Fair

Update on the Criminals at BMO

Posted on Updated on

DO THE RIGHT THING

I thought I would provide an update on my continuing search for justice from the criminal actions of BMO.

I will set out the present status. A lot of it deals with the attendances at court and my health, a lot of it involves BMO, but more particularly some judges who regardless of my health and medical treatment have put pressure on me to disclose aspects of my health that are not being challenged, and then proceeding in my absence.

DO THE RIGHT THING

BMO’ s  failure to consider this approach confirms to me the existence of a criminal culture that I experienced in my dealings with BMO that promoted illegal activity, lying about it and putting that evidence to court, and spending excessive amounts of money to conceal and fight it. My question is just this. If I was wrong. If there was not the criminal culture I experienced, why did no one from BMO ever contact me, own and take responsibility for their action and deal with it properly. DO THE RIGHT THING.  The fact that they don’t seem to know what  THE RIGHT THING is ,nor have they made any effort to show that they are not the criminals that the evidence shows them to be. Instead they spent your money if you are a customer of BMO to fight the victim. All of their actions and the fact that they have not DONE THE RIGHT THING. Confirms that culture to me.

If they really believed it and practised the ethics of trust and honesty they profess, and what Canadians expect from them, you would think they would be anxious to clear up the matter and demonstrate that they will not tolerate fraud dishonesty or lying. Unfortunately here they not only tolerated but went to great lengths including criminal activity to defendant support it while apparently refusing to do a proper if any investigation. This is strong confirmation of a culture of dishonesty, fraud, arrogance, entitlement, and of an organization apparently devoid of ethics

After the Summary Judgement Motion, I brought an action against all of the parties who had committed perjury and fraud in obtaining the judgement.

It turns out that you can stand on the street corner lie about someone and do serious damage and be sued for libel and slander if it is not true. In our legal system in Ontario, you can go to court, commit perjury and lie, cause damage to the other party, and you are not liable for the damage that your lies under oath were responsible for.

BMO and the other parties brought a motion to dismiss this action and the previous action I brought against them in 2015, based on the argument that had been decided by Conway and was therefore res judicata in that it was already determined. I consented to dismissal of the action that I brought after the summary judgement motion.

I don’t disagree that most of the facts and law that Conway corruptly distorted, despite the breach of her obligations as a judge, are nonetheless final.

The one issue that was not decided by Conway was whether or not
BMO owed me a duty as an executor. They say they do not owe me a duty. I believe they are very wrong. An executor is entitled to any information’s that the deceased would be entitled to.

That breach of duty and the failure to disclose the evidence they allege was from Harold Laski was to cover up the fraud they committed.

I have been in ill health for several years. As a result of my health I had to give up practising law and my house. A great deal of my psychological illnesses are a direct result of the abuse I’ve suffered from a number of judges in this this matter.

The matter initially had come up in front of Justice Chiappetta on April 12, 2018. As a result of which and pursuing torpor instructions, I delivered a notice of discontinuance on the case that I had brought after the summary judgement motion. As far as the other action was concerned although most of the facts I was stuck with from Conway’s perverse judgement I made no argument. The only issue was their duty to tell me as an executor any information I asked for or requested that the deceased would be entitled to. The law is that an executor stands in the shoes of the deceased.

Justice Chiappetta made a very strange order. It is an order that I do not recall ever hearing in such circumstances. She ordered that there be no cross examinations on the affidavits. Neither counsel raised this issue. It was a surprising and unsolicited order from the court which restricted my ability to provide full answer and defense. There are issues in the affidavit of Andrew Parley which are inaccurate and require cross-examination. I was not well and was stunned at the lack of explanation from her and the lack of any response from counsel to this off hand order.

This was just one of the odd and unusual decisions from a number of judges who dealt with this case and made decisions which in my opinion do not appear to conform to my understanding of general judicial standards.

The next time the matter came up with September 10, 2018 before Justice Gloria Wilson. By this time my health was such that I had to appear by CourtCcall, a service used by a number of jurisdictions including Ontario, to provide audio and video connection to the court room.

I was now ill and unable to work.I had a number of medical certificates over the last few years when they were required. I had never had any problem. The note said that for health reasons I was not able to work and I would be reassessed in two months.

Wilson, with no evidence of any kind to suggest that my certified doctor and myself as a solicitor with 40 years experience were misleading the court.expressed dissatisfaction with the note finding that it did not give the reasons I couldn’t proceed.

