Teresa Wright, Hannah Bell, Bush Dumville and many others must recall the email I sent them Tuesday, Jul 16, 2019 at 12:01 PM
David Amos<david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 2:38 PM |
| To: premier <premier@gov.pe.ca>, D17@liberalpei.ca, leader@greenparty.pe.ca, info@ndppei.ca, info@greenparty.pe.ca, waynebiggar@gmail.com, heath.macdonald@parl.gc.ca, Robert.Morrissey@parl.gc.ca, Sean.Casey@parl.gc.ca, Lawrence.MacAulay@parl.gc.ca | |
| Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, D1@liberalpei.ca, D2@liberalpei.ca, D3@liberalpei.ca, admin@islandparty.ca, Angieb_3@live.ca, adina.nault@greenparty.pe.ca, laverne.macinnis@greenparty.pe.ca, boyd.leard@greenparty.pe.ca, michele.beaton@greenparty.pe.ca, D14@liberalpei.ca | |
https://davidraymondamos3. Sunday, 26 March 2023 Teresa Wright, Hannah Bell, Bush Dumville and many others must recall the email I sent them Tuesday, Jul 16, 2019 at 12:01 PM https://twitter.com/ | |
Replying to @ReporterTeresa
Ep. #84: PEI goes to the polls
Teresa Wright and Stuart Neatby chat about the launch of PEI's election campaign.
The Fat Lady ain't sung yet
10 Views
Teresa Wright, Hannah Bell, Bush Dumville and many others must recall the email I sent them Tuesday, Jul 16, 2019 at 12:01 PM
Legions of people on the Island cannot deny that I told them to check it out as soon as King dropped the writ #cdnpoli
Replying to@DavidRaymondAm1 @ReporterTeresa and 4 others
David Raymond Amos
Now playing on Tik Tok… 👅
Follow & create @TheRollingStones
https://rollingstones.lnk.to/TikTokYT Welcome to Goats Head Soup 2020. Featuring three unheard tracks, sitting alongside an all-new stereo mix of the original 1973 album, plus demos, outtakes, live performances & more.
Angela Barton Good Luck Little Lady This tune is a lot older than you but I truly believe it applies
The Rolling Stones - Angie - OFFICIAL PROMO (Version 1)
2.81M subscribers
We just talked correct Mr McNeilly?
David Amos<motomaniac333@gmail.com> | Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 12:01 PM |
| To: gamcneillyMLA@assembly.pe.ca, "sean.casey" <sean.casey@parl.gc.ca>, GordD14@liberalpei.ca, premier <premier@gov.pe.ca>, "wayne.easter" <wayne.easter@parl.gc.ca>, premier <premier@gov.ab.ca>, premier <premier@gnb.ca>, premier <premier@ontario.ca>, Office of the Premier <scott.moe@gov.sk.ca>, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, "Katie.Telford" <Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, "Paul.Shuttle" <Paul.Shuttle@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, "Ian.Shugart" <Ian.Shugart@pco-bcp.gc.ca>, "Roger.Brown" <Roger.Brown@fredericton.ca>, "Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, "David.Coon" <David.Coon@gnb.ca> | |
| Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, sfine <sfine@globeandmail.com>, "sylvie.gadoury" <sylvie.gadoury@radio-canada.ca>, "Chuck.Thompson" <Chuck.Thompson@cbc.ca>, "charles.murray" <charles.murray@gnb.ca> | |
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 06:37:20 -0400 Subject: Re: For the record Mr Dumville is the only person to call me back from PEI since 2007 To: info@pronpei.vote, sthorne@gov.pe.ca, psmith@charlottetown.ca, jbrown@gov.pe.ca, samyers@assembly.pe.ca, omcrane@assembly.pe.ca, jsjaylward@assembly.pe.ca, crlavie@assembly.pe.ca, twright@theguardian.pe.ca, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, MulcaT <MulcaT@parl.gc.ca>, leader <leader@greenparty.ca>, "Jacques.Poitras" <Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca>, "andrew.scheer" <andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca>, Hebell@assembly.pe.ca, premier <premier@gov.pe.ca> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com> <Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Jack.Keir" <Jack.Keir@gnb.ca>, "Dominic.Cardy" <Dominic.Cardy@gnb.ca> On 5/12/18, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Hannah Bell <Hebell@assembly.pe.ca> > Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 11:16:00 -0300 > Subject: Re: Fwd: Hey folks remember the emails I sent in in 2014 when > Ghiz quit? If not scroll down > To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> > > Thank you for your email. As I was elected in November 2017 I did not > receive emails from 2014. I have scrolled through your mail and am not > clear what you are asking, however. I understand you have also called > the office - please note that we are happy to hear from the public but > that does not extend to threats. > > best regards > > > Hannah Bell > MLA District 11 Charlottetown-Parkdale > > Office of the Third Party / Bureau du troisième parti > Legislative Assembly of Prince Edward Island / Assemblée législative de > l'Île-du-Prince-Édouard > > www.thirdpartypei.ca > Tel/Tél. : 902-620-3977 > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: "Gallant, Premier Brian (PO/CPM)" <Brian.Gallant@gnb.ca> > Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 17:05:07 +0000 > Subject: RE: So what does Premier Gallant and Minister Doucet et al > think of my lawsuit? How about David Coon and his blogging buddy > Chucky joking about being illegally barred from parliamentary property > To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> > > Thank you for writing to the Premier of New Brunswick. > Please be assured that your email has been received, will be reviewed, > and a response will be forthcoming. > Once again, thank you for taking the time to write. > > Merci d'avoir communiqué avec le premier ministre du Nouveau-Brunswick. > Soyez assuré que votre courriel a bien été reçu, qu'il sera examiné > et qu'une réponse vous sera acheminée. > Merci encore d'avoir pris de temps de nous écrire. > > Sincerely, / Sincèrement, > Mallory Fowler > Correspondence Manager / Gestionnaire de la correspondance > Office of the Premier / Cabinet du premier ministre > > > On 1/19/18, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com >>> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400 >>> Subject: Attn Integrity Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C., >>> To: coi@gnb.ca >>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com >>> >>> Good Day Sir >>> >>> After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office again and managed >>> to speak to one of your staff for the first time >>> >>> Please find attached the documents I promised to send to the lady who >>> answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not after the Sgt >>> at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal Tanker >>> Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only document. >>> >>> These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal Court that I >>> suggested that you study closely. >>> >>> This is the docket in Federal Court >>> >>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj. >>> >>> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings >>> >>> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/ >>> >>> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/ >>> >>> April 3rd, 2017 >>> >>> https://archive.org/details/ >>> >>> >>> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal >>> >>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj. >>> >>> >>> The only hearing thus far >>> >>> May 24th, 2017 >>> >>> https://archive.org/details/ >>> >>> >>> This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity >>> >>> Date: 20151223 >>> >>> Docket: T-1557-15 >>> >>> Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015 >>> >>> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell >>> >>> BETWEEN: >>> >>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS >>> >>> Plaintiff >>> >>> and >>> >>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN >>> >>> Defendant >>> >>> ORDER >>> >>> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on >>> December 14, 2015) >>> >>> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way of motion pursuant to >>> the Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an Order made on November >>> 12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of Claim >>> in its entirety. >>> >>> At the outset of the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention a >>> letter dated September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then >>> capacity as Past President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian >>> Bar Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen Quigg, >>> (now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that letter >>> he stated: >>> >>> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you check the >>> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm including you. >>> You are your brother’s keeper. >>> >>> Frank McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former >>> colleague of mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to >>> expressing an intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number of >>> people in his Motion Record who he appears to contend may be witnesses >>> or potential parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to >>> me personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime >>> Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former >>> Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba Court of >>> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob Moore; >>> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau; former >>> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former Staff >>> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick Court >>> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and, retired >>> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian Mounted >>> Police. >>> >>> In the circumstances, given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my >>> personal capacity and my past and present relationship with many >>> potential witnesses and/or potential parties to the litigation, I am >>> of the view there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias should I >>> hear this motion. See Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in >>> Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et al, >>> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the applicable test regarding >>> allegations of bias. In the circumstances, although neither party has >>> requested I recuse myself, I consider it appropriate that I do so. >>> >>> >>> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator of >>> the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion. There >>> is no order as to costs. >>> >>> “B. Richard Bell” >>> Judge >>> >>> >>> Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment >>> already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had sent >>> to your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006. >>> >>> I noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court >>> Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the >>> bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my >>> lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada? >>> >>> "FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the >>> most >>> >>> >>> ---------- Original message ---------- >>> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca >>> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM >>> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My complaint against the CROWN in >>> Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to >>> submit a motion for a publication ban on my complaint trust that you >>> dudes are way past too late >>> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com >>> >>> Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre à >>> lalanthier@hotmail.com >>> >>> Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel à >>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca >>> >>> Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at >>> lalanthier@hotmail.com >>> >>> To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to >>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> Merci , >>> >>> >>> http://davidraymondamos3. >>> >>> >>> 83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more war >>> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to >>> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over >>> five years after he began his bragging: >>> >>> January 13, 2015 >>> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate >>> >>> December 8, 2014 >>> Why Canada Stood Tall! >>> >>> Friday, October 3, 2014 >>> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes And >>> Stupid Justin Trudeau >>> >>> Canada’s and Canadians free ride is over. Canada can no longer hide >>> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s skirts. >>> >>> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister Jean Chretien >>> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the second campaign >>> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against or contrary to >>> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers that were >>> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation. There were >>> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of the dearth >>> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces for >>> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last minute” >>> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its mind. >>> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would not >>> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a >>> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins to >>> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it was >>> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq. But >>> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister Chretien’s >>> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean Chretien’s >>> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic, >>> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI Battle >>> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway >>> campaign of 2006. >>> >>> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell you now, is that then >>> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien committed, and deployed the >>> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war” without the advice, consent, >>> support, or vote of the Canadian Parliament. >>> >>> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant, uneducated, and babbling >>> chattering classes are too addled to understand is the deployment of >>> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is known by planners >>> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the same as a >>> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war” make. >>> >>> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan cousins have >>> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian nation to war. >>> That has been recently clearly articulated to the Canadian public by >>> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can do is >>> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a “vote of >>> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien Government >>> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in this >>> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding a >>> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East. >>> >>> President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror >>> attacks in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state” >>> Afghanistan was the source of logistical support, command and control, >>> and training for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The >>> initial defeat, and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital and >>> >>> P.S. Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions of >>> the latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC have >>> had my files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical. >>> Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me. >>> >>> Subject: >>> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35 -0400 >>> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)" MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca >>> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com >>> >>> January 30, 2007 >>> >>> WITHOUT PREJUDICE >>> >>> Mr. David Amos >>> >>> Dear Mr. Amos: >>> >>> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December 29, >>> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the RCMP. >>> >>> Because of the nature of the allegations made in your message, I have >>> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to Assistant Commissioner Steve >>> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in Fredericton. >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> >>> Honourable Michael B. Murphy >>> Minister of Health >>> >>> CM/cb >>> >>> >>> Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote: >>> >>> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500 >>> From: "Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca >>> To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net, MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca, >>> nada.sarkis@gnb.ca, wally.stiles@gnb.ca, dwatch@web.net, >>> motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com >>> CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com, riding@chuckstrahl.com,John. >>> Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, >>> "Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca >>> Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has >>> forgotten me but the crooks within the RCMP have not >>> >>> Dear Mr. Amos, >>> >>> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on days off >>> over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest assured I >>> was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your concerns. >>> >>> As your attachment sent today refers from Premier Graham, our position >>> is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs do not process >>> testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are referred to the >>> Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can provide these >>> services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise in this >>> instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be done. >>> >>> As for your other concerns regarding the US Government, false >>> imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is clear >>> that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in Canada >>> the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of Detachment >>> and policing in Petitcodiac, NB. >>> >>> It was indeed an interesting and informative conversation we had on >>> December 23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future endeavors. >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> >>> Warren McBeath, Cpl. >>> GRC Caledonia RCMP >>> Traffic Services NCO >>> Ph: (506) 387-2222 >>> Fax: (506) 387-4622 >>> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca >>> >>> >>> >>> Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C., >>> Office of the Integrity Commissioner >>> Edgecombe House, 736 King Street >>> Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B 5H1 >>> tel.: 506-457-7890 >>> fax: 506-444-5224 >>> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com >>> Date: Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:35 AM >>> Subject: RE My complaint against the CROWN in Federal Court Attn David >>> Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to submit a motion for a >>> publication ban on my complaint trust that you dudes are way past too >>> late >>> To: David.Hansen@justice.gc.ca, peter.mackay@justice.gc.ca >>> peacock.kurt@telegraphjournal. >>> david.akin@sunmedia.ca, robert.frater@justice.gc.ca, >>> paul.riley@ppsc-sppc.gc.ca, >>> greg@gregdelbigio.com, joyce.dewitt-vanoosten@gov.bc. >>> joan.barrett@ontario.ca, jean-vincent.lacroix@gouv.qc. >>> peter.rogers@mcinnescooper.com >>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, gopublic@cbc.ca, >>> Whistleblower@ctv.ca >>> >>> https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc- >>> >>> http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/ >>> >>> http://thedavidamosrant. >>> >>> I repeat what the Hell do I do with the Yankee wiretapes taps sell >>> them on Ebay or listen to them and argue them with you dudes in >>> Feferal Court? >>> >>> Petey Baby loses all parliamentary privelges in less than a month but >>> he still supposed to be an ethical officer of the Court CORRECT? >>> >>> Veritas Vincit >>> David Raymond Amos >>> 902 800 0369 >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com >>> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 14:10:14 -0400 >>> Subject: Yo Mr Bauer say hey to your client Obama and his buddies in >>> the USDOJ for me will ya? >>> To: RBauer@perkinscoie.com, sshimshak@paulweiss.com, >>> cspada@lswlaw.com, msmith@svlaw.com, bginsberg@pattonboggs.com, >>> gregory.craig@skadden.com, pm@pm.gc.ca, bob.paulson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, >>> bob.rae@rogers.blackberry.net, MulcaT@parl.gc.ca, leader@greenparty.ca >>> Cc: alevine@cooley.com, david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, >>> michael.rothfeld@wsj.com, remery@ecbalaw.com >>> >>> QSLS Politics >>> By Location Visit Detail >>> Visit 29,419 >>> Domain Name usdoj.gov ? (U.S. Government) >>> IP Address 149.101.1.# (US Dept of Justice) >>> ISP US Dept of Justice >>> Location Continent : North America >>> Country : United States (Facts) >>> State : District of Columbia >>> City : Washington >>> Lat/Long : 38.9097, -77.0231 (Map) >>> Language English (U.S.) en-us >>> Operating System Microsoft WinXP >>> Browser Internet Explorer 8.0 >>> Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET >>> CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; InfoPath.2; >>> DI60SP1001) >>> Javascript version 1.3 >>> Monitor Resolution : 1024 x 768 >>> Color Depth : 32 bits >>> Time of Visit Nov 17 2012 6:33:08 pm >>> Last Page View Nov 17 2012 6:33:08 pm >>> Visit Length 0 seconds >>> Page Views 1 >>> Referring URL http://www.google.co... >>> Search Engine google.com >>> Search Words david amos bernie madoff >>> Visit Entry Page http://qslspolitics....