[petermcneeley]

The Canadian gov debanked people during a legitimate protest using the emergency act (among other violations). This was later ruled to be an illegitimate use of this act. Nobody has faced any consequences for this and none are expected.

I dont see that listed in this wiki entry. Perhaps this wiki is incomplete.

[gucci-on-fleek]

> The Canadian gov debanked people during a legitimate protest using the emergency act (among other violations).

Ok, but I don't see how that's corruption. Switching to some American examples, I've never heard anyone refer to the jailing of MLK [0], the shooting of Vietnam War protesters [1], or Stonewall [2] as "corruption", and these are all much more extreme than the 2022 Canadian protests.

> This was later ruled to be an illegitimate use of this act.

Do you have a source for this? Because §28.7 of the report from the independent commission [3] states that its use was legitimate:

  For these reasons, I have concluded that Cabinet was reasonably
  concerned that the situation it was facing was worsening and at risk of
  becoming dangerous and unmanageable. There was credible and compelling
  evidence supporting both a subjective and objective reasonable belief in
  the existence of a public order emergency. The decision to invoke the
  Act was appropriate.

> Nobody has faced any consequences for this and none are expected.

It was a decision made by the Cabinet while acting in its official capacity, so parliamentary privilege [4] means that there could never be any criminal consequences, no matter how severe what they did was. Political actions generally only have political consequences, and considering that Justin Trudeau and much of the Cabinet resigned a couple years later [5], I'd argue that there were in fact some consequences.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_campaign#Martin_Lut...

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots

[3]: https://publicorderemergencycommission.ca/files/documents/Fi...

[4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_privilege#Canada

[5]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024%E2%80%932025_Canadian_pol...

[petermcneeley]

I am aware of couching statements in the report but the conclusion was so definitive that the government immediately tried to appeal it and failed.

"The Federal Court of Appeal confirms that the federal government’s invocation of the Emergencies Act was unreasonable and ultra vires [beyond their legal authority], and that it infringed paragraph 2(b) and section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms." [0]

I am also aware that parliament is supreme. This is because the structure of Canada is that of a British colony. However that doesnt change the conclusion of the courts.

Ironically the exit of the Cabinet members highlights further corruption. Canada has transferred ~25 Billion to Ukraine. The minister responsible for the debanking of Canadians has left Canada and taken an official post in the Ukrainian government for the distribution of this money.[1]

In short you have completely no understanding of the level of corruption in this country.

[0] https://www.fca-caf.ca/en/pages/decisions/plain-language-dec...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrystia_Freeland

[gucci-on-fleek]

> https://www.fca-caf.ca/en/pages/decisions/plain-language-dec...

Huh, I wasn't aware of that, thanks. Looks like it only came out a couple months ago, which would explain how I missed it. But that indeed does seem pretty conclusive, so I'll gladly concede that point.

I'd still say that this is just standard government overreach/misuse of power and not corruption though.

> Ironically the exit of the Cabinet members highlights further corruption. Canada has transferred ~25 Billion to Ukraine. The minister responsible for the debanking of Canadians has left Canada and taken an official post in the Ukrainian government for the distribution of this money.

Ok, this one definitely sounds like corruption though. I haven't heard of this one before, so I'm not entirely sure about the details, but what you said does seem to broadly agree with what the linked Wikipedia article says.

And yeah, I agree that this sounds pretty bad.

> In short you have completely no understanding of the level of corruption in this country.

C'mon, there's no need for a semi-personal semi-attack here! I'm a Canadian living in Canada, so I like to think that I have a good idea what's going on in the country, but I'm of course mistaken sometimes.

Still, I think that you picked fairly weak examples; better ones would be the Sponsorship Scandal [0], the WE scandal [1], Aga Khan [2], and so on.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponsorship_scandal

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WE_Charity_scandal

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aga_Khan_affair

[petermcneeley]

Corruption comes in many forms. Sending 25 billion to the most corrupt country in Europe is to me more significant (than other scandals) due to scale.

> I'm a Canadian living in Canada

I am not intending a personal attack. I see something different happening in this country than maybe others. Every aspect of the country has significant corruption. Most of it will not fall under normal (criminal) corruption.

I can leave you with two important highlights to help understand Canada:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/13/canada...

https://companiesmarketcap.com/cad/canada/largest-companies-...

[whattheheckheck]

Bet you listen to Joe rogan too

[petermcneeley]

I do not.