I explained to her that I do not write the doctor’s notes, nor do I tell them what to put in. I had had a total break down as a result of the corrupt decision of Conway and being defrauded and lied to by BMO. My instructions from my five physicians was that I needed a complete rest and was not capable of working at all as the letter said.Wilson didn’t ask me for any clarification. Nor did she suggest we get further information from the doctor.

With what I view as a total lack of judicial integrity she granted the adjournment which was not being opposed. She ordered me to deliver materials which was clear I would not be well enough to do by that time. Then she went and ordered that the matter be peremptory on me. This means that I could not get it adjourned and had to go ahead on that date. Given my health that order did not seem to make sense. It seemed like a very inappropriate way to deal with the medical certificate. It was certainly not warranted in the circumstances and was inappropriate

The order had no basis in law or fact. That remedy is imposed by a court when one of the parties is delaying the matter unduly. In this case it was the first time up. There was no suggestion by the other party that I had in any way done anything improper or intentional to delay the matter. In my opinion a sad example of ego and judgeitis and was clearly contrary to the standards for judicial behaviour. it showed bias, a lack of impartiality and lack of fairness.

The worst part was that the pressure my doctors were trying to relieve me from so I could be treated was multiplied by the pressure of that decision. I had a relapse which severely affected my life. A further result of that mean-spirited decision was that future judges who dealt with the matter would put pressure on me and remind me that it was peremptory on me.

The next appearance was scheduled for Tuesday, 23 April 2019 before Justice Nishikawa. The Tuesday following the Easter Holiday long weekend

I had been taken by ambulance to Toronto General Hospital, then to Toronto Western Hospital, and back to Toronto General.I was there for 10 or 11 days. I was released late Thursday night right before the Easter Weekend. I was not able to arrange a Court call appearance in such a short time.

I sent the following email to BMO’s counsel Jonathan Chen:

From: Wayne <wlaski@wlaski.com>
Sent: April 22, 2019 10:00 AM
To: ‘Jonathan Chen’ <JChen@litigate.com>
Subject: RE: Laski – Motion

Hello Jonathan

This is further to your email below and our conversation of this morning.

As I advised you I was taken to the hospital April 10 at the Toronto Western where I spent a few days.

I was transferred to TGH I believe on the Friday the 12 and was released late Thursday the 18th.

The hospitalization was the result of my blood sugar being over 30 and my kidneys failing.

Given the Easter weekend, I was unable to get any of the documentation from the hospital.

Again given the holiday I was unable to set up court call even though I tried them several times.

I am not well enough to attend.

His honour had indicated that if I wanted an adjournment I would have to provide medical evidence.

As I say I have not had that opportunity.

Since we last appeared in court I have seen seven different doctors.

I was at my psychiatrist office to discuss a letter from him, when I fell ill and was admitted to the hospital.

I have not left my house save and except for medical appointments in the last several months.

I intend to provide documents from the hospital and my GP and Psychiatrist as evidence of my liabilities and limitations.

The only issue remaining between the parties is whether or not BMO owed to me as an executor a fiduciary duty to advise me with respect to the deceased dealing with his account.

BMO refused when my father died to give me any information. They stonewalled me for four years revealing the evidence one month before the motion. This evidence was used as determinative by judge Conway.

Their failure to provide it precipitated a very expensive four year estate battle causing approximately $400,000 in cost.

Your Honor this is an important issue. Besides their other conduct there should not be a precedent where a bank can deny an executor who stands in the shoes of the deceased.

I have asked Jonathan Chen to bring his cell phone tomorrow morning and if possible call me so that I can participate.

If not I would ask that you adjourn the matter to give me an opportunity to collect the medical evidence

Wayne S. Laski

416-229-1166 direct line

wlaski@wlaski.com                                                   

From: Jonathan Chen <JChen@litigate.com>
Sent: April 16, 2019 7:23 PM
To: Wayne <wlaski@wlaski.com>
Cc: Sophie Alexander <salexander@litigate.com>
Subject: RE: Laski – Motion

Hi Wayne,

I acknowledge receipt of your below email which appears to suggest that you will not be appearing on the motion scheduled for April 23, 2019.    

As you know, our motion to strike was originally scheduled on April 12, 2018 for a full day on September 19, 2018.  You took no issue with the hearing date at that time.

About a week before the hearing, we attended before Justice Wilson at Civil Practice Court wherein I requested an adjournment for health reasons but only provided the Court with a one-line medical note that provided no details as to why you could not proceed.  Justice Wilson ultimately adjourned the motion to February 11, 2019 on a peremptory basis and required that your responding materials be filed by November 2, 2018.  No materials were filed by that deadline.