-wendy- >>> Visit Exit Page http://qslspolitics....-wendy- >>> Out Click >>> Time Zone UTC-5:00 >>> Visitor's Time Nov 17 2012 12:33:08 pm >>> Visit Number 29,419 >>> >>> http://qslspolitics.blogspot. >>> >>> >>> Could ya tell I am investigating your pension plan bigtime? Its >>> because no member of the RCMP I have ever encountered has earned it yet >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com >>> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:36:04 -0400 >>> Subject: This is a brief as I can make my concerns Randy >>> To: randyedmunds@gov.nl.ca >>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com >>> >>> In a nutshell my concerns about the actions of the Investment Industry >>> affect the interests of every person in every district of every >>> country not just the USA and Canada. I was offering to help you with >>> Emera because my work with them and Danny Williams is well known and >>> some of it is over eight years old and in the PUBLIC Record. >>> >>> All you have to do is stand in the Legislature and ask the MInister of >>> Justice why I have been invited to sue Newfoundland by the >>> Conservatives >>> >>> >>> Obviously I am the guy the USDOJ and the SEC would not name who is the >>> link to Madoff and Putnam Investments >>> >>> Here is why >>> >>> http://banking.senate.gov/ >>> >>> Notice the transcripts and webcasts of the hearing of the US Senate >>> Banking Commitee are still missing? Mr Emory should at least notice >>> Eliot Spitzer and the Dates around November 20th, 2003 in the >>> following file >>> >>> http://www.checktheevidence. >>> >>> http://occupywallst.org/users/ >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: "Hansen, David" David.Hansen@justice.gc.ca >>> Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 19:28:44 +0000 >>> Subject: RE: I just called again Mr Hansen >>> To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com >>> >>> Hello Mr. Amos, >>> >>> I manage the Justice Canada civil litigation section in the Atlantic >>> region. We are only responsible for litigating existing civil >>> litigation files in which the Attorney General of Canada is a named >>> defendant or plaintiff. If you are a plaintiff or defendant in an >>> existing civil litigation matter in the Atlantic region in which >>> Attorney General of Canada is a named defendant or plaintiff please >>> provide the court file number, the names of the parties in the action >>> and your question. I am not the appropriate contact for other >>> matters. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> David A. Hansen >>> Regional Director | Directeur régional >>> General Counsel |Avocat général >>> Civil Litigation and Advisory | Contentieux des affaires civiles et >>> services de consultation >>> Department of Justice | Ministère de la Justice >>> Suite 1400 – Duke Tower | Pièce 1400 – Tour Duke >>> 5251 Duke Street | 5251 rue Duke >>> Halifax, Nova Scotia | Halifax, Nouvelle- Écosse >>> B3J 1P3 >>> david.hansen@justice.gc.ca >>> Telephone | Téléphone (902) 426-3261 / Facsimile | Télécopieur (902) >>> 426-2329 >>> This e-mail is confidential and may be protected by solicitor-client >>> privilege. Unauthorized distribution or disclosure is prohibited. If >>> you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us and delete >>> this entire e-mail. >>> Before printing think about the Environment >>> Thinking Green, please do not print this e-mail unless necessary. >>> Pensez vert, svp imprimez que si nécessaire. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com >>>> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 02:23:24 -0300 >>>> Subject: ATTN FBI Special Agent Richard Deslauriers Have you talked to >>>> your buddies Fred Wyshak and Brian Kelly about the wiretap tapes YET? >>>> To: boston@ic.fbi.gov, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov, >>>> bob.paulson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, >>>> Brian.Kelly@usdoj.gov, us.marshals@usdoj.gov, Fred.Wyshak@usdoj.gov, >>>> jcarney@carneybassil.com, bbachrach@bachrachlaw.net >>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, birgittaj@althingi.is, >>>> shmurphy@globe.com, redicecreations@gmail.com >>>> >>>> FBI Boston >>>> One Center Plaza >>>> Suite 600 >>>> Boston, MA 02108 >>>> Phone: (617) 742-5533 >>>> Fax: (617) 223-6327 >>>> E-mail: Boston@ic.fbi.gov >>>> >>>> Hours >>>> Although we operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week, our normal >>>> "walk-in" business hours are from 8:15 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday >>>> through Friday. If you need to speak with a FBI representative at any >>>> time other than during normal business hours, please telephone our >>>> office at (617) 742-5533. >>>> >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com >>>> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 01:20:20 -0300 >>>> Subject: Yo Fred Wyshak and Brian Kelly your buddy Whitey's trial is >>>> finally underway now correct? What the hell do I do with the wiretap >>>> tapes Sell them on Ebay? >>>> To: Brian.Kelly@usdoj.gov, us.marshals@usdoj.gov, >>>> Fred.Wyshak@usdoj.gov, jcarney@carneybassil.com, >>>> bbachrach@bachrachlaw.net, wolfheartlodge@live.com, shmurphy@globe.com, >>>> >> jonathan.albano@bingham.com, mvalencia@globe.com >>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, oldmaison@yahoo.com, >>>> PATRICK.MURPHY@dhs.gov, rounappletree@aol.com >>>> >>>> http://www.bostonglobe.com/ >>>> >>>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ >>>> >>>> As the CBC etc yap about Yankee wiretaps and whistleblowers I must ask >>>> them the obvious question AIN'T THEY FORGETTING SOMETHING???? >>>> >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch? >>>> >>>> What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served upon the >>>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament baseball >>>> cards? >>>> >>>> http://www.archive.org/ >>>> >>>> http://archive.org/details/ >>>> >>>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/ >>>> >>>> http://www.archive.org/ >>>> >>>> http://archive.org/details/ >>>> >>>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006 >>>> Senator Arlen Specter >>>> United States Senate >>>> Committee on the Judiciary >>>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building >>>> Washington, DC 20510 >>>> >>>> Dear Mr. Specter: >>>> >>>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man >>>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the matters >>>> raised in the attached letter. >>>> >>>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire tap >>>> tapes. >>>> >>>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this previously. >>>> >>>> Very truly yours, >>>> Barry A. Bachrach >>>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403 >>>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003 >>>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "David Amos" david.raymond.amos@gmail.com >>>> To: "Rob Talach" rtalach@ledroitbeckett.com >>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 10:59 PM >>>> Subject: Re: Attn Robert Talach and I should talk ASAP about my suing >>>> the Catholic Church Trust that Bastarache knows why >>>> >>>> The date stamp on about page 134 of this old file of mine should mean >>>> a lot to you >>>> >>>> http://www.checktheevidence. >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com >>>> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:37:08 -0400 >>>> Subject: To Hell with the KILLER COP Gilles Moreau What say you NOW >>>> Bernadine Chapman?? >>>> To: Gilles.Moreau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, phil.giles@statcan.ca, >>>> maritme_malaise@yahoo.ca, Jennifer.Nixon@ps-sp.gc.ca, >>>> bartman.heidi@psic-ispc.gc.ca, Yves.J.Marineau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca >>>> david.paradiso@erc-cee.gc.ca, desaulniea@smtp.gc.ca, >>>> denise.brennan@tbs-sct.gc.ca, anne.murtha@vac-acc.gc.ca, >>>> webo@xplornet.com, julie.dickson@osfi-bsif.gc.ca, >>>> rod.giles@osfi-bsif.gc.ca, flaherty.j@parl.gc.ca, toewsv1@parl.gc.ca, >>>> Nycole.Turmel@parl.gc.ca,Cleme >>>> >> oig@sec.gov, whistleblower@finra.org, whistle@fsa.gov.uk, >>>> david@fairwhistleblower.ca >>>> Cc: j.kroes@interpol.int, david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, >>>> bernadine.chapman@rcmp-grc.gc. >>>> Juanita.Peddle@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com, >>>> Wayne.Lang@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Robert.Trevors@gnb.ca, >>>> ian.fahie@rcmp-grc.gc.ca> >>>> >>>> http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/nb/ >>>> >>>> http://nb.rcmpvet.ca/ >>>> >>>> From: Gilles Moreau Gilles.Moreau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca >>>> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 08:03:22 -0500 >>>> Subject: Re: Lets ee if the really nasty Newfy Lawyer Danny Boy >>>> Millions will explain this email to you or your boss Vic Toews EH >>>> Constable Peddle??? >>>> To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com >>>> >>>> Please cease and desist from using my name in your emails. >>>> >>>> Gilles Moreau, Chief Superintendent, CHRP and ACC >>>> Director General >>>> HR Transformation >>>> 73 Leikin Drive, M5-2-502 >>>> Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0R2 >>>> >>>> Tel 613-843-6039 >>>> Cel 613-818-6947 >>>> >>>> Gilles Moreau, surintendant principal, CRHA et ACC >>>> Directeur général de la Transformation des ressources humaines >>>> 73 Leikin, pièce M5-2-502 >>>> Ottawa, ON K1A 0R2 >>>> >>>> tél 613-843-6039 >>>> cel 613-818-6947 >>>> gilles.moreau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca >>>> >> > > > http://davidraymondamos3. > > Sunday, 19 November 2017 > Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And Publishes > It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter Before > The Supreme Court > > https://decisions.fct-cf.gc. > > > Federal Court of Appeal Decisions > > Amos v. Canada > Court (s) Database > > Federal Court of Appeal Decisions > Date > > 2017-10-30 > Neutral citation > > 2017 FCA 213 > File numbers > > A-48-16 > Date: 20171030 > > Docket: A-48-16 > Citation: 2017 FCA 213 > CORAM: > > WEBB J.A. > NEAR J.A. > GLEASON J.A. > > > BETWEEN: > DAVID RAYMOND AMOS > Respondent on the cross-appeal > (and formally Appellant) > and > HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN > Appellant on the cross-appeal > (and formerly Respondent) > Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017. > Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2017. > REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: > > THE COURT > > > > Date: 20171030 > > Docket: A-48-16 > Citation: 2017 FCA 213 > CORAM: > > WEBB J.A. > NEAR J.A. > GLEASON J.A. > > > BETWEEN: > DAVID RAYMOND AMOS > Respondent on the cross-appeal > (and formally Appellant) > and > HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN > Appellant on the cross-appeal > (and formerly Respondent) > REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT > > I. Introduction > > [1] On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr. Amos) > filed a 53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court > against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11 million > in damages and a public apology from the Prime Minister and Provincial > Premiers for being illegally barred from accessing parliamentary > properties and seeks a declaration from the Minister of Public Safety > that the Canadian Government will no longer allow the Royal Canadian > Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass him and his clan > (Claim at para. 96). > > [2] On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of a > motion brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court (the > Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to > amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim > disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally vexatious, > and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment (the > Prothontary’s Order). > > > [3] On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC 93), by way of Mr. > Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge of the Federal > Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck all of Mr. > Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for damages > for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature in > 2004 (the Federal Court Judgment). > > > [4] Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the > Federal Court Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of Status > Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19, 2016. > As such, the only matter before this Court is the Crown’s > cross-appeal. > > > II. Preliminary Matter > > [5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law in > relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March > 6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two of > the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal. > This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he believed > had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with this > Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict with > several judges but did not name those judges. > > [6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have to > identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because he > had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed > with the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal > Court of Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed in > the Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on > subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985, > c. F-7: > > > 5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her > office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the > jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court of > Appeal. > […] > > 5(4) Les juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour > d’appel fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que > les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale. > […] > 5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by virtue of > that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all the > jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court. > > 5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges de la > Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les > juges de la Cour fédérale. > > > [7] However, these subsections only provide that the > judges of the Federal Court are also judges of this Court (and vice > versa). It does not mean that there is only one court. If the Federal > Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no need for this > section. > [8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act provide that: > 3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court > — Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal Court of > Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It is > continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and > for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and as > a superior court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction. > > 3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la Cour d’appel > fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale » en > français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est maintenue > à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté du > Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et > continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en > matière civile et pénale. > 4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court > — Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court” in > English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an > additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for > the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior > court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction. > > 4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada, appelée la Section de > première instance de la Cour fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « > Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en anglais. Elle est > maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et > d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit > canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant > compétence en matière civile et pénale. > > > [9] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create > two separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal Court > (section 4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the Federal > Court were automatically also filed in this Court, then there would no > need for the parties to prepare and file appeal books as required by > Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in relation > to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court. The requirement to > file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an appeal from a > decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only documents > that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of that > appeal book. > > > [10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact and law filed on > March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court, in which > Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have a > conflict in any matter related to him. > > > [11] On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion > before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming or denying the > conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of the Federal > Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction noting that if > Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of the Federal > Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Court. > Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of this > cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before this > Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal Court > will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion brought > before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed in > relation to that motion are not part of the record of this Court. > > > [12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos alleged that > the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest and > submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of a > conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was also > afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the conflict > that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in his > view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages of > documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized the > documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the particular > judge and then, immediately following that biography, by including > copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim that > such judge had a conflict. > > > [13] The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice Webb is > that before he was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in > 2006, he was a partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and before > that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted that he > had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law and > therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was a partner > of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was > personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which Mr. > Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that he > was a member of such firm. > > > [14] During his oral submissions at the hearing of his > appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice Webb, > focused on dealings between himself and a particular lawyer at > Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr. Amos at > the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with this > particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with this > lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings were > after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the Tax > Court of Canada over 10 years ago. > > > [15] The documents that he submitted in relation to the > alleged conflict for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings between > Byron Prior and the St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office of > Patterson Palmer, which is not in the same province where Justice Webb > practiced law. The only document that indicates any dealing between > Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of Stephen May > who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer. The > affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a number of e-mails > that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also included a > letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is John > Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of Patterson > Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed to > “John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen Street, > Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to a > possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer. > [16] Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice Webb > was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In Wewaykum > Indian Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R. > 259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of a > judge is to be determined based on whether there is a reasonable > apprehension of bias: > 60 In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as the > criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by de > Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National Energy > Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is the > reasonable apprehension of bias: > … the apprehension of bias must be a reasonable one, held by > reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to the > question and obtaining thereon the required information. In the words > of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an informed person, > viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and having thought > the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more likely > than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously or > unconsciously, would not decide fairly." > > [17] The issue to be determined is whether an informed > person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and having > thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations > give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this Court has > previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that judges will > administer justice impartially” and this presumption will not be > rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins v. > Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins]. See > also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151 D.L.R. > (4th) 193). > > [18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd. v. > Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the Supreme > Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed the > particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing a > case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was > involved in the litigation that was now before that judge. The Ontario > Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not disqualified if the > judge had no involvement with the person or the matter when he was a > lawyer. The Ontario Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for > determining whether a judge is disqualified are different from the > rules to determine whether a lawyer has a conflict: > 27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary to a > finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case over > which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no involvement, > as here, it cannot be said that the judge is disqualified. > > > 28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr. Patterson been > asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his appointment to > the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him from > taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of the > defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a trial > judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by the > Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v. Bayfield > Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58, that > there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a judge > and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances." > > > 29 It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an > inconsistency in application of rules can be explained by the > different contexts and in particular, the strong presumption of > judicial impartiality that applies in the context of disqualification > of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of allegations of > conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's previous > involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by Sopinka J. > in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249 (S.C.C.), > for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a disqualifying > interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a conclusory > statement from the lawyer that he or she had no confidential > information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is the > opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial judge. > His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case and > had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face value > unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para. 19. > > > 30 That brings me then to consider the particular circumstances > of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find a > disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there are > two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not to > recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties accept, > that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm and > that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage of > time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85: > To us, one significant factor stands out, and must inform > the perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of this > involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That factor is > the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on > circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the decision-making, > or that occurred within a short time prior to the decision-making. > 31 There are other factors that inform the issue. The Wilson > Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by the time of > trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J. had > been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship with > his former firm for a considerable period of time. > > > 32 In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter > realistically would conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly > and impartially with this case. I take this view principally because > of the long passage of time and the trial judge's lack of involvement > in or knowledge of the case when the Wilson Walker firm had carriage. > In these circumstances it cannot be reasonably contended that the > trial judge could not remain impartial in the case. The mere fact that > his name appears on the letterhead of some correspondence from over a > decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to believe that he would > either consciously or unconsciously favour his former firm's former > client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would throw > off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour a > client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six years > earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case involving > events from over a decade ago. > (emphasis added) > > [19] Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter > involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer or > Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made it > clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for the > alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member of > Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough for > Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos with > Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would have > had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when he > was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of any > involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos had > with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself is > sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since > Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would > also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in Justice > Webb hearing this appeal. > > [20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man. R. > (2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no > reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member of > the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no involvement > with the accused while he was a lawyer with that firm. > > [21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000] 4 > F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be a > reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was a > lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who > was before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as > Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on any files involving Mr. > Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law. > > [22] Mr. Amos also included with his submissions a CD. He > stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that there is a “true copy > of an American police surveillance wiretap entitled 139” on this CD. > He has also indicated that he has “provided a true copy of the CD > entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law enforcement authorities > and not one of the police forces or officers of the court are willing > to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an “American > police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American law > enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests, a > conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy. > > [23] As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable > apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for him > to recuse himself. > > [24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past professional > experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in deciding > the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice Near > confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in the > Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself. > > [25] Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr. > Amos’ allegations against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges > that she is incapable of hearing this appeal because he says he wrote > a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien in 2004. At that time, > both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney were partners in the law firm > Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question, which is rude and angry, > begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me suing > you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that the letter > was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by Mr. > Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no reason > for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question does > not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. > > > III. Issue > > [26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as follows: Did the > Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the Claim > in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that Mr. > Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick > legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action? > > IV. Analysis > > A. Standard of Review > > [27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside the > Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review to > be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and decisions > made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in Hospira > Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA 215, > 402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel of > this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with that > articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235 > [Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the Federal > Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by a > prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of the > case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal if > the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and overriding > error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and > law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere with > a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary order > if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error in > determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law > (Hospira at paras. 