are, because apparently Trump can't think.

    20. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not overthinking it, you're just ignorant about what's been going on for years now.

      China has been regularly arresting and jailing western business executives for "espionage" and similar "crimes" for years.

      You just don't hear about it because it's mostly been happening to people from countries like Australia (the world's biggest supplier of iron ore and coal).

    21. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many notable foreigners (for example, the CFO of say... Apple) has China arrested and executed? Or even held hostage?

      Not to say that executing their own citizens for no reason is acceptable, which I will clearly say, it is not, but comparing arresting foreign citizens and using them as leverage is not a common practice in China. Get your comparison straight.

    22. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Newsflash, the false rape charges have been dropped. Years ago. You should read about stuff you're trying to sound intelligent about.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    23. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Overthinking? Overthinking?!

      Big Giant Orange Head has just unleashed the worst tendencies of the worst dictators. Don't get what you want from America? Just take a few hostages and negotiate from a position of strength.

      This is likely to be worse for middle powers though. BGOH has just screwed all of America's (former) allies.

      Big Giant Orange Head: A Very Stable Genius!

    24. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by dryeo · · Score: 2

      Look up the usual punishment for breaking sanctions against Iran. Fines, lots of fines aimed at the company, not arresting the CFO and threatening 10 or 20 years . This is pretty well unprecedented

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    25. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh, you don't have to take that wide steps around the subject.
      American military shoots innocent civilians rather than taking a risk.
      Every state with capital punishment have their fair share of innocent people being jailed and executed.
      Every police district with "a few bad apples" have executed people without trial. (Speculatively the reason is being black in a place without witnesses.)

    26. Re: Ah... Where will this end? by willy_me · · Score: 1

      Not just a Canadian - a former Canadian diplomat. Arrested and no reason given. Relatively safe to assume the arrest was politically motivated.

    27. Re: Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are overthinking this. Donâ(TM)t think for a second that China is above detaining diplomats arbitrarily; they have already done it to Canada. At least here we have real evidence that Huawei willingly violated sanctions.

      Trump over to return their Criminal CFO speaks to the Chinese need to save face and signals we will play just as hard, only without violating principles.

    28. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Desler · · Score: 1

      Probably less than were murdered by Mao and the PRC.

    29. Re: Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heâ(TM)s spot on about wotlrking with the russians so his real argument about a weasel being paid is on target

    30. Re:Ah... Where will this end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      America has been drooling over Iran's oil since before the Iran/Iraq war that America started.

      U.S. oil exports reached a record 3 million barrels a day last week -- a greater amount than is pumped each day by all but three OPEC countries.

  4. The Justice Dept has already said no by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    they do not use people as bargaining chips, which is hilarious since Trump as chief Executive is the head of the Justice Dept (yeah, yeah, I know it's "non-partisan", tell me another one and say hi to the Attorney General he fired for not playing ball). The real damage Trump has done was to the rule of law in America.

    Thing is, his poll numbers haven't budge an inch (according to 538, which is usually right). He's a true Demagogue. Nothing he does or says makes his base second guess him. The GOP is even trying to get him to go after Social Security and Medicare, with the assumption being that he could do it without taking any damage politically. And you know what? I think they're right. Fortunately he's said no (so far).

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by Luckyo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's honestly funny and sad to see how far the TDS goes. People like you actually deny that people are commonly used as bargaining chips by US. Even a cursory check will show you countless cases of negotiations with Talibs for example, where people were used as bargaining chips as a matter of routine. "We got this commander of yours, he will be returned in exchange for these concessions" is a norm.

      You can find similar cases in pretty much every relationship, across many states. Even small states that press heavily for rules based international order like Estonia practice this (see Kohver's case for example).

      But because Trump does it, it automatically becomes something that is outlandish and that hasn't been done. Because Trump Derangement Syndrome.

    2. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is precedent (loads of it) for exchange prisoners during a war, since the laws in play are completely different. There's also some precedent for exchanging captured spies for other captured spies, which is again a rather unique situation. There is zero precedent for releasing prisoners convicted of any type of crimes in exchange for trade agreements. If you start doing that you may as well admit that your laws mean nothing.

    3. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The GOP is even trying to get him to go after Social Security and Medicare...

      Can you believe it?! I mean, the very idea!!!!
      How dare they try to do away with the things that are drowning us in debt! How absolutely dare they!

    4. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 3, Funny

      I say we trade her to Equador for Assange and a left-handed reliever.

    5. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's honestly funny how indignant Trump supporters get for the vitriol he has earned from people, but conveniently forget how just a few years ago the same Trumpsters were blaming Obama for everything, but using far dirtier and racist tactics.
      I feel sorry for the massive head that must cause such short term amnesia.