On January 28, 2019, we appeared again at Civil Practice Court before Justice Nishikawa.  Although the hearing was marked peremptory by Justice Wilson, you demanded an adjournment for health reasons.  Justice Nishikawa adjourned the motion to April 23, 2019 and required that you file responding materials by March 22, 2019.  Justice Nishikawa also endorsed that there would be no further adjournments unless you provide specific information regarding your medical and health limitations from a qualified medical doctor.  To date, we have not received responding materials from you or the medical documentation required by Justice Nishikawa.   

In the circumstances, we intend to proceed with the motion scheduled for April 23, 2019.  In light of your e-mail below, however, we will consider an adjournment provided that you provide us with written confirmation that you have been admitted into a hospital.  Specifically, in line with the previous endorsements made to date, we require a medical note from your treating doctor indicating which hospital you have been admitted into, how long you will be admitted and for what reason you have been admitted.  If you cannot provide us with a medical note, please have your treating doctor call us.  We can be reached at (416) 865-3553 or (416) 865-3093.   

We look forward to hearing from you. If we do not hear from you, we will provide this correspondence to the judge hearing the motion next week and will ask that the motion proceed as scheduled.

Regards,

Jonathan

From: Wayne [mailto:wlaski@wlaski.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2019 11:42 AM
To: Jonathan Chen
Cc: Sophie Alexander
Subject: Re: Laski – Motion

Jonathan. I won’t get a chance to read the enclosure. I’m presently in the hospital since last Wednesday and they believe I will be here for a week or two. I will be in touch when I get out 

From: Jonathan Chen <jchen@litigate.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2019 10:03 AM
To: Wayne
Cc: Sophie Alexander
Subject: Laski – Motion

Hello Wayne,

We will be filing the attached motion confirmation form today (and before 2PM).  Please advise if you have comments.

If we do not hear from you in the next two hours or so, I will amend the form accordingly.

Thanks,

___________________________________________________________________________________

The rules of professional conduct state that Council should agree to a request for an adjournment unless it goes to the merits. It is interesting to note that the instructions from BMO, was to oppose the adjournment and proceed despite my circumstances.

Despite my request I was not connected to the hearing by cell phone. I cannot remember another time in my career where request to appear by phone was never denied unless there was a technical problem.

Nonetheless they continued in my absence. With the email handed to him, Nishikawa, knowing I had just been in the hospital went ahead and gave BMO the order dismissing my case. Even the one part which is definitely a triable issue, their obligation to provide me as an executor any information the deceased would be entitled to.

Also, without argument he awarded $20,000 in costs against me in favour of BMO. Here’s another example of them getting to commit fraud lie and put false evidence in the court, and I have to pay them for the privilege. 

I should also mention here in this discussion of judges who ignore Doctor’s certificates, fail to consider that there are issues of privacy in people’s health. If a doctor provides a letter which indicates somebody cannot work, what more are you entitled to unless there is some suggestion that the issue of the illness is not true. This was not the case for me. I had cancer operation in 2014, spinal surgery in 2015, and other ailments which I don’t feel are required knowledge for the court for the public. Any suggestion by any of those judges or counsel that there was some question as to my health, could certainly be documented by the trauma I suffered from Conway’s judgement.I lost total respect for the judicial system and the concept of Justice that I had spent 40 years of my life dedicated to. I lost my practice, I lost my home, I lost my health. Any suggestion that I did all that to avoid arguing the motion with BMO is ridiculous.

I am presently forced to appeal Nishikawa’s order. Personally, I do not see how denying an opportunity to be heard in such circumstances would be seen by anyone to be bias, lacked impartiality and fairness.

I personally don’t see, in the judgements above, the honouring of the principal, that not only should justice be done, it should be seen to be done. In those instances where judges ignored or criticized without basis the doctor’s writings, I do not think a reasonable person would say that there was not an element of bias and unfairness. Tough to be fair and reasonable when one of the parties is not there,

I became a lawyer because I believed in justice and to fight injustice. I will continue to pursue justice in this matter because people or corporations should not so blatantly and arrogantly commit frauds. be allowed to come to court and lie about it, and get away with it.  no faith now

This will not end if they’re lucky enough to defraud and defeat the legal system again. I shall warn as many as I can in any appropriate manner. I shall certainly be sending copies to most of Canada’s financial editors. I can prove my claims to them with existing sworn evidence. Hopefully at some point we can stop this kind of conduct from being carried on here or condoned by Canadian Courts.

I am somewhat amazed that no one in authority at BMO ever considered, that they had committed fraud and lied, and should discuss it with the victim now with sufficient evidence to show their wrongdoing. This could have been resolved quickly and relatively cheaply. Instead the criminal culture at BMO spent huge amounts of your money (if your client or customer of BMO’s) to fight it.

