Do you have to be a registered party member to vote if there is more that one candidate running like here?

Words Matter.

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday he would intervene in the Justice Department’s case against a Chinese telecommunications executive if it would help secure a trade deal with Beijing.

“If I think it’s good for the country, 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 said in a wide-ranging interview with Reuters in the Oval Office.

Before she is released to the States she would have to go before a Canadian Judge. If that Judge things that she is being used as a political ploy by Trump like he says, then the Canadian Judge would rule and say set her free and allow her to board the next flight to Hong Kong.

Frustration in China over the arrest and possible extradition of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou may come from not understanding how the rule of law actually works.

In interviews with the West Block's Mercedes Stephenson, Liberal MP Andrew Leslie and Michael Hirson, Asia director at the Eurasia Group, posited that part of the reason for the rough reaction from China to Meng's arrest and Canada's willingness to carry it out lies in fundamental misunderstandings of just how deep respect for rule of law and the Canadian relationship with the U.S. work, even in times of challenges, such as under the current U.S. president.

"I think there are very wise people who know Canada well who reside in and around Beijing so they probably understand it, but there will be some people in China who find it difficult to understand just how fervently Canadians cling to the rule of law," said Leslie, who is a retired Canadian Forces lieutenant-general and one of the parliamentary secretaries to Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland.

"Some people might see rule of law as an anchor — raise and lower as you see fit — but in Canada it's an absolute."

On December 1, Canadian police arrested Meng in Vancouver at the behest of American authorities.

The Americans allege that the company she leads has been using a subsidiary to skirt U.S. sanctions on Iran and want her extradited to face charges.

Huawei, however, is one of the crown jewels of Chinese industry.

Meng was released on bail on December 11, one day after Chinese authorities detained two Canadians: former Global Affairs Canada employee Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, founder of a travel company that brings people to North Korea.

Chinese authorities say both are accused of "endangering national security," though what that actually means is not clear.

Both detentions have been characterized by observers as retaliation for the arrest of Meng, though Freeland said on Friday during a press conference that Chinese officials have not directly linked the cases in talks so far.

Still, the fact that China appears to be retaliating against Canada for the arrest rather than the U.S. for making the request is telling, Hirson said.

"China is venting at Canada because it feels, from a strategic point of view, there are limits to what it can do directly against the United States," he told Global News.

"There's also a sense of real frustration by Beijing that Canada would be willing to honour this request from the U.S. There is a broader issue here China faces: they have been quite surprised at the willingness of U.S. allies to stand by the U.S. on some of these really intense geopolitical issues between the U.S. and China."

He noted that this has likely thrown the Chinese for something of a loop.

"China thought there would be more of an opening to sort of hive off U.S. allies from the United States because of the frustration with [U.S. President Donald] Trump," he said.

"But what you find is many, including Canada, are not so quick to downplay the relationship with the U.S. and many share these concerns — national security concerns — about Huawei and Chinese foreign policy."

The U.S., Australia and New Zealand have placed restrictions on Huawei or barred the company outright from bidding on critical telecommunications infrastructure.

Those moves come amid years of speculation that the company, founded and run by a former member of the Chinese People's Liberation Army, could have spyware embedded in components of its parts that could be weaponized to spy for the Chinese government.

Huawei denies the speculations, but Canada is also currently in the midst of a review of the technology.

That review is expected to determine whether the company will be allowed to be part of the new 5G spectrum being built here in the coming years.

The only time usually why Canada won't exradite a person from Canada to the States is if it's to a State that still carries the death penalty.

And the other parties have the same rules?     

In Canada yes.

Poor Flynn thought he was going to court today just to plea guilty to lieing to the FBI but when he got there the Judge torn him a new Arsehole.

His lawyers screwed up when they said the FBI were one step from forcing him to tell the truth. The Judge said if your saying that then you better get your story straight because you are looking at jail time. His lawyers stepped up and said that it was them that said it and not Flynn which is bull. The sentencing will be held over till March and if Flynn carries on helping the FBI that will be taken into consideration on his sentencing and if not he will be given jail time.