82-83). > > [28] In the case at bar, the Judge substituted his own > assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This Court > must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the Judge > erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing to > interfere. > > > B. Did the Judge err in interfering with the > Prothonotary’s Order? > > [29] The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following > paragraphs from the Crown’s submissions as the basis for striking the > Claim in its entirety without leave to amend: > > 17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff > addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four > of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in 2006 > in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of > the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right of > the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province > or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged > does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court. > (…) > > > 21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant > provide no details as to the individuals involved or the location of > the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the > Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible to > determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to advance. > A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to > only speculate as to the true and/or intended cause of action. At > best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized as: he > suspects he is barred from the House of Commons. > [footnotes omitted]. > > > [30] The Judge determined that he could not strike the Claim > on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge noted > that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the > liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the actors > who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 > included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In considering > the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge identified > paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as it > identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting as > Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment at > para. 27). > > > [31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support a > cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and > identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v. Canada, > 2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111: > > > [13] As in both the cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC > 69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must > determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of claim pleads each > element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public office: > > a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and unlawful > conduct in his or her capacity as public officer; > > b) The public officer must have been aware both that his or her > conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff; and > > c) There must be an element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public > officer and knowledge of harm alone is insufficient to conclude that a > public officer acted in bad faith or dishonestly. > Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28 > (Federal Court Judgment at para. 28). > > [32] The Judge determined that Mr. Amos disclosed sufficient > material facts to meet the elements of the tort of misfeasance in > public office because the actors, who barred him from the New > Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so for > “political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29). > > [33] This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of pleadings > in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321 > D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt: > > …When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to > assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or > negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did steal”. > “The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is called > upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making bald, > conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an abuse > of process… > > To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in public office > requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in carrying > out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the public > officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or her > office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations is > mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization of > allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of > a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.” > (at paras. 34-35, citations omitted). > > [34] Applying the Housen standard of review to the > Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge interfered > absent a legal or palpable and overriding error. > > [35] The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim > disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the > basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material facts to > ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which addresses > the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the RCMP officer > engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or her > conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in bad > faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred from > the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious reasons, > these allegations are not particularized and are directed against > non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Legislative > Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As such, > the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the RCMP > barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of > supporting a cause of action. > > [36] In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of bare > allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it discloses no > reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal > Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside the > Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further, we > find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend. > The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that > amendment could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26). > > V. Conclusion > [37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the Crown’s > cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court Judgment, > dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order, dated > November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety > without leave to amend. > "Wyman W. Webb" > J.A. > "David G. Near" > J.A. > "Mary J.L. Gleason" > J.A. > > > > FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL > NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD > > A CROSS-APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT DATED > JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET NUMBER T-1557-15. > DOCKET: > > A-48-16 > > > > STYLE OF CAUSE: > > DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN > > > > PLACE OF HEARING: > > Fredericton, > New Brunswick > > DATE OF HEARING: > > May 24, 2017 > > REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: > > WEBB J.A. > NEAR J.A. > GLEASON J.A. > > DATED: > > October 30, 2017 > > > > > > APPEARANCES: > David Raymond Amos > > > For The Appellant / respondent on cross-appeal > (on his own behalf) > > Jan Jensen > > > For The Respondent / appELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL > > SOLICITORS OF RECORD: > Nathalie G. Drouin > Deputy Attorney General of Canada > > For The Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL > > > > >> From: magicJack <voicemail@magicjack.com> >> Subject: New VM (2) - 0:26 minutes in your magicJack mailbox from >> 9026287810 >> To: "DAVID AMOS" >> Date: Friday, May 11, 2018, 8:32 PM >> Dear magicJack User: >> >> You received a new 0:26 minutes voicemail message, on >> Friday, May 11, 2018 at 08:32:48 PM in mailbox 9028000369 >> from 9026287810. >> > > > http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/ > > > EXCLUSIVE: Bush Dumville breaks his silence on decision to leave the > Liberal caucus > Teresa Wright (Teresa.Wright@theguardian.pe. > Published: Feb 07 at 5:57 a.m. > > It was 10 a.m. on Wednesday morning last week when Bush Dumville > walked into the Shaw Building unannounced, holding his letter of > resignation from the Liberal caucus, ready to hand-deliver it to > Premier Wade MacLauchlan. > > “Give him hell,” the commissionaire said to Dumville as he let him > through security. > > Little did he know that Dumville planned to do just that. > > Dumville finally broke his silence Tuesday in an exclusive interview > with the Guardian. The West Royalty-Springvale MLA detailed the full > account of events that led to his decision to resign from the > government side of the house and sit as an independent last week. > > Dumville has been an MLA for over 10 years, beginning his term in > office under former premier Robert Ghiz in 2007 and re-elected in 2011 > and in 2015. > > But, it was the lead-up to the 2015 provincial election that proved to > be the beginning of the end of Dumville’s stomach for remaining part > of the current Liberal team. > > RELATED: MLA Bush Dumville resigns from Liberal caucus to sit as > independent > > In January 2015, he learned he would be challenged for the nomination > in his district – something that raised many eyebrows at the time. > Dumville and his supporters were convinced the party was supporting > his challenger, Windsor Wight. > > So, Dumville says he decided to visit MacLauchlan at his home. At that > time, it was still unclear what riding MacLauchlan would run in. In > fact, he still hadn’t been officially declared leader of