FYI The email that was sent is under the CBC article below
---------- Original message ----------
From: Mail Delivery System <MAILER-DAEMON@bdc-ironport04.
Date: 24 Dec 2018 15:00:51 -0500
Subject: Message Notification
To:
Thank you for contacting the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) Office of Inspector General (OIG). We have received your
submission and will evaluate the information provided and take
appropriate action, which may include referral to another SEC office,
notification to another agency, or additional inquiry. In this
regard, please note the following:
• If you believe your life is in imminent danger, contact your local
law enforcement department.
• We only have the authority to address allegations or complaints that
relate to SEC programs, operations, and personnel.
• In some cases, we may need to contact you for further information in
order to evaluate your allegation(s). We may contact you from an SEC
email address such as OIG@sec.gov or by calling you from 202-551-2000.
Please do not attempt to contact us on 202-551-2000 as this number is
not equipped to receive incoming calls.
• Should you wish to make a complaint or report information to the SEC
OIG, you may do so by visiting our website at https://www.sec.gov/oig,
clicking on the link Submit Online Hotline Complaint to access our web
form, or by calling our toll-free hotline at (877) 442-0854. Please
note that you may remain anonymous, however; this may limit our
ability to investigate if we are unable to contact you for additional
information.
Thank you again for contacting the OIG.
Respectfully,
The Office of Inspector General
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-2977
Fax: 202-772-9265; oig@sec.gov
From: Mail Delivery System <MAILER-DAEMON@bdc-ironport04.
Date: 24 Dec 2018 15:00:51 -0500
Subject: Message Notification
To:
Thank you for contacting the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) Office of Inspector General (OIG). We have received your
submission and will evaluate the information provided and take
appropriate action, which may include referral to another SEC office,
notification to another agency, or additional inquiry. In this
regard, please note the following:
• If you believe your life is in imminent danger, contact your local
law enforcement department.
• We only have the authority to address allegations or complaints that
relate to SEC programs, operations, and personnel.
• In some cases, we may need to contact you for further information in
order to evaluate your allegation(s). We may contact you from an SEC
email address such as OIG@sec.gov or by calling you from 202-551-2000.
Please do not attempt to contact us on 202-551-2000 as this number is
not equipped to receive incoming calls.
• Should you wish to make a complaint or report information to the SEC
OIG, you may do so by visiting our website at https://www.sec.gov/oig,
clicking on the link Submit Online Hotline Complaint to access our web
form, or by calling our toll-free hotline at (877) 442-0854. Please
note that you may remain anonymous, however; this may limit our
ability to investigate if we are unable to contact you for additional
information.
Thank you again for contacting the OIG.
Respectfully,
The Office of Inspector General
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-2977
Fax: 202-772-9265; oig@sec.gov
https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies
David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and 49 others
Methinks the Feds know why that as the stock markets take another nosedive on Xmass Eve I reminded them I am still alive and paying attention N'esy Pas?
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2018/12/methinks-as-stock-markets-take-another.html
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2018/12/methinks-as-stock-markets-take-another.html
#nbpoli #cdnpoli #Trump #Trudeau #SEC #FBI #RCMP
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/dollar-markets-oil-monday-1.4958332
Stock markets fall into bear market territory after Mnuchin and Trump stoke worries
Monday's trading was the worst ever on a Christmas Eve for all 3 U.S. indexes
Stock markets sold off on Monday after U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin called the heads of six major U.S. banks Sunday in an apparent attempt to reassure jittery financial markets — but ended up only stoking investor fears.
In thin trading on Christmas Eve, the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 653 points, or almost three per cent, to close below the 22,000 level for the first time in 15 months. That's more than 5,000 points below where it was less than three months ago.
Markets have had their worst month in a decade as investors worry about growth prospects in the midst of an escalating global trade war. The gloom prompted Mnuchin to reach out to the chief executives of major U.S. banks to confirm they have ample money to finance all their normal operations — even though there haven't been any serious liquidity concerns rattling the market.
In thin trading on Christmas Eve, the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 653 points, or almost three per cent, to close below the 22,000 level for the first time in 15 months. That's more than 5,000 points below where it was less than three months ago.
The broader S&P 500 was down more than two per cent at 2,351, while the technology-focused Nasdaq was also little over two per cent lower at 6,192. All three have lost 20 per cent since their peaks, which means all three are officially in bear markets.
This is a disaster for the Fed, a disaster for the president and a disaster for the economy.- Peter Conti-Brown, Wharton SchoolStock markets closed at 1 p.m. ET Monday to mark Christmas Eve. Monday's trading action was the worst on a Christmas Eve for all three U.S. indexes ever.
Markets have had their worst month in a decade as investors worry about growth prospects in the midst of an escalating global trade war. The gloom prompted Mnuchin to reach out to the chief executives of major U.S. banks to confirm they have ample money to finance all their normal operations — even though there haven't been any serious liquidity concerns rattling the market.
Today I convened individual calls with the CEOs of the nation's six largest banks. See attached statement.
The move was meant to soothe investor fears, but seems to have had the opposite effect.
"Reports of Steve Mnuchin meeting with decision-makers will not provide much Christmas cheer," said Chris Beauchamp, chief market analyst at IG.
"Mnuchin is most likely worried about his job, but everyone else will draw the conclusion that there is perhaps much more to worry about."
