I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.
Yes. Everyone knows I'm referring to the two Michaels.
The party that is rogue in this whole story is China. Even if the conduct of the US authorities here is/was suspect the retaliatory arrests is how the Mafia operates. I am not a fan of the way the US and Canada behaved here but at the end of the day for the most part Meng Wanzhou was not locked up, she had a luxury wait while the slow wheels of justice grind. It's almost certain there was some funny business from the Huawei side here as well since naturally they wouldn't care less about violating US sanctions.
The law and the rule of law in free and democratic countries can be abused. But it's still way ahead of the other option.
I am not an American. So that's one off your combo.
I was also not silent or defensive of the specific action of arresting her. I thought that was a mistake by Canada and said so at the time. I still think so. I'm not denying anything?
I still stand by what I said though about the rogue actor here being China. That is a big picture statement. It means that even if the actions of the US or Canada were wrong, they were within what we consider the rule of law. China's retaliatory actions were not. I'll take the rule of law over a dictatorship any day with all its problems.
Not only Americans are complicit through their silence, denials, and defens
for example, i've referenced a very famous poem by a Chinese liberal:
> If I am doomed to die in war in this life, then let me be a ghost under the precision-guided bombs of the United States. - Written on the 15th day of the Iraq War.
back to the topic
> It means that even if the actions of the US or Canada were wrong, they were within what we consider the rule of law.
first, discovered foreign spys are assets just prepared for situations like this, if 'my' spys were arrested by 'your' authority, 'I' will arrest yours and make a deal to exchange, except in this situation Meng is not a spy but a important business women
second, if it's wrong, but it's within the rule of law, doesn't it mean the rule of law is 'wrong'?
and, what do you think about hunter biden and trump donald, are they guilty? is it 'the rule of law' that they are free of judgment? or did the rule of law judged they are not guilty?
Everyone spies on everyone but when an American businessman is arrested the UK or when a Spanish businessman is arrested in Australia, something that I'll bet you has happened many times, generally speaking the US will not grab British "spies" and throw them in the dungeon pending the release of their businessman.
I will concede this was a very high profile extradition request but if let's say Sir James Dyson is arrested on charges of fraud in the US the UK is not going to grab CIA spies and throw them in the dungeon. If he did commit fraud in the US he would likely go to jail. Maybe he'll serve his jail term in the UK. Maybe he'll be pardoned through some diplomacy.
What your describing is something that would have been a practice of sorts during the cold war between Russia and the US. Essentially something you do when you're at war.
EDIT: I'm not familiar enough with the Hunter Biden case but possibly something fishy was going on (e.g. this laptop suddenly appearing). Trump is... Trump. The rule of law is not perfect, people in power can get away with things the rest of us can't, but nothing is perfect. In place without the rule of law many people just disappear and you have no recourse and people in power get away with a lot more.
Yes. Everyone knows I'm referring to the two Michaels.
The party that is rogue in this whole story is China. Even if the conduct of the US authorities here is/was suspect the retaliatory arrests is how the Mafia operates. I am not a fan of the way the US and Canada behaved here but at the end of the day for the most part Meng Wanzhou was not locked up, she had a luxury wait while the slow wheels of justice grind. It's almost certain there was some funny business from the Huawei side here as well since naturally they wouldn't care less about violating US sanctions.
The law and the rule of law in free and democratic countries can be abused. But it's still way ahead of the other option.