I will be pursuing BMO and the people who are the directing mind of the corporations, with evidence of crimes committed by the corporations and the employees they are responsible for.

I’ll be buying shares of BMO and will be at all of the shareholders meetings with my material and my questions. I will take all appropriate steps available to me as a shareholder to continue to get to the bottom of this. I will be doing further research on those individuals who are running this organization. I will not stop until I get an answer and explanation as to what went on, why they took the position they did. What they’re prepared to do to make the situation right. In some assurance, backed up by documentation, if they are taking steps to make sure this does not happen again.

If I or anyone in my family or my friends had money or investments or any business with BMO, given my experience I would withdraw it and place it in a safer institution. If I was a client of BMO , who did not remove their money, I would look very carefully at their paperwork and their reporting. Given my dealings with BMO and their lawyers I would have to say that they are completely untrustworthy. For an institution based on trust this is a complete failure. They have proven that there focus is to put their interests before the interests of the client

These companies have a protected trust and fiduciary duty to the public. I think it’s time they take it more seriously than they did in my case and recognize that they are not above the law.

The above is the opinion and experience of the author as a litigant and a victim.

Baker and Baker Law Firm put False Evidence Before the Court and Won the Case by Fraud

Posted on Updated on

The law firm of Baker and Baker, a family law firm in Toronto, put false evidence before the court and suborned perjury. In doing so they aided and abetted their client Wendi Laski and BMO Nesbitt Burns in defrauding her father’s estate, the government of Canada, and her brother Wayne.

The case revolved around allegations that Wendi Laski, the deceased’s daughter had used fraud and undue influence to change all her father’s accounts into joint accounts with survivorship to her, thereby leaving nothing for her brother Wayne. This was all done while Harold Laski was under palliative care in the last three months of his life under unusual and suspicious circumstances. Prior to that, all the money in question was in Harold’s name alone.

There was ample evidence of undue influence with suspicious dealings and transfers out of the ordinary course: large transfers ( the entire estate) of funds near the death of Harold Laski
All contacts with the banks and Mr. Yu were initiated by Wendi not Mr. Laski. There were serious suspicious transfers and dealings far outside of the normal course of business

There were few if any of the factors the Supreme Court of Canada would consider evidence of meeting the burden of rebutting the presumption of undue influence. The circumstances surrounding the signing of the documents both with the TD Bank and BMO was very suspicious and unclear. There was no independent legal advice, despite evidence that Ms. Hamilton, the lawyer who had drafted the will had told Harold Laski in writing to seek legal advice before he made any further transfers

Wendi had lied to Wayne on a consent recording, about what was happening with the accounts. She clearly led Wayne to believe that he would get what he was expecting from the will. This is clearly a lie as she had already arranged to keep all the money for herself. She further indicated that we should not touch the bank accounts. She said we didn’t know what needed to be paid and she hadn’t “taken a penny”. This of course was a lie as she had cleared out most if not all of the bank accounts from the TD on the morning of her father’s funeral and deposited the bulk of those immediately in her own name at the BM0

She lied in her testimony under oath about her conversations with Harold about his intentions. In one examination she swore under oath that she had not discussed these issues of her father’s intentions with him prior to his death. She only became aware of the money was hers after he died and she went to the bank and to BMO. The very next day, still under oath she denied that she had said it. When reminded she had said that, she continued to deny saying it. She then went on to give a completely different diametrically opposed and totally inconsistent with her previous testimony, now indicating she had talked with her father before his death and knew that the money was to be hers.

These two completely contradictory and opposite statements under oath with no correction or choice or explanation between the two by Wendi or her counsel. dealing with Harold’s intentions, were the central issue of the case. There was no evidence that Harold had changed his mind save and except for the false evidence of one Norman Yu and BMO described below

The first problem was that the details of this crucial evidence were concealed by Mr. Yu, his employer, BMO Nesbitt Burns, and Wendi Laski for almost four (4)  years after the death of Mr. Laski. It did not come out until they chose to divulge it only one month before the trial. Norman Yu and Wendi Laski refused to answer questions about how this evidence came about nor give any explanation for the four-year delay in bringing it forward in these unusual and suspicious circumstances . This and the meetings between Wendi, her lawyers, BMO and Norman Yu to discuss this evidence secretly, were ignored by the judge.

The real problem with this evidence was that it was not true. Norman Yu testified that Wendi was in the room with him when her father said he wanted to disinherit Wayne, because he was abusing him, and leave everything to Wendi.