![]()
A cracked Christmas ornament with the New York Stock Exchange logo hangs from the exchange's Christmas tree. U.S. stocks are on track for their worst month in a decade. (Mike Segar/Reuters)
"Mnuchin attempted some damage control," Win Thin, global head of currency strategy at Brown Brothers Harriman, said in a note, adding that the move could backfire.
"Yes, markets have been worried about recession, [but] until this weekend, however, markets were not that concerned about liquidity or clearance issues. And with markets on edge, the last thing they needed was another issue to worry about," Thin said.
The U.S. central bank, the Federal Reserve, hiked its key interest rate this month, and gave every indication that it plans to do so two more times. That also hasn't helped stocks, as higher rates make it more expensive to borrow to invest.
Mark Grant, chief global strategist of B. Riley FBR Inc., blamed the Fed, "as they raise rates at exactly the same time that they point out that the economy is shrinking.
"In my opinion, they have made a tremendous error in judgment. They are paying no attention, at all, to our declining economic conditions, as they create liquidity issues. Absolute folly, in my estimation."
U.S President Donald Trump seemed to agree. He has saidmore than once he would rather see rates stay low to encourage a stronger economy, ignoring the long established principle that the Federal Reserve sets it monetary policy independent of any political interference.
The president seemed to blame the Fed for the sell off on Monday, telling followers in a tweet that central bankers "don't have a feel for the market."
"He is seeking open warfare on Christmas Eve," said Peter Conti-Brown, a financial historian at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania.
"We've never seen anything like this full-blown and full-frontal assault. This is a disaster for the Fed, a disaster for the president and a disaster for the economy."
It's not just stocks that have taken a beating recently. Oil fell to $43.96 US a barrel on Monday, off by almost $2. After briefly topping $75 a barrel in October, the U.S. oil benchmark West Texas Intermediate has slumped steadily lower on growth concerns.
The gloom in oil has been bad news for the TSX, too, as the TSX slumped to its lowest level in more than two years to close at 13,799 on Monday, off by 135 points or almost one per cent.
That's the lowest Canada's benchmark stock index has traded since the summer of 2016, having lost about 15 per cent of its value this year.
The selloff wasn't limited to North America. France's CAC 40 was down 1.5 per cent at 4,626.39, while the FTSE 100 index of leading British shares fell 0.5 per cent to 6,685.99. Germany's DAX was closed.
"Reports of Steve Mnuchin meeting with decision-makers will not provide much Christmas cheer," said Chris Beauchamp, chief market analyst at IG.
"Mnuchin is most likely worried about his job, but everyone else will draw the conclusion that there is perhaps much more to worry about."
"Yes, markets have been worried about recession, [but] until this weekend, however, markets were not that concerned about liquidity or clearance issues. And with markets on edge, the last thing they needed was another issue to worry about," Thin said.
The U.S. central bank, the Federal Reserve, hiked its key interest rate this month, and gave every indication that it plans to do so two more times. That also hasn't helped stocks, as higher rates make it more expensive to borrow to invest.
Mark Grant, chief global strategist of B. Riley FBR Inc., blamed the Fed, "as they raise rates at exactly the same time that they point out that the economy is shrinking.
"In my opinion, they have made a tremendous error in judgment. They are paying no attention, at all, to our declining economic conditions, as they create liquidity issues. Absolute folly, in my estimation."
U.S President Donald Trump seemed to agree. He has saidmore than once he would rather see rates stay low to encourage a stronger economy, ignoring the long established principle that the Federal Reserve sets it monetary policy independent of any political interference.
The president seemed to blame the Fed for the sell off on Monday, telling followers in a tweet that central bankers "don't have a feel for the market."
The only problem our economy has is the Fed. They don’t have a feel for the Market, they don’t understand necessary Trade Wars or Strong Dollars or even Democrat Shutdowns over Borders. The Fed is like a powerful golfer who can’t score because he has no touch - he can’t putt!
"He is seeking open warfare on Christmas Eve," said Peter Conti-Brown, a financial historian at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania.
"We've never seen anything like this full-blown and full-frontal assault. This is a disaster for the Fed, a disaster for the president and a disaster for the economy."
It's not just stocks that have taken a beating recently. Oil fell to $43.96 US a barrel on Monday, off by almost $2. After briefly topping $75 a barrel in October, the U.S. oil benchmark West Texas Intermediate has slumped steadily lower on growth concerns.
The gloom in oil has been bad news for the TSX, too, as the TSX slumped to its lowest level in more than two years to close at 13,799 on Monday, off by 135 points or almost one per cent.
That's the lowest Canada's benchmark stock index has traded since the summer of 2016, having lost about 15 per cent of its value this year.
The selloff wasn't limited to North America. France's CAC 40 was down 1.5 per cent at 4,626.39, while the FTSE 100 index of leading British shares fell 0.5 per cent to 6,685.99. Germany's DAX was closed.
With files from The Associated Press and Reuters
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 16:00:35 -0400
Subject: Methinks the Feds know why that as the stock markets take another nosedive on
Xmass Eve I reminded them I am still alive andpaying attention N'esy Pas?
To: oig@sec.gov, OIGCounsel@oig.treas.gov, dean.buzza@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
rick.hancox@fcnb.ca
Cc: Ddavid.raymond.amos@gmail.com,
Frank.McKenna@td.com, francis.scarpaleggia@parl.gc.
https://davidraymondamos3.