the Liberal > Party, although he was the only candidate. > > The two went for a walk with MacLauchlan’s dogs, when Dumville says he > offered to step aside and let MacLauchlan run in his district. > MacLauchlan told him it was a generous offer, he had other plans. > > “Then a few minutes later, we were up a little way around the corner > and he said, ‘By the way Bush, you will not be in cabinet.” > > He took this as a blow. > > TIMELINE: > > Jan. 2015 – Dumville says he was told by Wade MacLauchlan he would > never be in cabinet > > March 6, 2015 – Dumville wins contested nomination in District 15 > West Royalty-Springvale > > April 6, 2015 – Provincial election is called > > May 4, 2015 – Liberals win third term government with Wade > MacLauchlan as new premier > > Feb. 2017 – Dumville tells the premier he will resign from caucus > but reconsiders > > Jan. 25, 2018 – Founding meeting for new District 15 Brackley-Hunter > River > > Jan. 31, 2018 – Dumville resigns from Liberal caucus > > “How would it make you feel if a premier told you wouldn’t be in > cabinet before you were nominated? That’s when something snapped > inside. Then I was running, and I was running hard.” > > He spent the next two months working his district to win the Liberal > nomination, which he did on March 6, 2015, by 11 votes. He says 600 > people attended this meeting, of which 255 people voted. > > One month later, MacLauchlan dropped the election writ, and Dumville > was back on doorsteps to fight for re-election to the legislature, > which he also accomplished. > > Now he was a member of MacLauchlan’s caucus, where he says he never > felt welcome. > > His first dustup with the premier’s office came when he became one of > three Liberal MLAs who ran for the role of House Speaker. > > After he was quoted in a Guardian article about the race, Dumville > says MacLauchlan’s chief of staff, Robert Vessey, chastised him for > speaking to the press “without permission.” > > “He said, ‘You’ve got a bad attitude,’ ” Dumville recalls, saying > Vessey told him he had better go see the premier. > > Dumville refused and told Vessey he would speak to the press anytime he > wanted. > > BUSH DUMVILLE AT A GLANCE > > S. Forrest (Bush) Dumville was elected to the legislature in 2007. > He was re-elected in 2011 and again in 2015. > > Prior to entering politics, Dumville was a local businessman, > community volunteer and a member of the RCMP. He has served for over > 30 years with the Rotary Club of Charlottetown. He opened the Burger > King restaurants in Charlottetown and Summerside. > > He is past Master of the P.E.I. Masonic Order and a member of the > Island Shrine Club and Philae Temple of Nova Scotia and P.E.I. > > > “After that, here’s Bush, sitting over there in the corner, being > requested to hold the party line, vote on the party line, chair > committees with never a thank you, nothing,” he said. > > “I felt like a junkyard dog chained up in the corner… They just wanted > me to be docile. They needed me to work and to vote their way.” > > He was unhappy, but he stayed put, waiting for the right time to make a > move. > > “It’s hard to be in a situation where you’re not wanted, but I’ll be > damned if I was going to quit over it.” > > He cited several other incidents over the last three years that > further convinced him to consider his options. The biggest came after > Alberton-Roseville MLA Pat Murphy spoke out against school closures in > February 2017 and was then promoted to cabinet. > > Following this appointment, Dumville says MacLauchlan met with all his > MLAs to “hand out little goodies.” > > He asked Dumville to accept a position on a cabinet committee – which > would give him a $6,500 boost to his salary, a fact he says the > premier noted. > > “I looked at him and said, ‘You’ve just made Pat Murphy a minister. > Gave him a $30,000 or $40,000 raise and a car. I’m not really > interested in a $6,000 consolation prize. Premier, I’m resigning from > caucus.’ You should have seen his eyes.” > > Dumville says the premier asked him to reconsider, which he did. > > RELATED: Dumville decision disappoints elector > > Then, earlier this month, after once again being overlooked in a > January cabinet shuffle, Dumville says he decided to finally follow > through with his resignation after what he believes was a deliberate > attempt by the party to once again move in on his district. > > During a founding meeting for his newly redrawn District 15 to elect a > new executive, two positions were contested, and the person Dumville > was supporting for president did not win. > > “The straw that broke the camel’s back was that farce of a meeting, > pulling the same old tricks that they did in 2015,” Dumville said. > > “These things happen in Russia and in Third World countries, and who > would ever imagine that a learned person would ever resort to these > types of tactics.” > > That’s why, last Wednesday, he walked into the premier’s office and > handed him his letter of resignation. > > “I said, ‘I’ll be a federal Liberal in good standing. I’d like to be a > provincial Liberal in good standing, however I’ll not be in your > Liberal caucus because I do not support you.’” > > He then dismissed himself, describing the feeling of walking back down > the hallway to “walking the gauntlet.” > > Last week, MacLauchlan dismissed the notion his party was behind > contested executive positions. He said he expects his caucus MLAs to > respect the values of inclusiveness and democracy and that it "has > been clear for some time that Mr. Dumville has struggled to share the > values of our Liberal caucus and Liberal party." > > "It's an open and inclusive and democratic process, and I'm delighted > to walk into a meeting and find the hall full or to see them putting > out additional chairs," MacLauchlan said last week. > > Going forward, Dumville says he will remain an “independent Liberal” > until the next election, explaining that he owes it to his > constituents to serve out his mandate as a Liberal. > > But when asked if he would consider running for another party in the > next election, he suggested he’d be willing to examine his options. > > “As we get closer to an election, people will be looking for their > nominees and then I’ll have to make a decision if there’s a nomination > open somewhere for me in some party. I don’t know.” > > One thing is certain, Dumville says he will not resign his seat, > vowing to use his time in the legislature in the spring to challenge > the premier on questions of character and ethics. > > His biggest concern is that his constituents could suffer now that he > is no longer in government and left on poor terms. > > Dumville admits the last week has been a rollercoaster of emotions. > > “I don’t know what’s going to happen. This may be the end of my > political career or it could be the beginning of my political career. > Only time will tell.” > | |
P.E.I. Green Party wasn’t ready for election, may lose seats from 2019: experts
CHARLOTTETOWN - As the Prince Edward Island election approaches its final week, the Green Party is fighting to hold onto its historic gains from the last provincial vote — a battle some experts say could result in lost seats.
Hannah Bell, a Green MLA who decided not to seek re-election, says the party simply wasn’t ready for this campaign.
While Progressive Conservative Leader Dennis King did call the vote six months before the province’s fixed election date, Bell says all political parties knew a campaign was coming this year. She says her party was not doing enough grassroots work or planning in the months and years leading up to the April 3 vote, leading her to believe the party’s seat count may suffer.
“I do feel, and I have been saying this internally and externally, that the Green Party has missed an opportunity to build momentum in advance of an election,” Bell said.
“You need to start planning for the next election the minute you finish an election. And in hindsight … the Greens struggled with building and expanding on the fact they had such a momentous impact from 2019.”
The P.E.I. Green Party made history four years ago when it won eight seats in the legislature and became the first Green official Opposition in North America.
The PCs formed a minority government, becoming the first one the province had seen since the 19th Century. That gave Peter Bevan-Baker’s Greens more influence and opportunity to advance initiatives and policies than opposition parties of the past, although the Tories did secure a slim majority after a 2020 byelection.
Today, however, the Green Party’s momentum appears to have stalled. At the outset of the campaign, the Greens were polling well behind the PCs. A Narrative Research poll suggested the Greens had the support of 22 per cent of decided voters in February, compared with 49 per cent support for the Progressive Conservatives.
The Greens have also struggled to attract candidates and were forced to leave two ridings without anyone carrying the party banner.
“I won’t pretend that I’m not disappointed that we don’t have a full slate, and I can tell you it wasn’t for lack of trying,” Bevan-Baker said in a recent interview.
Many supporters have expressed a desire to run for the party over the last four years, but found it hard to drop everything to run when the early election call came, he said.
Some also expressed a reticence to run due to the challenges of public life and how “ugly and petty and cruel that can be,” Bevan-Baker added. “I think that puts some people off, particularly people from marginalized communities and women.“
Both Bevan-Baker and Bell said they believe the public mood is also hurting the Greens. Both say they felt Islanders viewed 2019 as a “change election,” while this campaign does not have the same energy.
But Bell also says she believes the party should have been doing more to prepare well before the lead up to this campaign. For example, the party has only established a handful of district associations and has not been expanding its membership in areas outside of the urban ridings where its support is strongest, Bell said.
She blames the party’s “inexperience” in elected office — no Green MLA was ever elected in P.E.I. before 2015 — but also says her colleagues and party staff have been more focused on policy than on building the grassroots.
Don Desserud,a political science expert based in P.E.I., says he believes the Green Party’s breakthrough four years ago was due largely to disaffected Liberal voters looking for an alternative after 12 years of Liberal governments.
That’s why he says this election will be a test of how much support the Greens are able to retain, or whether 2019 was an “aberration” in a province that has typically elected either Liberal or PC MLAs.
Desserud said some disaffected voters who were parking their votes with the Greens in 2019 may have grown to like the party.
“But when I look at those polling numbers, I don’t see that,“ he said. ”I see the Greens back to where they were before.”