Wendi and her lawyers, never raised this evidence during the four years of litigation. She never relayed confirmed or corroborated that meeting. Not once, in any form, did Wendi claim, that she had been in the room with Norman Yu when  Harold Laski expressed his intentions or that she even knew what the reasoning for those intentions were.

Is it believable or reasonably possible in these circumstances that Wendi would have had this crucial information before the litigation commenced and never revealed it?

Given those facts, it is not within the balance of probabilities that Mr. Yu’s evidence was true.

Further significant indicator that Norman Yu’s evidence was not true, occurred in August 2012 when the parties were before Justice Nordheimer to freeze the funds, which he did. Would this not had been the time, if it was true, to bring up this evidence that Wendi and Norman heard from Harold on January 10 2012 as to his intentions to give the money to Wendi because Wayne was bullying him. That was not true. They did not bring it up because it was not true. Donald Baker told me and my counsel that he had heard this (what Norman Yu had to say) in July 2012 but had “promised not to tell”

When being cross-examined, Wendi was asked about the evidence of Norman Yu that she would rely on. Andrea Di Battista would not let her answer claiming it was privileged as it resulted from of purportedly without prejudice meeting where Norman Yu in January 2013 gave some but not all of his story. Had Norman Yu’s evidence been true, Andrea Di Battista would have known it from Wendi and would be required to answer questions on that evidence. This is a further indication that Norman Yu had lied.

A further example of their dishonesty revolved around Wayne’s allegation that the money was in Harold’s account in his name alone at the time of his death, and was transferred after he died. There were phone calls and other evidence to support this. Wendi swore in an affidavit that the money was not transferred before but after Harold died. He had passed March 13 2012.

“48   The Direction was accepted by BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. on February 29, 2012. Although the securities were not deposited into BMO Joint Account # 4551381314 in advance of March 13, 2012. the Direction was irrevocable and therefore the instruction could not be changed once BMO Nesbitt Burns accepted the Direction.”

Despite this specific sworn evidence and the admitted highly, suspicious sloppy and out of the ordinary course of business handling of the transfer documents, and in light of no credible evidence to the contrary, in essence saying that Wendi’s sworn statement was not credible. Baker and Baker who had drafted the affidavit and had it sworn by Wendi in essence by not challenging the judge, by implication, now denied Wendi’s sworn statement

For me, this was devastating. For someone who entered law and fought all my life because of my deep commitment to justice. I could not believe that with all Wendi, BMO and their lawyers lies and inconsistent and suspicious evidence that evil could triumph so easily. All that is left is to complete my fight against injustice and dirty stains of perjury.

Beyond the personal injustice and damage, the result of the disgraceful actions of Baker and Baker through Donald Baker and Andrea Di Battista was to bring the Administration of Justice into disrepute.

Wendi Laski with the help of her friend Norman Yu and BMO, got away with committing fraud. The victims were the Estate, Wayne, and The Government.

Wendi, her lawyers, Norman Yu, BMO and their lawyers got away with putting false and perjured evidence before the court.    

This conduct not only brings the Administration of Justice into disrepute, but cuts to the very heart of our judicial system. In my view lawyers who knowingly put false evidence before the court should be disbarred.

This kind of sleazy behavior by lawyers brings the profession into disrepute and supports the negative opinion of lawyers as dishonest and dishonorable held by a lot of the public.

Another sad example of conduct which in my view was improper was a the distribution, all to Wendi, a relatively small amounts monies, I believe were left her in the will.

When they first contacted me and asked me to consent to this distribution, I responded that I don’t think it had anything to do with me, nor did they need anything from me to do the distribution.

Most notably, when Wendi with Brian’s knowledge and consent, gave all the monies in the bank accounts and investment accounts to herself, Brian indicated that they did it because that’s what the will said. I was not consulted or advised of the actions they were taking. Why now for a rather small amount of money did they need my consent. I wrote them advising that given the fact that their client had committed fraud and lied under oath, and that the Baker firm knowingly put false evidence before the court, I did not trust any of them and would not deal with them.

While they harassed me, I was served with motion material to release the money. Again they had cleared the bulk of the estate and given it to Wendi without any knowledge or involvement on my part. It was not necessary to involve me.

I have been in deteriorating health for many years. The corrupt judgement, clients and lawyers putting false evidence before the court, caused me to break down. I lost my law practice, and house. I have had previous medical certificates, as I had been ill for some time. I had a medical certificate from my doctor indicating that I could not work for several months. I had not been well enough to prepare materials and certainly was not well enough to argue the motion. I was asking for an adjournment on that basis.