---------- Original message ----------
From: OIGCounsel <OIGCounsel@oig.treas.gov>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 18:55:45 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Attn Daniel Gosselin why I have not recieved any response from
you or your lawyers to my phone calls and emails about the questionable fax and emails your
people have sent me recently?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for your email. If you have received an unsolicited call,
text, or email from an individual purporting to be from the Internal
Revenue Service, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), or the
Department of the Treasury--usually making threats of legal action or
even promises of federal grant funds--it is a fraud. Further, there
are NO government programs to 'reimburse victims of fraud".
There are a number of similar scams, some of which can be quite
persuasive: in some, the scammers have done brief Internet research of
potential victims so they appear to be familiar with their victim's
personal details, and they use this information as a springboard to
obtain more. You may report scams regarding the IRS at the following
site:
www.tigta.gov. Other scams can be reported to the Federal Trade
Commission at spam@uce.gov, (or call 1-877-FTC-HELP) and internet
(email) frauds to the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center at
www.ic3.gov.
Likewise, criminals do not respect US law, so they do not respect the
“Do Not Call” list either. Generally, it is helpful to avoid
answering any calls you do not recognize, so you have time to consider
and research any demands that might have been left on voicemail.
Several media sources have written articles on potential steps for
self-protection: for instance, “How to stop annoying robocalls on your
iPhone or Android
phone<https://www.theverge.
at The Verge; “Robocalls Flooding Your Cellphone? Here’s How to Stop
Them”,<https://www.nytimes.
and “Worried About the I.R.S. Scam? Here’s How to Handle Phone
Fraud,”<https://www.nytimes.
available at the NY Times, explore a number of alternative options
that potential victims may find helpful. Although neither these
articles nor their publishers are affiliated with the U.S. Department
of the Treasury, you may find one or more of these articles to contain
helpful information.
Please be aware also that phone numbers and email addresses can be
"spoofed" to appear to be generated from a federal agency. Recently
there has been an increase in reports of scammers using this method to
make it appear as if a number associated with this agency or the DC
area is the calling number. Do not be taken in! We encourage you to
continue to be extremely wary of unsolicited telephone or e-mail
communications, particularly those that request personal information,
contain any offer of some prize or "grant," or make monetary demands.
Complaints regarding fraud, waste, or abuse in the Department of the
Treasury, excluding the IRS, may be reported at
www.treasury.gov/about/
We have noted that some systems do not download operational links from
this autoreply, instead generating the links as duplicate address
texts. If your system is experiencing these issues, we thank you for
your patience while we attempt to fix this issue. These sites can also
be accessed by either typing in the specific www. or https:\\
address, or locating the site via a search engine.
Sincerely,
Office of Counsel
---------- Original message ----------
From: Mail Delivery System <MAILER-DAEMON@adc-iport02.
Date: 24 Dec 2018 13:55:06 -0500
Subject: Message Notification
To:
Thank you for contacting the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) Office of Inspector General (OIG). We have received your
submission and will evaluate the information provided and take
appropriate action, which may include referral to another SEC office,
notification to another agency, or additional inquiry. In this
regard, please note the following:
• If you believe your life is in imminent danger, contact your local
law enforcement department.
• We only have the authority to address allegations or complaints that
relate to SEC programs, operations, and personnel.
• In some cases, we may need to contact you for further information in
order to evaluate your allegation(s). We may contact you from an SEC
email address such as OIG@sec.gov or by calling you from 202-551-2000.
Please do not attempt to contact us on 202-551-2000 as this number is
not equipped to receive incoming calls.
• Should you wish to make a complaint or report information to the SEC
OIG, you may do so by visiting our website at https://www.sec.gov/oig,
clicking on the link Submit Online Hotline Complaint to access our web
form, or by calling our toll-free hotline at (877) 442-0854. Please
note that you may remain anonymous, however; this may limit our
ability to investigate if we are unable to contact you for additional
information.
Thank you again for contacting the OIG.
Respectfully,
The Office of Inspector General
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-2977
Fax: 202-772-9265; oig@sec.gov
On 12/24/18, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Hardy, Manon"<Manon.Hardy@justice.gc.ca>
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 18:33:19 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks that after arguing Manon Hardy;s
> buddies in Federal Court for over 3 years they cannot deny the obvious
> The documents hereto attached are properly filed in the docket N'esy
> Pas?
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Hello/Bonjour,
>
> Please note that I will be back to the office on January 3, 2019.
>
> Veuillez noter que je serai de retour au bureau le 3 janvier 2019.
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Baumberg, Andrew"<Andrew.Baumberg@cas-satj.gc.
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 18:33:20 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks that after arguing Manon Hardy;s
> buddies in Federal Court for over 3 years they cannot deny the obvious
> The documents hereto attached are properly filed in the docket N'esy
> Pas?
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> I am away from the office until December 31.
>
> To find out if a case is before the Federal Court and see its
> procedural history, see FAQ
> #1<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc_
> to the documents filed in Court, you may contact your local Registry
> Office<http://www.fct-cf.gc.
> #4<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc_
> Federal Court hearings is available on the Hearing
> List<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/
>
>
> Je suis hors du bureau jusqu’au 31 décembre.
>
> Pour vérifier si la Cour fédérale est saisie d'une affaire et
> connaître l'historique procédural, voir la FAQ #
> 1<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc_
> d'un document déposé à la Cour, vous pouvez contacter votre bureau
> local du Greffe<http://www.fct-cf.gc.