    6. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      Regardless of whether or not you support him, wouldn't you expect this strategy from someone who wrote "The Art of the Deal" and promised to run the country like a business? I'm a little surprised his poll numbers aren't going up.

    7. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After the last 40 years of polticial crimes being ignored.
      There is no moral or legal argument that will work on trump.

      Should have policed your own ranks for so long... but didn't do shit. Now you want us to care because trump.

      Not going to happen guys.

      You still have the oportunity to clean your own house for the next time around. Get to it?

    8. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      There is precedent (loads of it) for exchange prisoners during a war, since the laws in play are completely different.

      Except that China has not taken a hostage first.

      Only a terrorist state would take the first hostage, outside of a battle field, on fake charge.

    9. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You clearly either didn't read past that first line, or your grasp of the English language is absolutely pathetic.

      Weren't you supposed to learn Farsi and fuck off?

    10. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that China has not taken a hostage first.

      Ignorance. China does this with some frequency to westerners when their nations so much as say "China has been hacking us." Go back and look at the arrests when Obama was criticizing China.

      Only a terrorist state would take the first hostage, outside of a battle field, on fake charge.

      That's China. You call yourself "hackingbear," if you know anything about infosec, you already know what China does every minute of every day. They are not trustworthy, do not play fair, and do not hold their word.

    11. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      The Dems don't want to talk about the stuff the 'emails' revealed about how their leadership runs things. They want to shriek about how awful it is that the emails were revealed. Not what was revealed.

    12. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by quantaman · · Score: 1

      Regardless of whether or not you support him, wouldn't you expect this strategy from someone who wrote "The Art of the Deal"

      Not really. I mean Trump endorsed it and it's certainly inspired by Trump but it represents a more sophisticated approach to dealmaking than he uses.

      and promised to run the country like a business? I'm a little surprised his poll numbers aren't going up.

      Successful businesses recognize that trying to exploit every loophole works in the short-term but it raises the costs of doing business and drives away partners and customers. There's a reason Trump made all his recent money from scams, Russian money launderers, and selling his image. No one legitimate wants to do business with him.

      Trying to run a country the same way is a disaster. No one wants to let the bully get away with it. Sure you win the big public battles, but the diplomats and politicians of other nations will get back at you every chance they get.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    13. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They call it a trade war because the rule of law no longer applies and the rules in play are completely different.

    14. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      The military and tax cuts for the wealthy are what are drowning us in debt. Not Medicare and social security.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    15. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He wrote nothing and other than his blatant frauds, he has never made anything loosing deals.

    16. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      China does this with some frequency to westerners

      That's purely opinions from you and your mainstream media, since there has been zero real proof that China hijacked westerners as a retaliation or for negotiation, as in the form of actual announcements or leaked documents. Whereas, in this case the POTUS openly calls for such a nasty tactic. Why don't you think that westerners violating Chinese laws unimaginable? People violate laws all the time, just like the US judicial system has also wrongful thrown thousands of innocents into jail.

      you already know what China does every minute of every day. They are not trustworthy, do not play fair, and do not hold their word.

      I don't know if China has trustworthy or not. I only know that Americans have been scammed of a trillion dollars by falsified and exaggerated claims of WMDs in Iraq. Why you likely to be deceived again and again by the cyber security + military industry complex is beyond me.

    17. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Crybaby libtard.

    18. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great! You are just a troll, invented that "hostage" line. It's not in the source nor the source's source. Denying that China hacks other countries and imprisons western citizens without charge. Yet getting attention because people here want to believe your nonsense narrative.

      Think we found an actual paid Russian Troll here. Would explain the username.

    19. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by drsquare · · Score: 1

      I'm not an American, can I assume that 'Trump Derangement Sydrome' is what Trump fanatics call anyone who doesn't like their Dear Leader, because they can only imagine that someone must be deranged not to also worship him? Personality cults are a dangerous thing, I'm glad we don't have them in our country and we're free to criticise our politicians. I also like that our justice system is free from political interference, the thought of a trial being interfered with by politicians or judges appointed by politicians is terrifying.

    20. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by drsquare · · Score: 1

      He didn't write that, it was ghost written.

    21. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your assessment is correct. They got mad that we called em Deplorables so they've come back with we're deranged. However, American Conservatives also have a huge persecution and projection complex, so when you hear something "clever" come out of their mouths, they're just a guilty dog barking. They know they're crazy and can't process that so make it look like it's the other side doing it. It is a centuries old tactic and is practiced worldwide, even in your bastion of freedom, which leads me to......