I participated by telephone in this motion. I advised the judge that they had done this kind of transfer without me for a large amount of money before and it didn’t require me. I have also advised the court that regardless of the fact that they didn’t need me to transfer that money. Further, I advised the court that Wendi, Brian, Donald Baker, and Andrea Di Batista had lied to me and lied to the court and for that reason I did not want to deal with them.

The matter came before Mme. Justice Dietrich in Superior Court on Wednesday the 17th day of July. As I was not physically able to attend I had contacted a company called CourtCall which the Ontario Court uses when lawyers are unable to appear. CourtCall connects counsel, opposing counsel, and the judge by video and audio. I made the necessary arrangements. The day before the hearing, CourtCall, notified me that they would not be able to provide the service as the court had moved the hearing two floors down.

I participated by telephone. I advised the judge that Wendi and Brian had done distributions together, without me, for a large amount of money before and it didn’t require me. I have also advised the court that regardless of the fact that they didn’t need me to transfer that money. Further, I advised the court that Wendi, Brian, Donald Baker, and Andrea Di Batista had lied to me and lied to the court and for that reason I did not want to deal with them.

I also advised the court as Dietrich continued, that as a result of my health, I did not feel comfortable or capable of arguing the motion at this time. Despite the above she went ahead and granted the order for the transfer, which I had never opposed, and then went on to order costs of $7500 against me. It’s bad enough to have your family rip you off. It’s bad enough when you’re dealing with unethical lawyers. It’s bad enough when a judge conducts herself corruptly as I set out in my blog, “Justice Perverted, Corrupted, and Denied by Judge Barbara Conway” on truthlikewater on WordPress.com but then a succession of judges decided that I had to pay for being defrauded by Wendi, her lawyers, BMO and their lawyer

The dishonest ugly greed of Wendi and her lawyers continues. If Wendi or her lawyers try and collect any further monies from me based on the judgements that they got by putting perjured evidence to the court, I will pursue them for fraud. They know that the judgement was obtained by fraud and for you to take money knowingly obtained by fraud, it is fraud. 

As to the truth of this, I invite Baker and Baker, Donald Baker, and Andrea di Battista to sue me. They won’t, just as BMO threatened but did not follow through on a lawsuit for defamation for the blog posts BMO DEFRAUDS INVESTOR CLIENT’S ESTATE and BMO NESBIT BURNS COMMITS CRIMES. WHO IS RESPONSIBLE ? to be found in my blog truthlikewater on WordPress.com. I would be pleased if any of Baker and Baker, and Andrea Di Battista, Donald Baker, BMO or their lawyers sued me for defamation. There is ample evidence to prove the contents of these blogs. The Truth is a defense.

All Above is the opinion and experience of the author as litigant and victim and to  provide some comfort to other victims who are not alone and to hope this does not happen to others.

The above is the opinion and experience of the author as a litigant and a victim.

Maybe America Should Have Stayed with Britain

Posted on Updated on

Those colonists loyal to King George III, left America to form my home, Canada.

I have always  admired much about the United States. Although democracy is never perfect, America flourished in their newly created country founded on freedom and liberty. I respected and appreciated America’s commitment to defend democracy and liberty around the world. They are the richest country on the planet.

Even before Trump polarized and focused America and the world’s attention on the strength or weakness of America’s democracy and social values, Trump has attacked the institutions and values that make America great. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are the cornerstones of American democracy and liberty.

Trump aside, some have begun to question America’s place as a leader and beacon for truth, fairness, justice, freedom and liberty. I look to Canada, and most of the civilized world to find universal healthcare. The world’s richest country, U.S.A, is without universal healthcare, or even meaningful healthcare while arguing about less.

Here we have political discourse which is generally civil and productive. I haven’t seen that in the United States since before Gingrich became speaker. What has followed is a continual obstructionism by both parties.

In Canada, again like most of the civilized world, we have sane and effective gun laws. Americans have to recognize that the Second Amendment was drafted in the 18th century in a different reality. Countries with more restrictive gun laws have far fewer gun deaths.

I still love America and believe the spirit of the best of the U.S.A, is the envy of the world. I, however, have realized that Americans may have been better off had they remained part of Great Britain as a colony, Dominion, member of the Commonwealth and an independent country. Chances are good that our neighbors to the south would have universal healthcare, sane gun laws, and a degree of civil, respectful and productive political discourse, with a democracy that never sunk this low.

Justin Trudeau, Not Just a Pretty Face

Posted on Updated on

Canada’s Prime Minister finds himself a focus of those who seem impressed with what they see in shirtless photo ops and on the cover of the Rolling Stone. He was dismissed by his opponents as the privileged son riding on the coattails of his famous father Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau. It was said that he lacked his father’s lofty intellect and was not up to the challenge.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. Not only is he up to the task, but he has advantages and talents beyond those of his father.