> la FAQ #4)<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/
> audiences de la Cour fédérale se trouve à la page
> Rôle<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/
>
>
> Andrew Baumberg
> Legal Counsel / Conseiller juridique
> Federal Court / Cour fédérale
> (613) 947-3177
> andrew.baumberg@fct-cf.gc.ca<
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 14:33:07 -0400
> Subject: Methinks that after arguing Manon Hardy;s buddies in Federal
> Court for over 3 years they cannot deny the obvious The documents
> hereto attached are properly filed in the docket N'esy Pas?
> To: Manon.Hardy@justice.gc.ca, Samantha.Boorman@justice.gc.ca
> Melissa.Chan@justice.gc.ca, mcu@justice.gc.ca, JUSTMIN@novascotia.ca,
> "Mark.Blakely"<Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "martin.gaudet"
> <martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca>
> <Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Liliana.Longo"
> <Liliana.Longo@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
> "greg.thompson2"<greg.thompson2@gnb.ca>, "carl.urquhart"
> <carl.urquhart@gnb.ca>, "hugh.flemming"<hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>,
> "andrea.anderson-mason"<andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>
> <david.hansen@justice.gc.ca>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>,
> sfine <sfine@globeandmail.com>, daniel.gosselin@cas-satj.gc.ca
> andrew.baumberg@fct-cf.gc.ca, Bruce.Preston@cas-satj.gc.ca,
> Beatriz.Winter@cas-satj.gc.ca, Gib.vanErt@scc-csc.ca,
> marc.giroux@fja-cmf.gc.ca, Lorri.Warner@justice.gc.ca,
> jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca, bill.pentney@justice.gc.ca
> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Manon Hardy <Manon.Hardy@priv.gc.ca>
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:37:37 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
> strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> Je vous remercie pour votre message. Veuillez noter qu'? partir du 12
> nov. 2018, je travaillerai au minist?re de la Justice du Canada.
> Veuillez communiquer avec Ewelina Frackowiak ou Julia Barss pour
> toute assistance.
> *****
> Thank you for your message. Please note that starting on Nov. 12,
> 2018, I will be joining the Department of Justice of Canada. Please
> contact Ewelina Frackowiak or Julia Barss for assistance.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:25:01 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
> strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
> To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
>
> Thank you for writing to the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Member
> of Parliament for Vancouver Granville.
>
> This message is to acknowledge that we are in receipt of your email.
> Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence, there
> may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured that your
> message will be carefully reviewed.
>
> To help us address your concerns more quickly, please include within
> the body of your email your full name, address, and postal code.
>
> Please note that your message will be forwarded to the Department of
> Justice if it concerns topics pertaining to the member's role as the
> Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada. For all future
> correspondence addressed to the Minister of Justice, please write
> directly to the Department of Justice at
> mcu@justice.gc.camcu@
> or call 613-957-4222.From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 16:00:35 -0400
Subject: Methinks the Feds know why that as the stock markets take another nosedive on
Xmass Eve I reminded them I am still alive andpaying attention N'esy Pas?
To: oig@sec.gov, OIGCounsel@oig.treas.gov, dean.buzza@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
rick.hancox@fcnb.ca
Cc: Ddavid.raymond.amos@gmail.com,
Frank.McKenna@td.com, francis.scarpaleggia@parl.gc.
https://davidraymondamos3.
---------- Original message ----------
From: OIGCounsel <OIGCounsel@oig.treas.gov>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 18:55:45 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Attn Daniel Gosselin why I have not recieved any response from
you or your lawyers to my phone calls and emails about the questionable fax and emails your
people have sent me recently?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for your email. If you have received an unsolicited call,
text, or email from an individual purporting to be from the Internal
Revenue Service, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), or the
Department of the Treasury--usually making threats of legal action or
even promises of federal grant funds--it is a fraud. Further, there
are NO government programs to 'reimburse victims of fraud".
There are a number of similar scams, some of which can be quite
persuasive: in some, the scammers have done brief Internet research of
potential victims so they appear to be familiar with their victim's
personal details, and they use this information as a springboard to
obtain more. You may report scams regarding the IRS at the following
site:
www.tigta.gov. Other scams can be reported to the Federal Trade
Commission at spam@uce.gov, (or call 1-877-FTC-HELP) and internet
(email) frauds to the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center at
www.ic3.gov.
Likewise, criminals do not respect US law, so they do not respect the
“Do Not Call” list either. Generally, it is helpful to avoid
answering any calls you do not recognize, so you have time to consider
and research any demands that might have been left on voicemail.
Several media sources have written articles on potential steps for
self-protection: for instance, “How to stop annoying robocalls on your
iPhone or Android
phone<https://www.theverge.
at The Verge; “Robocalls Flooding Your Cellphone? Here’s How to Stop
Them”,<https://www.nytimes.
and “Worried About the I.R.S. Scam? Here’s How to Handle Phone
Fraud,”<https://www.nytimes.
available at the NY Times, explore a number of alternative options
that potential victims may find helpful. Although neither these
articles nor their publishers are affiliated with the U.S. Department
of the Treasury, you may find one or more of these articles to contain
helpful information.
