Canadian Constitution Foundation
A lawyer for the Canadian Constitution Foundation, Janani Shanmuganathan, cross examines Justice Minister David Lametti about his belief that the definition of national security threat under the Emergencies Act is broader than the definition under the CSIS Act, which is incorporated by reference into the Emergencies Act.
Ms. Shanmuganathan puts to Mr Lametti excerpt from Hansard that show that the Emergencies Act definition is the CSIS definition. Lawyers for the government of Canada try to stop the line of questioning, but Minister Lametti pops in and gives an opinion on a paragraph from the Hansard excerpt. This allows the line of questioning to continue. Little does Minister Lametti know, the next paragraph from Hansard undermines him.
Lamotte you are a disgrace resign
Lamotte you are a disgrace resign
who is white and who is colored here, as usual we see the truly white privileged and psychopathic power hungry patriarchal old white men running our government and calling freedom lovers, misogynistic, racists. Something smells fishy here and that is psychopaths in our government projecting their internal world and twist reality. Shame on our government.
So are we’re allowed to interpret the law to suit our needs now?
I changed the definition but I can't talk about it because of client privilege. This is the same guy who wanted to give SNC Lavalin a pass on wide spread corruption. Why does Rouleau not see that the CSIS and EMA use the same definition? I am surprised that Lameti spoke up to state they need to use the definition used in the CSIS act for the EMA and yet he tries to say that the gov't can use a different definition. Only a Trudeau Liberal can make sense of that.
Lametti seethes arrogance and corruption.
Lying Lametti
CSIS was not "inputting" information. They did their analysis and they were the only one that could determine if the conditions were or were not met. And they said no, that they weren't met to call the Emergencies Act into play.
Lots of talk to say nothing
You’re a superstar lawyer
Lies and never an answer🤮
Since when, on God's green earth, does this commission inquiry have anything at all…ANYTHING AT ALL, to do with one's interpretation of comfort? TELL THE TRUTH LAMETTI!!!
Your point of view… tough but fair, will use that as a pleb and see how far we can go, ho ho ho.
The west needs to leave this s##t-show
They all belong in jail
Turdy didn’t like seeing that giant F##k Trudeau banner on that semi-trailer parked in front of Parliament every morning when he went into “work” .Emergency Act required,let’s move that semi boys!
I am not a lawyer yet I can understand the points you are making. So why is it the Justice Minister, Commissioner and government lawyer do not? It appears they do understand very well that agreement severely undermines the government’s rationale to invoke the EA. Justice Minister is so arrogant and condescending. Excellent work CCF!
Yes, CSiS has it own classified. Sec 2 (1a,1b) sec 5,6 (abc). Also sec 15
Loonmetti the loon
never trust a liebral or their survrents
I don't know if you're on the right track here. I think you need to focus on the definition of an emergency in the Emergencies Act, not the CSIS Act. You better be sure that the judge thinks it unreasonable to have two definitions.
He was hand picked after Judy pushed back because he agreed to play ball. He has 0 credibility as is a tool of the government and also generally a TOOL as well. This inquiry is a charade, a sham to placate the sheeple. He should search ebay for NOS chins, because his chin is too small.
Why is this lady aloud to interrupt lawyers and witnesses, she is not the judge. And when the judge removed Miller, I think this woman interrupting is totally inappropriate. Escort her out, security.
BINGO CCF
Last resort? Where was mention of addressing the truckers concerns about mandates?
After all, that was the point of this protest. Shouldn’t negotiations be considered before discussing tanks on the streets, even with the looming threat that the bouncy castles imposed?
The best my lady. BAHAHAHA nicely done!
Their disregard for CSIS as a critical requirement, while potentially a valid concern, remains moot as the EMA is a parliamentary act which require parliamentary action/debate/approval in order to change and cannot, should not and must not be changed by a GIC based upon their own interpretation and desired outcome. Their actions were unconstitutional, undemocratic and unethical under a fair/free system in particular given the decision making process remains cloaked under Cabinet Confidence and solicitor-client privilege.
I think the government of canada represents the people of Canada. So if he represents the government then solicitor client privilege should not exclude the people. The government is supposed to be the people.
LOCK THESE PIG'S UP 💯🇨🇦