Pierre Trudeau came to power in the late 1960s. Canada was facing deep division over the cultural and political differences in Québec. Trudeau was the right man for the time. He handled political unrest avoiding civil war. He strengthend the bonds between Québec and English Canada and brought Canada into the modern age by repatriating its constitution.

I had the interesting experience of becoming acquainted with Pierre Trudeau when I was a law student in Ottawa in my early 20s. We were introduced through a close family friend Barney Danson, then Minister of Defence. Bearing the name of one of his favourite professors, Harold Laski, was the basis of striking up a friendship.

Pierre Elliott Trudeau was a highly intelligent, sophisticated, aloof and elegant man. He burst onto the Canadian scene with the charisma that spawned Trudeau mania where he was treated as a rock star. There was an alluring mystery to the man with whom Canada had a love-hate relationship.

Justin Trudeau comes by his political chops naturally. Yet he is a very different man from his father. He is strongly influenced by his mother Margaret. As a result he is not as aloof as his father. He may come from privilege, but he connects to and truly empathizes with and understands Canadians and their aspirations in a way few other politicians in Canada have been able to do. He understands the inequalities in society and is truly committed to speaking for all Canadians in making life better.

The issues that face society today are very different than the ones his father faced over four decades ago. The greatest issue facing the world today is the inequality in the distribution of wealth and resources.

He will guide Canada through further liberalization building on social and political values that Canadians consider to be at the core of being a Canadian.

I believe the future of this relatively young leader will find its true purpose on the international stage. His father’s name was floated as a possible Secretary-General of the United Nations after retiring from active Canadian politics. He shared the view that some form of world government to more fairly deal with disputes and a fair distribution of the world’s resources. The United Nations is the only entity that has the organization and infrastructure to provide that kind of leadership.

Justin Trudeau’s empathy, understanding, and feeling for the issues of greater equality of quality-of-life and share of resources would make him an excellent choice to take on the challenge. He is widely recognized and respected throughout the world. He is a young man with many missions ahead.

 

 

Don’t Forget Who He Is.

Posted on

Trump was sent to Washington to shake things up. A reaction to the voters anger from both parties at the governing class.

Today he spoke at the United Nations. He did what no other president has done. He attacked America’s enemies. He said the things that many Americans felt needed to be said.

He has shaken up government. He has attacked the leadership of both parties and has admonished them quite accurately for their failures and lack of accomplishment. When the GOP wouldn’t cooperate and come through, he turned to the Democrats. He doesn’t have an ideology.

These are admirable accomplishments. One must however, remember that this is a lying, pathological, misogynist degenerate.

It is unfortunate that the electorate had no other choice but the governing class they rejected or a corrupt con man.

Why Trump Really Won

Posted on Updated on

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton had less to do with the results of the election, than the voters of both parties anger at the governing class.

Voters were tired of the less than transparent conduct by the White House and Congress treating us like the audience of a reality TV show. Create a fantasy world, conflict, tension and keep the audience entertained.

America’s voters were fed up with a directionless government which took care of themselves before they took care of the American people. They were tired of the deadlock in Washington and nothing getting done.

Patients had run out for the governing class. Those who made their lives politics. Public service was seen by the people as a ticket to all the money made available by Citizens United.

The Democratic candidate was a member of the governing class. All of those Republicans who stood on the early stages of the campaign were members of the governing class. Trump was not. He capitalized on that anger and spoke out loud all of the fear and hate of the ugly underbelly of America.

That is what elected Donald Trump.

The Donald Trump Trample

Posted on Updated on

There’s a new dance sweeping the nation. It’s called the Donald Trump Trample. So far the White House staff, Departments of government, Congress, and Scotus are learning how it’s done.

First there’s the Trump Trample on racial and religious groups. From Mexicans to Muslims there’s enough disrespect and hate for all. His tacit support of the Nazis and white supremacists fit in with his concept of America.

Next he does the Trump Trample on individuals. Whether it’s Jeff Sessions, James Comey, the GOP leadership in Congress or the long list of departed staffers. No one but his family is spared. For now. Trump has no shame in publicly bullying and berating people.

Finally and more importantly he does the Trump Trample on the basic rights and freedoms that are the foundation of America. His war on the press has viciously attacked the First Amendment. The greatest and most pathological liar to ever sit in the Oval Office, wants to control the truth. He tacitly encourages violence and hate.