Please be aware also that phone numbers and email addresses can be
"spoofed" to appear to be generated from a federal agency. Recently
there has been an increase in reports of scammers using this method to
make it appear as if a number associated with this agency or the DC
area is the calling number. Do not be taken in! We encourage you to
continue to be extremely wary of unsolicited telephone or e-mail
communications, particularly those that request personal information,
contain any offer of some prize or "grant," or make monetary demands.
Complaints regarding fraud, waste, or abuse in the Department of the
Treasury, excluding the IRS, may be reported at
www.treasury.gov/about/
We have noted that some systems do not download operational links from
this autoreply, instead generating the links as duplicate address
texts. If your system is experiencing these issues, we thank you for
your patience while we attempt to fix this issue. These sites can also
be accessed by either typing in the specific www. or https:\\
address, or locating the site via a search engine.
Sincerely,
Office of Counsel
---------- Original message ----------
From: Mail Delivery System <MAILER-DAEMON@adc-iport02.
Date: 24 Dec 2018 13:55:06 -0500
Subject: Message Notification
To:
Thank you for contacting the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) Office of Inspector General (OIG). We have received your
submission and will evaluate the information provided and take
appropriate action, which may include referral to another SEC office,
notification to another agency, or additional inquiry. In this
regard, please note the following:
• If you believe your life is in imminent danger, contact your local
law enforcement department.
• We only have the authority to address allegations or complaints that
relate to SEC programs, operations, and personnel.
• In some cases, we may need to contact you for further information in
order to evaluate your allegation(s). We may contact you from an SEC
email address such as OIG@sec.gov or by calling you from 202-551-2000.
Please do not attempt to contact us on 202-551-2000 as this number is
not equipped to receive incoming calls.
• Should you wish to make a complaint or report information to the SEC
OIG, you may do so by visiting our website at https://www.sec.gov/oig,
clicking on the link Submit Online Hotline Complaint to access our web
form, or by calling our toll-free hotline at (877) 442-0854. Please
note that you may remain anonymous, however; this may limit our
ability to investigate if we are unable to contact you for additional
information.
Thank you again for contacting the OIG.
Respectfully,
The Office of Inspector General
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-2977
Fax: 202-772-9265; oig@sec.gov
On 12/24/18, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Hardy, Manon"<Manon.Hardy@justice.gc.ca>
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 18:33:19 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks that after arguing Manon Hardy;s
> buddies in Federal Court for over 3 years they cannot deny the obvious
> The documents hereto attached are properly filed in the docket N'esy
> Pas?
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Hello/Bonjour,
>
> Please note that I will be back to the office on January 3, 2019.
>
> Veuillez noter que je serai de retour au bureau le 3 janvier 2019.
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Baumberg, Andrew"<Andrew.Baumberg@cas-satj.gc.
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 18:33:20 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks that after arguing Manon Hardy;s
> buddies in Federal Court for over 3 years they cannot deny the obvious
> The documents hereto attached are properly filed in the docket N'esy
> Pas?
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> I am away from the office until December 31.
>
> To find out if a case is before the Federal Court and see its
> procedural history, see FAQ
> #1<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc_
> to the documents filed in Court, you may contact your local Registry
> Office<http://www.fct-cf.gc.
> #4<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc_
> Federal Court hearings is available on the Hearing
> List<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/
>
>
> Je suis hors du bureau jusqu’au 31 décembre.
>
> Pour vérifier si la Cour fédérale est saisie d'une affaire et
> connaître l'historique procédural, voir la FAQ #
> 1<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc_
> d'un document déposé à la Cour, vous pouvez contacter votre bureau
> local du Greffe<http://www.fct-cf.gc.
> la FAQ #4)<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/
> audiences de la Cour fédérale se trouve à la page
> Rôle<http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/
>
>
> Andrew Baumberg
> Legal Counsel / Conseiller juridique
> Federal Court / Cour fédérale
> (613) 947-3177
> andrew.baumberg@fct-cf.gc.ca<
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 14:33:07 -0400
> Subject: Methinks that after arguing Manon Hardy;s buddies in Federal
> Court for over 3 years they cannot deny the obvious The documents
> hereto attached are properly filed in the docket N'esy Pas?
> To: Manon.Hardy@justice.gc.ca, Samantha.Boorman@justice.gc.ca
> Melissa.Chan@justice.gc.ca, mcu@justice.gc.ca, JUSTMIN@novascotia.ca,
> "Mark.Blakely"<Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "martin.gaudet"
> <martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca>
> <Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Liliana.Longo"
> <Liliana.Longo@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
> "greg.thompson2"<greg.thompson2@gnb.ca>, "carl.urquhart"
> <carl.urquhart@gnb.ca>, "hugh.flemming"<hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>,
> "andrea.anderson-mason"<andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>
> <david.hansen@justice.gc.ca>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>,
> sfine <sfine@globeandmail.com>, daniel.gosselin@cas-satj.gc.ca
> andrew.baumberg@fct-cf.gc.ca, Bruce.Preston@cas-satj.gc.ca,
> Beatriz.Winter@cas-satj.gc.ca, Gib.vanErt@scc-csc.ca,
> marc.giroux@fja-cmf.gc.ca, Lorri.Warner@justice.gc.ca,
> jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca, bill.pentney@justice.gc.ca
> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Manon Hardy <Manon.Hardy@priv.gc.ca>
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:37:37 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
> strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> Je vous remercie pour votre message. Veuillez noter qu'? partir du 12
> nov. 2018, je travaillerai au minist?re de la Justice du Canada.