The Liberals, who had four seats heading into the election, have been polling well behind the PC party and slightly behind the Greens. They are also not running a full slate of candidates for the first time since 1919.
Liberal Leader Sharon Cameron has made it her focus to target the Green Party in this campaign in an effort to win back some of those disaffected voters. Cameron has even taken the unusual step of running against Bevan-Baker in his riding, breaking the political convention of not pitting leaders against one another.
P.E.I. historian Ed MacDonald says the province’s two-party system is deeply entrenched in older generations of Islanders, many of whom saw their party allegiances as a kind of family inheritance.
But he says the Greens could maintain their gains and attract new voters, given the shifting demographics of the Island thanks to population growth from aggressive immigration efforts.
“The electoral landscape on P.E.I. has been and is changing,” he said.
“There are a lot more newcomers to Prince Edward Island from other parts of Canada, from other areas of the world who don’t share in that traditional kind of electoral inheritance. So the swing vote, I think, is much larger than it ever was, especially in urban areas.”
Bevan-Baker says criticism of his party’s election readiness is “fair,” but he remains hopeful that Islanders will focus on the Greens’ substantial work over the last four years in Opposition, including getting 18 bills passed into law.
“We showed that we deserve to be there,” Bevan-Baker said.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 26, 2023.
Methinks Pierre Poilievre and the Green Meanies on PEI and their many buddies everywhere must admit that Eric Grenier is a pretty funny guy at election time N'esy Pas David Coon?
David Amos<david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com> | Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 3:42 PM |
| To: "David.Lametti" <David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca>, "David.Coon" <David.Coon@gnb.ca>, mcu@justice.gc.ca, pm <pm@pm.gc.ca>, "Katie.Telford" <Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, premier <premier@ontario.ca>, "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, premier <premier@gov.ab.ca>, PREMIER <PREMIER@gov.ns.ca>, premier <premier@leg.gov.mb.ca>, Office of the Premier <scott.moe@gov.sk.ca>, premier <premier@gov.nl.ca>, premier <premier@gov.nt.ca>, premier <premier@gov.yk.ca>, premier <premier@gov.pe.ca>, premier <premier@gov.bc.ca>, "rob.moore" <rob.moore@parl.gc.ca>, "Ross.Wetmore" <Ross.Wetmore@gnb.ca>, "robert.mckee" <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>, Brian Ruhe <brian@brianruhe.ca>, "Paul.Lynch" <Paul.Lynch@edmontonpolice.ca>, paul <paul@paulfromm.com>, "kris.austin" <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, kingpatrick278 <kingpatrick278@gmail.com>, "freedomreport.ca" <freedomreport.ca@gmail.com>, art <art@streetchurch.ca>, "andrew.scheer" <andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca>, "andrea.anderson-mason" <andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>, "Arseneau, Kevin (LEG)" <kevin.a.arseneau@gnb.ca>, andre <andre@jafaust.com>, "Mylene.Gigou" <Mylene.Gigou@elections.ca>, archbishop@archtoronto.org, neilm@archtoronto.org, jeff.rud@gov.bc.ca, turpel-lafond@allard.ubc.ca, "Mike.Comeau" <Mike.Comeau@gnb.ca>, "Mark.Blakely" <Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "martin.gaudet" <martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca>, "Mitton, Megan (LEG)" <megan.mitton@gnb.ca>, "hugh.flemming" <hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>, nuntiatura@nuntiatura.ca, jorge.barrera@cbc.ca, Michele.Dillon@unh.edu, jason.warick@cbc.ca, sheilagunnreid <sheilagunnreid@gmail.com>, motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "steve.murphy" <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>, "Robert. Jones" <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca> | |
| Cc: eric.grenier@thewrit.ca, "pierre.poilievre" <pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca>, "jagmeet.singh" <jagmeet.singh@parl.gc.ca>, "jake.stewart" <jake.stewart@parl.gc.ca>, "Janice.Charette" <Janice.Charette@pco-bcp.gc.ca> | |
https://davidraymondamos3. Tuesday, 7 March 2023 King makes it official: Prince Edward Island election to be held April 3 https://www.youtube.com/watch? The Writ Podcast - Ep. #85: China, Alberta, PEI, and the odds of a spring election Éric Grenier 1.59K subscribers 787 views Mar 17, 2023 The Writ Podcast Philippe J. Fournier joins me to chat about the polls from coast to coast. https://www.thewrit.ca/ https://338canada.com/ Has the Chinese election interference moved the dial in the polls for Justin Trudeau or Pierre Poilievre? And what are each party’s incentives (or disincentives) in forcing an election this spring? What about where things stand ahead of the upcoming Alberta election or in the midst of Prince Edward Island’s campaign? And what to make of an upset in a Quebec byelection this week? Philippe J. Fournier of 338Canada.com (and L’actualité and POLITICO Canada) is back on the podcast this week to chat with me about all this and everything in between. https://thewrit.ca/p/the-writ- thewrit.ca Ep. #84: PEI goes to the polls Teresa Wright and Stuart Neatby chat about the launch of PEI's election campaign. ---------- Original message --------- From: "Coon, David (LEG)" <David.Coon@gnb.ca> Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2021 17:41:56 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: You are welcome Mr Lametti say to all the Green Meanies for me during the upcoming election To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail. Thank you for your email. / Merci pour votre courriel. I am out of the office. / Je suis absent du bureau. If you are a constituent in need of help, please contact Taeyon Kim at Taeyon.Kim@gnb.ca<mailto:Taeyo vous êtes un électeur ayant besoin d'aide, veuillez contacter Taeyon Kim à l'adresse Taeyon.Kim@gnb.ca<mailto:Taeyo le 506-455-0936. For media requests, please call: 506-429-2285. / Pour les demandes des médias, veuillez appeler au 506-429-2285. Many thanks / Merci beaucoup, David Coon MLA Fredericton South & Leader of the Green Party/ Député deFredericton Sud et chef du Parti Vert ---------- Original message ---------- From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail. Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2021 14:41:08 -0300 Subject: You are welcome Mr Lametti say to all the Green Meanies for me during the upcoming election To: "David.Lametti" <David.Lametti@parl.gc.ca>, "David.Coon" <David.Coon@gnb.ca> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com> ---------- Original message --------- From: Ministerial Correspondence Unit - Justice Canada <mcu@justice.gc.ca> Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2021 17:32:25 +0000 Subject: Automatic Reply To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail. Thank you for writing to the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada. Due to the volume of correspondence addressed to the Minister, please note that there may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured that your message will be carefully reviewed. We do not respond to correspondence that contains offensive language. ------------------- Merci d'avoir écrit à l'honorable David Lametti, ministre de la Justice et procureur général du Canada. En raison du volume de correspondance adressée au ministre, veuillez prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de votre courriel. Nous tenons à vous assurer que votre message sera lu avec soin. Nous ne répondons pas à la correspondance contenant un langage offensant. | |
No comments:
Post a Comment