Trump started up a charity fund but seemed to think it was his dipping pot and used it for everything like paying off lawyers to having a portrait of himself painted. The whole Trump family seems to be involved with this charity and it's crooked as hell. The Trumps make the Clintons look like saints.

Flynns lawyers brought up his good military position thinking it was a good thing for Flynn but the Judge turned it around and said anyone with his knowledge and experience should know better than to lie to the FBI and be acting as a foreign agent while working in the WH. 

I think the Judge in the Flynn case is a Republican Major. Trump and Sarah Sanders keep telling the press that Flynn was ambushed by the FBI and when Flynn was asked by the Judge he and his lawyers said no.. Your friend that had a crowd show up in front of his house and had his driveway sprayed with paint is being looked at again because he said Mexicans made America look dirty on Fox News.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Tuesday that if Congress won’t agree to an additional $5 billion toward a border wall, then President Trump would seek other government funds to pay for it.

Hours earlier, the White House indicated it could back down on its threat to shut down the government come Friday over the border wall money. But to save face, the Trump administration is twisting itself in knots trying to explain how Mexico and not U.S. taxpayers will ultimately fund the wall even as it asks for new congressional appropriations or money from other agencies.

“The president has asked every agency to look and see if they have money that can be used for that purpose, and that’s exactly what we’re doing,” Sanders told reporters during her 10-minute afternoon news briefing.

But, a reporter pressed, the deficit is over $1 trillion, so why is the American taxpayer paying for the wall when Trump as a candidate promised that Mexico would pay for it?

“We’re not asking American taxpayers for that. We are looking at existing funding through other agencies right now that we can draw on to do that in — immediately,” Sanders said. “The president has been clear that the USMCA deal would provide additional revenue through the deal that would show that Mexico has paid for the wall.” The USMCA is the administration’s proposed new trade agreement with Mexico and Canada.

Okay, let’s break this down. First, any existing funding that other agencies have in their coffers is taxpayer money. So, as many, many people pointed out on Twitter, trying to claim the money isn’t coming from the American public is either misinformed or misleading.

We asked “@TheBudgetGuy,” a.k.a. Stan Collender, in an email about Sanders’s claim. He responded: “The quick answer is that’s BS. All that is taxpayer’s money.”

The White House has been trumpeting for a long time that its new trade deal with Mexico and Canada (which has not yet been ratified by Congress) will generate enough new revenue that it will be as if Mexico is paying for the wall. (Or, in that case, is Canada paying for it?)

Sanders reasoned during the briefing that “we’re talking about additional revenue that wouldn’t have existed without the president getting a new deal” and that revenue coupled with money saved means “we can pay for the wall four times over, and by doing that new trade deal we have the opportunity to pay for the wall.”

But when a reporter followed up by asking if the White House had done the math on that, Sanders said vaguely, “There have been a number of things that we’ve looked at.”

Luckily, The Washington Post’s Philip Bump did do some math and determined that if Sanders was referring to increased tax revenue from the addition of new jobs thanks to the trade deal, the math is actually simple. If — and these are big ifs — the deal generated 10,000 new American jobs at an annual salary of $100,000 and an 18 percent federal tax rate, the wall could be paid off in as little as 100 years.

But even if the deal encouraged manufacturers not to relocate plants in Mexico or to move them back to America, that’s still not Mexico paying for the wall. It’s U.S. taxpayers.

Even though Trump is trying to close down his charity fund the courts are still coming after him and the family. The courts are saying he was using the fund as his own personal piggy-bank.

Back when Trumps boys wanted to join the Boy Scouts, all parents were asked could they donate 7 dollars and up or what the family could see their way clear to donate to keep the organization going. Trump donated 7 dollars for each of his boys.