      Now, I will have to give you a small "fuck off, elitist" because your government is ran by humans, yes? Then it's corrupt. It may have a lower number of corruptness, but don't act like your shit don't stink, especially since you couldn't be brave enough to tell us which paradise you claim superiority from. You know you've got skeletons and you know the internet will dig em up.

    22. Re:The Justice Dept has already said no by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Trump Derangement Syndrome is the term that has empirical evidence, that simply outlines the observation that there's a large strata of society that utterly disconnects from observable reality when Trump is mentioned.

      I.e. "subject x without mention of Trump". Rational discussion and agreement that subject x is good or bad can be had. "Subject x, Trump supports". No rational discussion can be had, subject x must be bad because Trump supports it, regardless of any and all evidence to contrary.

      I'm not american either. Which is what makes it so easily observable. It's very clear from the outside perspective is you bother to look. It's also what makes it so annoying to talk about any subject when Trump is mentioned, because a significant portion of slashdot immediately disconnects from observable reality to take a position opposite to one Trump stated on a principle, regardless of observable reality. As they did in this case.

    23. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Justice Department reports to the White House

    24. Re: The Justice Dept has already said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup!

  5. Well, duh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Couldn't we all see this coming from..you know, space? Of course Trump will use this Exec as a bargining chip. My concern is that it'll just blow up in his face, but he won't be the one who feels the brunt of the pain from the events that unfold.

  6. Now we're getting Politico reposts... by Freshly+Exhumed · · Score: 1

    This is Slashdot, right?

    --
    I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
    1. Re:Now we're getting Politico reposts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering a fair amount of /. are still techies, and might have to travel to China for their work, yeah I'd say this is applicable to them.

      Fly in to Shanghai to check on your outsourced project, then while in the country your passport number is "mistakenly" flagged as invalid in the customs system. i.e. it would be pretty easy for an average joe to get used as ammo against Trump's bargaining chip.

    2. Re:Now we're getting Politico reposts... by Desler · · Score: 1

      Slashdot has had political posts for nearly two decades even back when Taco was running the show. Get over yourself.

    3. Re:Now we're getting Politico reposts... by Freshly+Exhumed · · Score: 1

      Slashdot has had political posts for nearly two decades even back when Taco was running the show. Get over yourself.

      You realize I said "Politico" and not "political", right? Get over yourself yourself, then.

      --
      I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
    4. Re:Now we're getting Politico reposts... by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      No it's definitely worse with Trump now. If 24 hours goes by without a story mentioning Trump then something is wrong.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    5. Re:Now we're getting Politico reposts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is Slashdot, right?

      Huawei is a major tech company, and there's also the angle of it possibly hacking telco networks, which is why many Five Eyes nations have banned equipment use.

    6. Re:Now we're getting Politico reposts... by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      No it's definitely worse with Trump now. If 24 hours goes by without a story mentioning Trump then something is wrong.

      That is because 24 hours never goes by without him doing something retarded.

    7. Re:Now we're getting Politico reposts... by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      I wasn't aware Slashdot was the go to site for political news.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  7. Promise we won't harvest her organs. by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 0

    The Chinese might think we'll treat her like they treat Western prisoners.

    1. Re: Promise we won't harvest her organs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet she is very grateful - that was actually pretty funny! I can imagine one of those wigged politicians saying that with a straight face

    2. Re:Promise we won't harvest her organs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have instances of westerners having their organs harvested by the Chinese?

  8. Yeah!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's take political hostages!! That's what MAGA is all about am I right?! Guys???

  9. but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the united states of america doesn't negotiate with terrorists....

    oh, wait. it would help if we didn't already have one in the fucking white house.

  10. Fair trial by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    After US president said she will not have a fair trial, perhaps Meng Wanzhou's lawyers have a good point for arguing against extradition in Canadian courts.

    1. Re:Fair trial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US President suggests he may use executive clemency to be MORE LENIENT on a suspected criminal, and you think this would result in an "unfair trial"?

      I'm a little uncertain where offering a lesser punishment, to drop charges, or otherwise not fully punish someone is considered unfair. Unfair to other criminals that don't have connections to powerful government families, maybe?

      Somehow, I don't think that's what you meant.

    2. Re:Fair trial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't get it. The judicial system is supposed to be independent, everyone is supposed to be judged the same way. We all know how that works in practice, but at least that's the theory, for very important reasons.