> Veuillez communiquer avec Ewelina Frackowiak ou Julia Barss pour
> toute assistance.
> *****
> Thank you for your message. Please note that starting on Nov. 12,
> 2018, I will be joining the Department of Justice of Canada. Please
> contact Ewelina Frackowiak or Julia Barss for assistance.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:25:01 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
> strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
> To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
>
> Thank you for writing to the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Member
> of Parliament for Vancouver Granville.
>
> This message is to acknowledge that we are in receipt of your email.
> Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence, there
> may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured that your
> message will be carefully reviewed.
>
> To help us address your concerns more quickly, please include within
> the body of your email your full name, address, and postal code.
>
> Please note that your message will be forwarded to the Department of
> Justice if it concerns topics pertaining to the member's role as the
> Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada. For all future
> correspondence addressed to the Minister of Justice, please write
> directly to the Department of Justice at
> mcu@justice.gc.ca
>
> Thank you
>
> -------------------
>
> Merci d'?crire ? l'honorable Jody Wilson-Raybould, d?put?e de
> Vancouver Granville.
>
> Le pr?sent message vise ? vous informer que nous avons re?u votre
> courriel. En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de
> correspondance, il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
> votre courriel. Sachez que votre message sera examin? attentivement.
>
> Pour nous aider ? r?pondre ? vos pr?occupations plus rapidement,
> veuillez inclure dans le corps de votre courriel votre nom complet,
> votre adresse et votre code postal.
>
> Veuillez prendre note que votre message sera transmis au minist?re de
> la Justice s'il porte sur des sujets qui rel?vent du r?le de la
> d?put?e en tant que ministre de la Justice et procureure g?n?rale du
> Canada. Pour toute correspondance future adress?e ? la ministre de la
> Justice, veuillez ?crire directement au minist?re de la Justice ?
> mcu@justice.gc.ca ou appelez au 613-957-4222.
>
> Merci
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Barry, Clare"<Clare.Barry@justice.gc.ca>
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:37:23 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
> strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Je serai absente du bureau entre le 27 decembre et le 2 janvier. Dans
> mon absence, veuillez contactez Sam Boorman ou Melissa Chan dans le
> bureau regional.
>
> I will be away from the office from December 27, 2018 to January 2,
> 2019. In my absence, kindly contact Sam Boorman or Melissa Chan of the
> Atlantic Regional Office.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Jensen, Jan"<jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:37:23 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
> strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> I will be away from the office and not returning until Tuesday
> December 27th, 2018. If you require immediate assistance, please
> contact my assistant at (902) 407 7461.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:37:57 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
> strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
> To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
>
> Please be advised that the Constituency Office of Bill Blair will be
> closed from December 24th to January 1st. The office will re-open on
> January 2nd, 2019. During this time I will have limited access to
> email.
>
> Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays and all the best for 2019.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jessica Bozzo
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Justice Minister <JUSTMIN@novascotia.ca>
> Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:37:27 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
> strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Thank you for your email to the Minister of Justice. Please be assured
> that it has been received by the Department. Your email will be
> reviewed and addressed accordingly. Thank you.
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 22:02:31 -0400
> Subject: YO Brenda Lucki You know as well as I that the Civilian
> Review and Complaints Commission has not done anything ethical since
> we crossed paths in 2003 and obviously never will
> To: daniel.gosselin@cas-satj.gc.ca
> Bruce.Preston@cas-satj.gc.ca, Beatriz.Winter@cas-satj.gc.ca,
> Gib.vanErt@scc-csc.ca, marc.giroux@fja-cmf.gc.ca,
> Lorri.Warner@justice.gc.ca, jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca,
> bill.pentney@justice.gc.ca, Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca,
> Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
> Clare.Barry@justice.gc.ca, David.Hansen@justice.gc.ca,
> Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, liliana.longo@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
> hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca, Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
> Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, pm@pm.gc.ca, andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca,
> maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca, Michael.Wernick@pco-bcp.gc.ca,
> complaints@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca, Newsroom@globeandmail.com,
> Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, Larry.Tremblay@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
> Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, washington field
> washington.field@ic.fbi.gov, Boston.Mail@ic.fbi.gov
> Cc: motomaniac333@gmail.com, David.Raymond.Amos@gmail.com
>
> - Hide quoted text -
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Complaints <complaints@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca>
> Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 17:56:32 +0000
> Subject: Civilian Review and Complaints Commission 2018-2861 David Amos
> To: "david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>
> David Amos:
>
> Please see the attached letter regarding your complaint against the RCMP.
>
>
> Intake Office, Operations
> Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP / Government of
> Canada
> complaints@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca<
> 1-800-665-6878 / TTY: 1-866-432-5827/
> www.crcc-ccetp.gc.ca/en/make-
>
> Bureau de réception des plaintes, Opérations
> Commission civile d'examen et de traitement des plaintes relatives à
> la GRC / Gouvernement du Canada
> plaintes@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca<
> 1-800-665-6878 / ATS : 1-866-432-5827/
> www.crcc-ccetp.gc.ca/fr/depot-
>
> [crcc-email-block]
>
>
> http://davidamos.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> "Harper, Stephen - M.P."Harper.S@parl.gc.ca wrote:
>
> Subject: RE: Re: Lets all go through the looking glass to check the
> Integrity of the Talking Heads in BC tonight
> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 15:32:54 -0500
> From: "Harper, Stephen - M.P."Harper.S@parl.gc.ca
> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>
> Thank you for your e-mail message to Stephen Harper, Leader of the
> Opposition. Your views and suggestions are important to us. Once they
> have been carefully considered, you may receive a further reply.