A motion was passed and then voted on to shorten sentences for non-violent crimes. The Republicans and Democrats came together today and passed the Bill.  Obama has tried to pass this same bill when he was in office but it was shot down. In the mean time Trump wakes up and decided in a spilt second to haul his forces out of Syria. The generals weren't informed, the national security advisers weren't informed, the Penagon wasn't informed, the Government wasn't informed or were any of his Allies working beside his troops there. He says he removing them out because ISIS is now completly destroyed. 

In my opinion, he sees what it cost to have them there and needs the money to get his wall built.

His own Republicans Senators are jumping all over him. He wants to bring them all home as soon as possible. Pence got raked over the coals by every senate available. I wouldn't be surprised if he hasn't already rented cattle boats for the troops to come home in. The Turks will now be free to slaughter the Kurds and Syria and Russia now hold the high ground. Maybe, just maybe he's still working with the Russians.

Trump had managed to make his commie friends happy yesterday with two things he has done for them. First by saying he is hauling the troops out of Syria and second by taking off sanctions on Russia. To add to this because he can't get his wall funding he is going to let the government shut down by not signing the bill but forward and passed by the senate which is still controled by the Republicans. My question to the Republicans would be what is the straw that will break the camels back and get the Republicans to say enough is enough from this president.

The stock markets are continuing to tank and if it continues even a bit further will be the worst year on record since the Great depression.

The question is Tommy, who did Trump negotiate with besides himself and his own party. With the amount of trantrums he's throwing lately after backing himself into a corner you just don't know what stunt he will try next. Russia's Putin says in his year end address to the Russian people that we are close to nuclear war.

The last adult in the room has now left the White House.  He had enough and his resignation letter showed it. Trump said on TV besides bringing the troops home it would save them Billions of dollars. He's still on his wall kick remember and what better way to get it that pulling your troops out your front line defences against another 9-11 attack just to pay for a wall to try and keep Mexicans out. Haven't heard Trump bad mouthing Mattis's letter back yet. Here's the letter.

I have been privileged to serve as our country's 26th Secretary of Defense which has allowed me to serve alongside our men and women of the Department in defense of our citizens and our ideals.

I am proud of the progress that has been made over the past two years on some of the key goals articulated in our National Defense Strategy: putting the Department on a more sound budgetary footing, improving readiness and lethality in our forces, and reforming the Department's business practices for greater performance. Our troops continue to provide the capabilities needed to prevail in conflict and sustain strong U.S. global influence.

One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies. Like you, I have said from the beginning that the armed forces of the United States should not be the policeman of the world. Instead, we must use all tools of American power to provide for the common defense, including providing effective leadership to our alliances. NATO's 29 democracies demonstrated that strength in their commitment to fighting alongside us following the 9-11 attack on America. The Defeat-ISIS coalition of 74 nations is further proof.

Similarly, I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model - gaining veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions - to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense.

My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances.

Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position. The end date for my tenure is February 28, 2019, a date that should allow sufficient time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed as well as to make sure the Department's interests are properly articulated and protected at upcoming events to include Congressional posture hearings and the NATO Defense Ministerial meeting in February. Further, that a full transition to a new Secretary of Defense occurs well in advance of the transition of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September in order to ensure stability within the Department.

I pledge my full effort to a smooth transition that ensures the needs and interests of the 2.15 million Service Members and 732,079 DoD civilians receive undistracted attention of the Department at all times so that they can fulfill their critical, round-the-clock mission to protect the American people.

I very much appreciate this opportunity to serve the nation and our men and women in uniform.

I wonder will the Demo's challenge that part about keeping the asylum seekers south of the border Tommy. They are going to be busy boys come January eh!

Another shut down just because Trump can't get it ino his thick head THERE AIN'T GONNA BE A WALL.

At least we can take pleasure in the knowledge that it's ruined his Christmas. We know he's an idle sod who likes his time off, now he's got to stick around in Washington to sort out his own mess.