      President Cheeto has just undermined that entire idea, and suggested that what counts as "justice" is, in fact, completely arbitrary and that he decides who goes to jail and who doesn't. What he's said basically amounts to "That's an awfully nice CEO you've got there, it would be terrible if something happened to her, wouldn't it?". He's trying to behave like a movie villain, only he's considerably less intelligent.

  11. If you want your guy back... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...then you better promise to buy more of our shitty automobiles.

    1. Re:If you want your guy back... by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Huh? Who let the crazy Italian guy in here?

  12. The rest of the story you did not hear by SuperKendall · · Score: 0

    So the deal is that apparently the arrest of the executive was actually a Deep State action meant to *hurt* Trump as he negotiated with China, it was done without his knowledge and he was pissed.

    What you are seeing now is recovery action by Trump to at least make use of the situation others have put him in.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:The rest of the story you did not hear by theycallmeB · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well if he was actually pissed about this he could simply issue a pardon for the alleged crimes. Case over, "Deep State" thoroughly thwarted, tensions eased and good karma points earned with China. The use of Presidential pardons to counter over-zealous prosecution is emphatically one of the use cases in mind when the pardon power was written.

      But, no, he publicly muses about using the arrest of Ms. Meng as a bargaining chip to extract a better deal from the Chinese government. That dramatically increases the chance that extradition will be denied, since political overtones were just dropped all over the case, while burning any good will there may have been from the trade truce.

      It really isn't normal to forewarn the President about individual arrests in ordinary cases. If this had simply been left to career staff to make a legitimate case the Chinese government would have scowled some and then filed it as precedent for later use when the shoe is on the other foot. But it was very much the President's choice to make Iran related issues a priority for the Justice Department, as is his rightful prerogative, and also his choice to make this case a political football. So if he is in fact pissed about this, some of that ire needs to land on the man in the mirror.

    2. Re:The rest of the story you did not hear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So the deal is that apparently the arrest of the executive was actually a Deep State action meant to *hurt* Trump as he negotiated with China, it was done without his knowledge and he was pissed.

      How can you say it's a Deep State Action when John R. Bolton, the national security adviser, acknowledged that he knew about that arrest and that he (Bolton) told the Chinese delegation about it.

      Don't you think Bolton would have told Trump about the arrest, before he passed that info to the Chinese, back when they (Trump, Bolton, the Chinese) were in Argentina?

      Or are you implying that John R. Bolton is part of the Deep State ?

    3. Re:The rest of the story you did not hear by SuperKendall · · Score: 0

      How can you say it's a Deep State Action when John R. Bolton, the national security adviser, acknowledged that he knew about that arrest

      Perhaps you missed the part where I *SAID* Trump was turning it to his advantage?

      You plainly do not play with-dimensional chess!

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    4. Re:The rest of the story you did not hear by lactose99 · · Score: 1

      Textbook narcissism, every problem of his is one someone else created

      --
      Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
  13. Really This hasn't been NSS since day 1? by Snotnose · · Score: 1

    No Shit Sherlock, Trump is looking for leverage. He doesn't care how much damage he causes, as long as he gets what he wants and someone else has to pay for the damage.

  14. Fake president Trump by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    Mandatory clarification.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    1. Re:Fake president Trump by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      You're confusing Trump with that faketimcook guy.

      (and nobody here can figure out how you could possibly do so!)

  15. Works both ways ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... I hope China takes hostages in retaliation. The new term this presidential cycle is, "Chickenshit Politics."

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re: Works both ways ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China already does this. You think North Korea grab westerners for no reason? Nope. They do Xi's bidding.

    2. Re:Works both ways ... by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      They already took a Canadian former diplomat.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    3. Re:Works both ways ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It appears they already have.

    4. Re:Works both ways ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Trump doesn't care about Canada.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    5. Re:Works both ways ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Well played. China needs to do more. This shit has to stop. Trudeau needs to tell Trump to piss off.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  16. Huawei is a criminal organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huawei should be prosecuted and they belatedly just steal technology. I used to work for Cisco. Our binary files for 2600 series switches would run fine on their devices! If thatâ(TM)s not outright theft, I donâ(TM)t know what is. Time for the chickens to come home to roost!

    1. Re:Huawei is a criminal organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      All modern corporations are criminal. There is no one that is "more criminal" than any other.

    2. Re: Huawei is a criminal organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Relatively few western companies steal or are criminal. Most Chinese companies are.

    3. Re:Huawei is a criminal organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That'd be because is basically just another unix shell, yeah?

