mcgillivray

people.com
Donald Trump Proclaims April Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month — and the Irony Is Lost on No One
Every April starting with President Obama in 2009, had been proclaimed National Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month

Well in that case, in honor of it being Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month, here is a list of the women who have spoke up about his misconduct:

  1. Ivana Trump (1989) - Marital rape
  2. Jill Harth (1992) - Assault at Mar-a-lago
  3. Jessica Leeds (1980s) - Groped her on an airplane
  4. Kristin Anderson (1990s) - Groped her beneath her skirt at a nightclub
  5. Cathy Heller (1997) - grabbed and kissed by Donald Trump
  6. Temple Taggart McDowell (1997) - publicly accused Trump of unwanted kisses and embraces
  7. Karena Virginia (1998) - Trump grabbed her arm and touched her breast
  8. Mindy McGillivray (2003) - Groped by Trump at his Mar-a-Lago estate
  9. Rachel Crooks (2005) - Kissed by Trump in an elevator
  10. Natasha Stoynoff (2005) - Groped and kissed her at Mar-a-lago
  11. Jessica Drake (2006) - Sexually assaulted her and two acquaintances
  12. Ninni Laaksonen (2006) - Grabbed her buttocks
  13. Summer Zervos (2007) - Kissed her open-mouthed, groped her breasts, and thrusted his genitals on her.
  14. Erin Burnett’s unnamed friend (2010) - Kissed in a Trump Tower boardroom
  15. Cassandra Searles (2013) - Groped Trump during the Miss USA pageant
  16. Bridget Sullivan (2000), Tasha Dixon (2001), Samantha Holvey (2006) - Said that Trump walked into the dressing room while the girls were naked.

And people STILL voted this misogynist egotistical disgusting predator as President of the United States. Making America Great Again for Predators.

Source

I emailed my Liberal MP (I just moved out of an NDP riding) regarding my concerns around C-23 and received, what I assume is, a general response from his office…still, I’m pleased to receive a response and was wondering what your thoughts may be on it:

Thank you for writing to MP Terry Beech with your concerns regarding Bill C-23, An Act respecting the preclearance of persons and goods in Canada and the United States. Terry appreciates hearing from constituents about their concerns and priorities, and asked me to follow-up with you to provide greater details and clarifications on Bill C-23.

The Government knows that a secure but smoothly functioning border is absolutely essential to the economic prosperity of both Canada and the United States. Preclearance at Canadian airports, in place for several decades now, is an important advantage for Canadian travellers, as it helps to avoid lineups and delays, and also enables more direct flights between many Canadian cities and U.S. airports not otherwise equipped to receive international travellers, such as Ronald Reagan Airport in D.C. and LaGuardia in New York City.

Each year, 12 million passengers undergo preclearance at eight major Canadian airports, including YVR, with little incident. Due to the success of the program, Prime Minister Trudeau and then-President Obama concluded a new agreement in the spring of 2016 which creates a framework for the expansion of land, rail, marine, and air preclearance between both countries. The Obama administration and the Congress passed legislation implementing the agreement late last year. Bill C-23, introduced last June, is Canada’s own implementing legislation.

We’ve heard from several constituents with concerns about the bill’s effect on Canadian sovereignty and the rights of travellers, and wanted to clear a few things up. Very little will change between the existing system and the proposed framework.

Most importantly, Canadian law will continue to apply within preclearance areas at all times and preclearance operations conducted by American officers must comply with our laws, including the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Human Rights Act.

While U.S. preclearance officers would indeed be permitted to detain somebody if there were reasonable grounds to believe that the person has broken Canadian law, American officers would be required to transfer that person into Canadian custody as soon as feasible, which is already the case under the current system.

If a traveller in a preclearance area decides that they no longer wish to enter the United States, they are entitled to withdraw from the area and preclearance officers would be prohibited from imposing any unreasonable delay on the traveller. That being said, they would have the authority to question the traveller about their reason for withdrawal or take a photograph to establish identity. These are common-sense security measures which will not unduly inconvenience travellers.

In terms of Canadians’ rights and freedoms, Bill C-23 and preclearance facilities actually enhance them. Many travellers entering the United States would normally clear customs and immigration on the American side, subject only to that country’s laws. In preclearance facilities, however, travellers are protected by our own laws and both Canadian and American officers are subject to the requirements of the Charter.

Expanded preclearance is a very positive development for Canada’s thriving tourism and travel industries. It has been lauded by the Canadian, BC, and Quebec chambers of commerce, as well as travel operators such as Vancouver’s Rocky Mountaineer and Toronto’s Porter Airlines. This government will continue to work hard to promote economic growth and travellers’ interests, while upholding the Charter and Canadians’ fundamental rights and freedoms.

Once again, thank you for writing to Mr. Beech about Bill C-23 and preclearance. I hope that we were able to address your concerns. Please don’t hesitate to write again, should you have questions or comments on this subject or any other.

Best regards,


Stewart McGillivray
Member’s Assistant
Office of Terry Beech, MP

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans, and the Canadian Coast Guard

Member of Parliament for Burnaby North-Seymour

Submitted by asbestoshazard

AlltheCanadianPolitics: Still doesn’t address all of my concerns about the bill. I’d be more ok with Mr. Beech’s reasoning if Hillary Clinton was in office, and not Trump. Border security guards in Trump’s America are already ‘acting rogue’ and disobeying federal judge’s rulings. I’m still very uncomfortable that we’re giving American Border guards the ability to carry weapons and detain suspects on Canadian soil.