[JumpCrisscross]

> The insane idea is that US criminal law applies worldwide

If a man in India scams a Russian or German, that should be outside the realm of Russian or German law? And then if that man travels to Russia or Germany, Russia or Germany should not be allowed to arrest him, because he was in India when the crime was committed?

It takes mental gymnastics to take a series of material lies made to a bank to obtain U.S. dollar financing for the violation of U.S. sanctions in respect of American products, and brand it as extraterritoriality. The U.S. absolutely has extraterritoriality problems. This isn't one of those.

[billfruit]

If an Indian company defrauds a Russian bank, could they be in trouble in Germany, because the transaction was done in British pounds? Seems quite a tenuous stretch.

[sudosysgen]

HSBC is neither Russian nor German, even though they do business with the Russian and German economy and government.

[JumpCrisscross]

> HSBC is neither Russian nor German

And Meng isn’t Indian. It’s an analogy.

[sudosysgen]

Meng is Chinese, the analogy works perfectly. HSBC is an entity from a third-party country.

[JumpCrisscross]

> the analogy works perfectly

Correct, which is why the jurisdiction and extradition make sense.

Glad we agree.

[guug]

So you're saying that china would be completely within its rights to extradite, prosecute, and punish a US citizen who made fun of their leader on US soil if that citizen ever sets foot in a jurisdiction that has an extradition treaty with china?