  17. a psychopaths need to BRAG, by wolfheart111 · · Score: 1

    is their downfall. What a good scheme... until u mention it. ROFL.... post it in a tweet... lol

    --
    [($)]
  18. Hmmm . . . What about houses by Gnostic+Teflon · · Score: 0

    Hmm . . . What about the Pacific Northwest & California's long-term house values? Maybe the wealth management funds should take a look at the future of major west coast home builders. With fickle leadership, what's in it for the rich Chinese expats/second home owners?

  19. Intermixing Domains Bigly by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    He's been mixing trade, military, law, and personal business ever since he got into office. And you wonder why the turnover is so high.

    1. Re:Intermixing Domains Bigly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's behaving like a powerdrunk, weak mobster. I fear it will end as well.

  20. Re:Hmmm - CRIMINAL. SPY. IP THIEF. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if you treat women like they are human you might not die a virgin.

  21. A new Ransom Gambit by kimgkimg · · Score: 2

    Wow, how long before we have US executives traveling abroad being held in foreign prisons for similar ransom?

    1. Re: A new Ransom Gambit by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Already happens( North Korea, aq, Isis ), but not at great nations. Now he is opening all of us to this. W did the same shit with his Iraqi invasion, but now...

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re: A new Ransom Gambit by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      And Obama with his drone attacks? Or were you on vacation for eight years?

    3. Re: A new Ransom Gambit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://cleantechnica.com/2018... Who are the worst 5 countries holding the world for ransom?
      Yes it's the USA...

    4. Re: A new Ransom Gambit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any example/name of a US executive that been held in prison for ransom?

      It's not that I think you are a liar, I just don't trust a random comment on internet.

    5. Re: A new Ransom Gambit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump thinks he can override the courts? Aren't you supposed to be all about freedom and rule of law?
      Just look at his handling of the ZTE case as well...
      You are more Communist than China, and China is more Capitalist than the US.

    6. Re: A new Ransom Gambit by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Iran hostages come very quickly to mind.
      https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/...
      https://www.chinalawblog.com/2016/11/foreign-executives-arrested-in-china-please-do-not-look-away.html
      https://www-m.cnn.com/2013/07/04/world/detained-americans-fast-facts/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F
      https://www.independent.co.uk/...
      https://wset.com/news/nation-w...


      Sadly, it goes on ALL the time. Normally, the west does NOT do this. We are normally above it. Sadly, W, and now trump, are showing that America's morals are plummeting. It needs to stop.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    7. Re: A new Ransom Gambit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that the new "BUTT HER EMAAAAAILS!"? Who got held ransom because of an Obama drone strike? You guys are pathetically Deplorable.

    8. Re: A new Ransom Gambit by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Are you the whataboutism elf? Double down, dood.

    9. Re: A new Ransom Gambit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/1...

      "A number of financial institutions, including JP Morgan, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and international banks, were all judged guilty and paid enormous fines for violating sanctions in the last several years," Roach told CNBC's Eunice Yoon on Friday. "None of their executives, of course, went to jail — why is Huawei being singled out for the sanctions violations?"

      Because it's only bad when other countries do it...

  22. His base claims to love the rule of law by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    their poll numbers say otherwise. Can you just imagine the shit storm if Obama pulled this crap? Take everything Trump's done for the last 2 years, put it down on paper, CTL-R / Trump / Obama and run a poll and see what kind of numbers you get.

    My point is his base has stopped thinking and they're just feeling. Trump feels _good_. He tells them what they want to hear. He gives them simple answers to complex problems. It's classic demagoguery just like Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Mussolini did. Trump's not violent like them, he just like attention. So he'll fade into the background when his time's up.

    Trump's paving the way for a real dictator. We, and most definately Trump's base (who've been crying about FEMA death camps since Obama got elected) should be freaking the heck out about that. Trouble is they mostly get their media from propaganda outfits (Fox News, Alex Jones, and now even NRA TV, go watch it, it's creepy as hell). So they can't see the very thing they fear most creeping up on them...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:His base claims to love the rule of law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're already sitting at +5, so you'll just have to settle for a "thumbs-up" from another student of human nature.

      And while, personally, I think your governmental structures are robust enough that "Trump's paving the way for a real dictator" is little more than hyperbole at this point we should be freaking out about the co-opting of politics by a very small and very unrepresentative portion of our nations' citizenry.

    2. Re: His base claims to love the rule of law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why did Obama kill US citizens with drones in other countries? Or the wedding party in Yemen? Trump hasn't ordered a single killing of a US citizen in this way. Only dictators kill people extrajudicially.