>
> *Remember to include your mailing address if you would like a response.
>
> If you prefer to send your thoughts by regular mail, please address them
> to:
>
> Stephen Harper, M.P.
> Leader of the Opposition
> House of Commons
> Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6
>
> Mail may be sent postage free to any Member of Parliament.
>
> You can also reach Mr. Harper by fax at: (613) 947-0310
> Martin Demands That Harper Must Come Clean on Notwithstanding Clause
> by LPC Friday, 16 December 2005
> Prime Minister Paul Martin demanded Conservative Leader Stephen Harper
> come clean that he intends to use the notwithstanding clause to
> overturn the Charter right to same-sex marriage.
>
> Mr. Harper said during tonight’s leader’s debate in Vancouver on the
> topic of abolishing same-sex marriage: "I will never use the
> notwithstanding clause on that issue."
>
> Prime Minister Martin asked that he be honest with the Canadian people
> regarding his intention to override a Charter right.
> "We're talking about integrity. That means being honest. Either Mr.
> Harper is going to try to change the law of the country that protects
> the rights and freedoms of gays and lesbians or he's not going to,"
> said Prime Minister Martin.
>
> "If he's going to use the notwithstanding clause, he should say so,
> and the people will at least know what his position is."
> The Prime Minister said Mr. Harper’s proposal would require the use of
> the notwithstanding clause because it is not possible to have a vote
> in the house that will overrule the Constitution and the courts
> without using the notwithstanding clause.
>
> This is borne out by a January 25 open letter from more than 100 legal
> experts from across Canada to Mr. Harper regarding same-sex marriage
> legislation.
>
> Mr. Martin called on Mr. Harper to be "honest."
>
> He made clear that the Liberal government does not believe that you
> can pick and choose which Charter rights you will protect and he
> affirmed that he will respect the Charter as a whole.
> The Prime Minister said Mr. Harper’s proposal would require the use of
> the notwithstanding clause because it is not possible to have a vote
> in the house that will overrule the Constitution and the courts
> without using the notwithstanding clause.
>
> This is borne out by a January 25 open letter from more than 100 legal
> experts from across Canada to Mr. Harper regarding same-sex marriage
> legislation.
>
> Mr. Martin called on Mr. Harper to be "honest."
>
> He made clear that the Liberal government does not believe that you
> can pick and choose which Charter rights you will protect and he
> affirmed that he will respect the Charter as a whole.
>
>
>
> On 12/12/18, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> https://davidraymondamos3.
>>
>> Wednesday, 12 December 2018
>>
>> The latest Public Safety Minister Carl Urquhart yesterday the RCMP and
>> many lawyers know Fat Fred City and the province are about to get sued
>> BIGTIME
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Gallant, Brian (LEG)"<Brian.Gallant@gnb.ca>
>> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 17:48:50 +0000
>> Subject: RE: YO Deputy Premier Robert Gauvin Enjoy
>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>
>> Thank you for writing to the Leader of the Official Opposition of New
>> Brunswick. Please be assured that your e-mail will be reviewed.
>>
>> If this is a media request, please forward your e-mail to
>> ashley.beaudin@gnb.ca
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Nous vous remercions d’avoir communiqué avec le chef de l’opposition
>> officielle du Nouveau-Brunswick. Soyez assuré(e) que votre courriel
>> sera examiné.
>>
>> Si ceci est une demande médiatique, prière de la transmettre à
>> ashley.beaudin@gnb.ca
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: Premier of Ontario | Premier ministre de l’Ontario
>> <Premier@ontario.ca>
>> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 17:48:28 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: YO Deputy Premier Robert Gauvin Enjoy
>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>
>> Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly
>> valued.
>>
>> You can be assured that all emails and letters are carefully read,
>> reviewed and taken into consideration.
>>
>> There may be occasions when, given the issues you have raised and the
>> need to address them effectively, we will forward a copy of your
>> correspondence to the appropriate government official. Accordingly, a
>> response may take several business days.
>>
>> Thanks again for your email.
>> ______
>>
>> Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
>> nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations.
>>
>> Nous tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
>> considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.
>>
>> Dans certains cas, nous transmettrons votre message au ministère
>> responsable afin que les questions soulevées puissent être traitées de
>> la manière la plus efficace possible. En conséquence, plusieurs jours
>> ouvrables pourraient s’écouler avant que nous puissions vous répondre.
>>
>> Merci encore pour votre courriel.
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Gauvin, Serge (SNB)"<Serge.Gauvin@snb.ca>
>> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 17:48:49 +0000
>> Subject: Réponse automatique : YO Deputy Premier Robert Gauvin Enjoy
>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>
>> I am out of the office. Please contact Patrick Windle at
>> patrick.windle@snb.ca
>>
>> Je suis absent du bureau. Veuillez contacter Patrick Windle à
>> patrick.windle@snb.ca
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: "Cormier, Donna (JAG/JPG)"<donna.cormier@gnb.ca>
>> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 20:15:11 +0000
>> Subject: Automatic reply: Yp John Logan I just called
>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>
>> I'm away from the office until December 12, 2018. Should your matter
>> require immediate attention, please contact Susan Butler at (506)
>> 453-6309.
