Canada is an advanced economy, we alone have developed the "experience different" card and implemented it across government like no other nation on Earth.
Yeah it's really dangerous when a government or its highest ranking officials can absolve themselves of accountability by just claiming disagreement on subjective interpretation. If literal abuse of a sexual, physical or emotional nature can be excused with "experienced differently", what else can be excused? Concentration camps? Torture? Extermination?
By using that excuse, the people in charge are basically saying "IDGAF, I can do whatever I want and I'm not accountable to anyone".
Yep. It's a double standard. Could Trump use that excuse? Because leftists can. Both the Prime Minister and the Governor General have used it, indeed, the highest ranking officials.
In the U.S. you can't sue the President or indict them. They'd need to leave/be removed from office first. Also I know that Presidents have had Attorneys General interpret laws to mean whatever they want them to mean.
Also as you may know there was an argument that Trump wasn't allowed to pardon himself while he was President. I personally believe that he had the right to. The Constitution doesn't limit the Presidential pardon powers (except for impeachment of course.)
The President ... shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of impeachment. -Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1, US Constitution.
People argued that it would violate a part of U.S. common law that held that no one could be a judge in their own case. I didn't buy that argument, but I'm not a legal scholar. I always thought the Constitution was the supreme law of the land in the U.S. but maybe common law outranks it.
I was curious if the GG has Sovereign Immunity like the Queen does when I heard that Payette may have assaulted someone. I couldn't find an answer though. The closest I came was that Lt. Govs can't claim sovereign privilege. A Quebec Lt. Gov tried and was refused by the courts.
It looks like the Queen is responsible for civil penalties but not criminal ones, unless I'm misreading it.
Canada is an advanced economy, we alone have developed the "experience different" card and implemented it across government like no other nation on Earth.
Yeah it's really dangerous when a government or its highest ranking officials can absolve themselves of accountability by just claiming disagreement on subjective interpretation. If literal abuse of a sexual, physical or emotional nature can be excused with "experienced differently", what else can be excused? Concentration camps? Torture? Extermination? By using that excuse, the people in charge are basically saying "IDGAF, I can do whatever I want and I'm not accountable to anyone".
Yep. It's a double standard. Could Trump use that excuse? Because leftists can. Both the Prime Minister and the Governor General have used it, indeed, the highest ranking officials.
In the U.S. you can't sue the President or indict them. They'd need to leave/be removed from office first. Also I know that Presidents have had Attorneys General interpret laws to mean whatever they want them to mean.
Also as you may know there was an argument that Trump wasn't allowed to pardon himself while he was President. I personally believe that he had the right to. The Constitution doesn't limit the Presidential pardon powers (except for impeachment of course.)
The President ... shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of impeachment. -Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1, US Constitution.
People argued that it would violate a part of U.S. common law that held that no one could be a judge in their own case. I didn't buy that argument, but I'm not a legal scholar. I always thought the Constitution was the supreme law of the land in the U.S. but maybe common law outranks it.
I was curious if the GG has Sovereign Immunity like the Queen does when I heard that Payette may have assaulted someone. I couldn't find an answer though. The closest I came was that Lt. Govs can't claim sovereign privilege. A Quebec Lt. Gov tried and was refused by the courts.
It looks like the Queen is responsible for civil penalties but not criminal ones, unless I'm misreading it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity#Canada