      Before you call me a Breitbart acolyte, let's take it from a more legitimate source:

      https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/world/asia/killing-of-americans-deepens-debate-over-proper-use-of-drone-strikes.html

    3. Re: His base claims to love the rule of law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why did Obama kill US citizens with drones in other countries? Or the wedding party in Yemen? Trump hasn't ordered a single killing of a US citizen in this way.

      You know that US citizen Obama ordered killed, Anwar al-Awlaki, Trump ordered a raid that killed his 8-year old daughter. Look, I agree Obama did some unethical things, but Trump seems to do unethical things daily and with great pleasure. Obama at least had the grace to look like he didn't enjoy it.

    4. Re:His base claims to love the rule of law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My point is his base has stopped thinking and they're just feeling.

      Projection is the keystone of the modern left.

    5. Re:His base claims to love the rule of law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's PRECISELY what a projecting Republitard would say... That's y'alls bag right there, baby. Own it.

    6. Re:His base claims to love the rule of law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a rich thing to hear in the middle of the "War on Christmas" from the people who throw a fit if stores try to pander to Jews and Pagans at the same time as Christians.

      (Doubly so after 50 years of "Get Commercialism out of Christmas" specials)

  23. Great. The idiot strikes again by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    What he is doing is stepping off moral boxes while making targets of all Americans. W did this with his invasion of Iraq. Trump is really a total jackass.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Great. The idiot strikes again by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      And, again, Obama did it with his drone attacks. But let's just leap over that whole era and back to Bush.

  24. With POWs and Spies there's equivalence by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    We're exchanging like for like and both sides are (debatably) in the wrong. What makes this screwed up is we're not longer exchanging like for like. We're trading a persons life for money. It's mob tactics. Which, well, isn't really a surprise. Trump's had mob ties forever.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  25. Before you take up the narrative about "precedents by melted · · Score: 2

    Consider this: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/1.... If he is using a high-level figurehead as a bargaining chip to force China to let those folks out, more power to him.

  26. What a mess by dskoll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Canada should absolutely determine that the US extradition request was made in bad faith. Except... Now the Chinese have gone and disappeared a couple of Canadian citizens, which means we'll look like chumps if we give in to China. Thanks for involving us in your stupid pissing match, US and China.

    1. Re:What a mess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump had nothing to do with Meng's legitimate crimes or her arrest. He just wants to use this as leverage, which is perfectly precedented (in western countries), but usually you wait until AFTER the extradition to unveil negotiation, and you make it clear that you're simply "working closely with [country] on the matter". Trump is just ham fisted and foot-in-mouth about it, as always.
      Now in China, N. Korea, and other countries run by actual evil dictators, they just sit back, relax and oh wait a second? Are some of your people missing? That's unfortunate, that you'll never see them again. What a shame... Anyway I do hope you release that person we want back.

      Small difference?

  27. Such a sad day for our democracies by untelp · · Score: 2

    To a Chinese colleague telling me a few days ago that this whole thing must of course be instructed/manipulated by US executive power, I answered I did not believe so because unlike China and other authoritarian regimes, the ground of our western democracies is that justice is not a tool of the executive power but independent.
    As an example a meaningful symbolic action in the beginning of the French revolution was to free the prisoners from the King's prison La Bastille.
    Apparently I was wrong. Is America going to let Trump undermine democracy until there is nothing left of it?

    1. Re:Such a sad day for our democracies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I did not believe so because unlike China and other authoritarian regimes, the ground of our western democracies is that justice is not a tool of the executive power but independent.

      Buddha bless your beautiful, naive (14 year old??) soul.

    2. Re:Such a sad day for our democracies by untelp · · Score: 1

      Namaste Anonymous coward.
      Although maybe not as many as they were before, there are some older souls in this world not yet fully overcome by the ocean of cynicism. They need to find inspiration for a better world elsewhere than from the US though nowadays.

  28. Really? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    "President Trump To Use Huawei CFO As a Bargaining Chip"

    What could possibly go wrong?

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  29. Re:Hmmm - CRIMINAL. SPY. IP THIEF. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This incel will die a virgin. He produces pheromones that are actually repulsive to women. His hand will be his only companion, forever.

  30. breaking news: Huawei CFO flown back to china by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    via helicopter

  31. What would Hillary have done? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hillary has more tact but that was why she didn't win, people wanted these practices to be discussed out in the open rather than to be made to feel good on taking the moral high ground while she did the dirty work.