There’s no doubt that everybody’s afraid of the Trump Trample. He runs the country like a reality TV show. Create a fantasy world, crank up the drama and the tension and keep them entertained. He truly believes in his own superiority. Only he can decide what’s lawful or not. If you’re anywhere in government and you don’t fall in line you’re gone.

So far the Trump Trample has worked. He freely trashes institutions, individuals, and civil rights in the most base way built on pathological lies. He has succeeded in intimidating and frightening all around him. He will do the dance until he is recognized as the indispensable leader. His ego, personality disorders, and mental illness, will accept no less

Why are The One %

Posted on

There appears to be a consensus that 1% of the population controls 99% of the wealth. That is the problem at the root of conflict in the world.

Out of all the problems humankind faces, this is the most inane situation certainly on this planet and probably the rest of the universe.

How can people suffer every day from the fear that financial survival in this world demands? While the resources exist to alleviate 99% of it.

It’s not just the poor and disadvantaged, whose mere existence is an insult and stain on humanity. Most people, even the moderate to reasonably well-to-do, have to struggle with financial survival every day.

We live in a world that appears to be deteriorating around us, as infrastructure is a politicians low priority until it breaks. Federal and local governments around the world have lacked the resources to maintain or replace them. We lack the resources to provide the basic services that we need in this modern society. Governments, like most people, must deal with the pain of choosing priorities in accordance with their financial abilities.

Why? Why? Why?

The resources exist to deal with these issues in a way that eases life and makes it more fair for everyone.

The weight of history, has over the centuries distributed some of the great wealth held by the few amongst the rest of the population. The 1% has counted on control of the military and political scenery to maintain this balance. In this modern world it is unlikely that this is the case. Instant mass communication depending on how it is used may be the saviour or the downfall of humankind.

But the scale is starting to tip the other way. The pressure on society to find another way to keep score and fairly manage resources will meet head-on with a deteriorating society. It is hard to imagine that the flow of history will be stopped.

But for the moment we live in a bizarre world. All but the privileged few, under financial pressure from governments to the people. Meanwhile 1% of the population controls 99% of the wealth.

Why?

 

Donald Trump is Winning?

Posted on

Donald Trump promised to bring his business experience to government.

As the head of his own personal corporation he had absolute control over all of the employees and minions who fawned over him while he praised himself and abused them. Opposition was crushed. As a self promoter he controlled because no one was better than him. No one but him could do it.

People expressed their loyalty and showed it by doing what he wanted them to do. If you ran afoul of him, he was vicious, undisciplined, and childish as he is now.

He’s really neither Republican nor a Democrat and can play both against the other. He’s positioned himself to break the deadlock that has plagued Congress for many administrations.

That is how he sees government and himself. He is the absolute undisputed head of the organization and demands complete loyalty.  Business and government legalities didn’t frighten him. They don’t now that this man is president.

Donald Trump is relentlessly attacking the Free Press. He’s running the presidency like a reality TV show. Pump up the action, create conflict and controversy, and keep the audience entertained.

He is taking action to intimidate the press and other politicians into doing his will. He is a pathological liar who believes what he says. He deflects attacks by aggrandizing himself and attacking others.

He seems to be winning. He seems to be successful in intimidating politicians, Government employees staff and the public.

The legal parameters of any Presidency, have always been what you could get away with.

I personally think Donald Trump has some severe personality disorders and mental illness and is not fit, in fact is dangerous to American the world. He is the same misogynist predator who took advantage of many women. Ran up debt. Stuck it to the little guy, and walked off with his pockets jingling.

I like most citizens of the world look on in shock that this man is the President of the United States. The problem is, so far, he’s gotten away with it. Sure the fake news made a big deal of it. He knew the truth because he made it up. It’s like the Emperor’s New Clothes except everybody’s talking about it but nobody’s doing anything about it.

It just creeps up on you. The bullying and intimidation. Everyone except his family is fair game. Congress and Scotus seem to be towing the line. The freedoms will slowly disappear. Free speech and the truth are his enemies. He will subvert both the Democrats and Republicans and play them against each other. Everyone seems to be afraid to confront or run afoul of him.

Trump truly believes that he knows better than anyone else and is the only one who can do the job. That’s one of the hallmarks of a dictator. America better be very vigilant or you will wake up one morning and realize that it’s too late for free speech, truth and democracy.

Fear and hate are the currency he uses to excite his base. They are the thugs who will silence those who oppose Trump.

Meanwhile he goes on in the cloud that is Donald Trump imitating Mussolini (who I think he resembles in his facial expressions when he speaks at his rallies) and other dictators who plagued society.

Somebody do something soon! Before it is too late!