  32. extradition and double criminality principle by FeatherBoa · · Score: 2

    A fundamental underpinning of extradition proceedings is the âoedouble criminalityâ principle. If Canada is to extradite, there must be an offence charged in the U.S. that corresponds to one in Canadian law. While Canada has followed the UN with sanctions on Iran as regards nuclear and missile technology, I'm not aware that UN sanctions ever covered the trade in telecoms. Since in Canada sanctions like this emanate from the UN, I doubt there is a matching crime here. There is also the Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act that spells out that American sanctions cannot operate in Canada -- otherwise 10,000s of Canadians who have visited Cuba could be rounded up.

  33. Was my first thought. by reanjr · · Score: 1

    When it was first announced, I immediately wondered if it was related to the trade war. You don't hear about these types of prosecutions often, so it seemed like there had to be some greater political machination going on.

  34. 45 days! by aberglas · · Score: 1

    That is a long time to keep someone on spec.

    It should be something like 7 days. If there is not enough evidence to extradite then the arrest warrant should never have been issued.

    Within civilized countries there are definite limits on how long Police can hold someone without charge, and they are nothing like 45 days!

    1. Re:45 days! by mlyle · · Score: 1

      It's normal for extradition treaties. It makes sense, because you need to present lots of evidence in a radically different jurisdiction. Exact same timeframe applies to Canada's requests of the US, etc.

    2. Re:45 days! by omnichad · · Score: 1

      It's likely that they've had all the required information ready for a very long time and were holding it until it is politically useful. Waiting out the statutory limit of 45 days is probably not being done in good faith, and violates the intent of the limit.

  35. THE PRESIDENT IS A DOTARD IN A PLAYPEN, FACT. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    THE PRESIDENT IS A DOTARD IN A PLAYPEN, FACT. Don't like it? Die in prison a traitor with him and his bitch beta traitor sons and bauble whore daughter.

    The most embarrassingly stupid family in America, the Drumpfts.

  36. Trump is an unbelievable moron by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    He's playing right into China's talking points about it being a political arrest.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    1. Re:Trump is an unbelievable moron by keithdowsett · · Score: 1

      Haven't you heard about Trump's new foreign policy, "Make America grate again".

      So he's throwing out treaties left right and center, and trashing America's reputation abroad. It sure is grating with America's allies.

  37. Trade war not political LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're a funny little Ivan aren't you.

  38. Not true, so ignorant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is SO much non-sense. First off, this investigation and the criminal charges brought against the CFO were run by the Justice department for MONTHS.
    Second, This company has stated that it WILL COMMIT CRIMES. It STATED that it will commit crimes and pay the financial penalties as it is more profitable than abiding by the law.

    People who limit their input to liberal media are truly fucking stupid and don't understand. If this were a company were incorporated in the free world, AKA the free world it would be out of business as NO free world country allows a company to operate against the laws of the world. But since this company is based in an atheist and amoral country that has no hope nor belief that their is a difference between good and evil they will do what ever they want so long as it is what they want.

  39. The only senile is you, dearie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    USA can say they don't want chinese to sell to Iran, but that means fuck all. Simple enough anyone who isn't sucking drumpf mushroom cock would get it.

  40. So who will the diplimat get to help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is only the idea that your diplomats will be arrested that stop this, but since trump has shown he doesn't care and will happily arrest them anyway, why should they care?

    Kidnap and chop up the new ambassador to the UN. After all, since Koshoggi, it's fair game to chop up "enemies of the people", uh, sorry, journalists.

  41. We don't hear it because it's fake news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MEanwhile CEOs HAVE been arrested for flyovers of the USA because they broke US laws while in Europe. they've arrested foreigners for "crimes" they made up. And have done for decades. But merkins won't hear that because the news dare not explain it like this because the fee fees of merkins will be hurt and they may decide to watch the more ego stroking fox.

  42. Most western companies steal/criminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But the USA is worse, the US government helps their companies steal and protect their criminals, while demanding that "criminals" from other countries be tried as with US law. USA far worse than China.

  43. honest by sad_ · · Score: 1

    at least he's honest about it, sure we knew all along but that doesn't mean they will admit to it.

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
  44. He's a constant liar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He may be correct this time, but he is still a constant liar. Take anything he says with a grain of salt. If he provides a link, take two grains, it probably contradicts what he claims.

  45. The old global sanctions ended, fuckwit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's as valid as claiming that the USA is violating UK's ownership of the USA because it used to be part of the British Empire. Fucking moron.

  46. Ouch by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    That is a nasty slash to the throat of America's credibility, and the blood sprays onto Canada.

    How long until Trump starts calling himself the Generalissimo and wearing ridiculous outfits?

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    1. Re:Ouch by Freischutz · · Score: 1

      That is a nasty slash to the throat of America's credibility, and the blood sprays onto Canada.

      How long until Trump starts calling himself the Generalissimo and wearing ridiculous outfits?

      Feast your eyes: https://imincorrigible.files.w...

  47. Re:Hmmm - CRIMINAL. SPY. IP THIEF. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Based on the rational argument you have posted, it sounds like you have some critical evidence to the case.

    Instead of ranting on the internet, have you considered contacting the US intelligence office and hading over your evidence?

  48. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  49. Braindead by Socguy · · Score: 1

    The trouble is that by saying things like this, Trump hands her defense team a legitimate argument that this extradition request is, at least in part, politically motivated. Judges do not like this kind of thing and it just increases the chances that she may not be extradited to the USA regardless of the case against her there.

    In the bigger picture, countries that form treaties (like the one that Canada arrested this lady under on behalf of the USA), are generally like-minded. If one side starts abusing these treaties then they're apt to fall apart. This makes things harder for everyone.

    Finally, this kind of shoot-from-the-hip, talk has real consequences in lives. In retaliation for this arrest Canada has already had two of its citizens detained in China for the thinly veiled purpose of putting pressure on the Canadian government. Regardless of the truth of Trumps statements, the simple fact that he's making them is making life difficult not just for Americans but for her allies as well.

  50. Too Late. BC Gov Already Did! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And all they got was $10,000,00cdn & two houses worth $12,500,000. Fucking anateur-hour shit.. bitch is already in Hong Kong.

  51. But Obama! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I recall YEARS of FUD about this, Obama and Julian whats-his-name. No proof, no connection to the US, but oh god, the sky was falling.

    Let's do this right . . . Trump should go ahead and do it . . . then if it's bad it's Obama's fault.

  52. Nothing +5 insightful about that post. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right wing nutjobs said the same damn thing about Obama.

    Anyone paying attention knows full well you are driven by emotions and mouthing-off.

  53. Re:Before you take up the narrative about "precede by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    That's good, more power too him. What else can we do to show that the US is no different than the 3rd world shitholes they spend so much time criticising?

  54. Standard policy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    China should not negotiate with terrorists

  55. Re:Before you take up the narrative about "precede by melted · · Score: 1

    What are you proposing?

  56. Your point is easy to prove by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SO PROVIDE THE WHOLE QUOTE! Show us that qualifying phrase, the missing fragment, that dangling participle that got whacked by CNN. DOOOOO IT! Show us the corruption.

    You. Fucking. Can't.

  57. Seems quite reasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For a Ferengi, that is.

    BTW, I hope you understand that is not a compliment...

  58. Enforcing US law overseas by alw53 · · Score: 1

    Let's invade Britain and arrest the Queen for driving on the wrong side of the road.

    1. Re:Enforcing US law overseas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm with it. And slap willie while were at it.

  59. They're still making nukes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He didn't get him to stop making nukes though. But the bitching, omg at least there's no bitching about it. Suck that mushroom cock harder.

  60. Be a GOOD Republican by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not garbz and you know it cause he'd never proposed some shit like this:
    A good Republican would propose that the rule of law is the rule of law so they need to be punished. Nothing should be done. China is a sovereign nation and those persons were in their country so they run by their rules. If only those foreign invaders would have learned the culture and acclimated like a good immigrant should, but they refused and brought all their crime and disease and religious hatred with them. If they and you don't like it, then STAY THE FUCK OUT.

    You have no counter argument to this that doesn't make you sound like a bleeding heart liberal. Reality is liberal.

    1. Re:Be a GOOD Republican by melted · · Score: 1

      How do you know they were lawfully detained? Why are you suggesting that protections available under US citizenship according to US Code should not be offered to US citizens detained in China? This IS rule of law.

  61. This Right Here is Trumpist Excuse Making by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The US warrant isn't political. And Trump uttering blather isn't going to make it political, ..."

    I'm not sure if you are an arrogant American, or an arrogant Trumpista. One way or another you are arrogant and self-centered.

    You don't get to unilaterally decide what is political! It's just not up to you. The Chinese have already decided that it is political and that makes it so. Trump piling on merely confirms what we already knew. We can "blather on" about the impartiality of the justice system all we want, it doesn't change reality.

    Know what I heard the other day? The Chinese have noticed that America won't let it's own citizens be charged by the World Court, but meanwhile attempt to exert American justice systems out of American jurisdiction. Viewed this way, Chinese citizens are in jeopardy of legal action by both World Court and American jurisprudence.

    Now do you get it? America has a double standard and other countries have noticed. As long as America was responsibly led and had noble goals, people were willing to let that go, for the most part. Now America is neither responsibly led nor does it have noble goals.