>>
>> Je suis à l'extérieur du bureau jusqu'au 12 décembre 2018. Si votre
>> matière est urgente, veuillez communiquer avec Susan Butler au (506)
>> 453-6309.
>>
>> Merci / Thank you
>> Donna Cormier
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 15:49:18 -0400
>> Subject: Yp John Logan I just called
>> To: donna.cormier@gnb.ca, John.Logan@gnb.ca
>> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
>> Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 02:04:52 -0400
>> Subject: So Much for the Strong Ethics of the Strong Organization
>> commonnly knows as the RCMP/GRC N'esy Pas?
>> To: Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "Jody.Wilson-Raybould"
>> <Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
>> <mike.holland@gnb.ca>, "Mitton, Megan (LEG)"<megan.mitton@gnb.ca>,
>> "carl.urquhart"<carl.urquhart@gnb.ca>, "Stephane.vaillancourt"
>> <Stephane.vaillancourt@rcmp-
>> <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>, news <news@kingscorecord.com>, "Gilles.Blinn"
>> <Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Michelle.Boutin"
>> <Michelle.Boutin@rcmp-grc.gc.
>> <michelle.conroy@gnb.ca>, "michael.comeau"<michael.comeau@gnb.ca>,
>> "Norman.Sabourin"<Norman.Sabourin@cjc-ccm.gc.ca
>> <andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca>, "maxime.bernier"
>> <maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca>, "Gilles.Moreau"
>> <Gilles.Moreau@forces.gc.ca>, "Gilles.Cote"<Gilles.Cote@gnb.ca>,
>> "gerry.lowe"<gerry.lowe@gnb.ca>, "Gerald.Butts"
>> <Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, "Michael.Wernick"
>> <Michael.Wernick@pco-bcp.gc.ca
>> <Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "dale.drummond"
>> <dale.drummond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
>> ddale <ddale@thestar.ca>, sfine <sfine@globeandmail.com>
>> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: ethics-ethique ethics-ethique <ethics-ethique@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>> Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2018 00:22:30 -0500
>> Subject: Re: Re My many calls to the Calgary Police Dept about their
>> client Partick Doran and his many cohorts
>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>
>> This will confirm that we have received your enquiry and it has been
>> placed in a priority sequence.
>> ******************************
>> La présente confirme que nous avons bien reçu votre requête et qu'elle
>> a été placée en ordre de priorité de réception.
>>
>> Thank you/Merci
>>
>> Professional Ethics Office / Bureau de l'éthique professionelle
>> Royal Canadian Mounted Police / Gendarmerie royale du Canada
>> 73 Leikin Dr., M5-3-101
>> RCMP Mailstop #58/
>> GRC Arrêt Postal #58
>> Ottawa, Ontario
>> K1A 0R2
>>
>> 1-866-206-0195 (off/bur)
>>
>> ethics-ethique@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>
>> "Strong Ethics, Strong Organization"
>> « Une éthique solide pour une organisation solide »
>>
>> This document is the property of the Government of Canada. It is
>> loaned, in confidence, to your agency only and is not to be
>> reclassified or further disseminated without the consent of the
>> originator."
>>
>> « Ce document appartient au gouvernement du Canada. Il n'est transmis
>> en confidence qu'à votre organisme et il ne doit pas être reclassifié
>> ou transmis à d'autres sans le consentement de l'expéditeur. »
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400
>>> Subject: Attn Integrity Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>> To: coi@gnb.ca
>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>
>>> Good Day Sir
>>>
>>> After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office again and managed
>>> to speak to one of your staff for the first time
>>>
>>> Please find attached the documents I promised to send to the lady who
>>> answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not after the Sgt
>>> at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal Tanker
>>> Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only document.
>>>
>>> These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal Court that I
>>> suggested that you study closely.
>>>
>>> This is the docket in Federal Court
>>>
>>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>
>>> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>>>
>>> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/
>>>
>>> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/
>>>
>>> April 3rd, 2017
>>>
>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>
>>>
>>> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>>>
>>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>>
>>>
>>> The only hearing thus far
>>>
>>> May 24th, 2017
>>>
>>> https://archive.org/details/
>>>
>>>
>>> This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>>>
>>> Date: 20151223
>>>
>>> Docket: T-1557-15
>>>
>>> Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>>>
>>> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell
>>>
>>> BETWEEN:
>>>
>>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>>
>>> Plaintiff
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>>
>>> Defendant
>>>
>>> ORDER
>>>
>>> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on
>>> December 14, 2015)
>>>
>>> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way of motion pursuant to
>>> the Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an Order made on November
>>> 12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of Claim
>>> in its entirety.
>>>
>>> At the outset of the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention a
>>> letter dated September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then
>>> capacity as Past President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian
>>> Bar Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen Quigg,
>>> (now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that letter
>>> he stated:
>>>
>>> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you check the
>>> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm including you.
>>> You are your brother’s keeper.
>>>
>>> Frank McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former
>>> colleague of mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to
>>> expressing an intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number of
>>> people in his Motion Record who he appears to contend may be witnesses
>>> or potential parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to
>>> me personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime
>>> Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
>>> Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba Court of
>>> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob Moore;
>>> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau; former
>>> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former Staff
>>> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick Court
>>> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and, retired
>>> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian Mounted
>>> Police.
>>>
>>> In the circumstances, given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
>>> personal capacity and my past and present relationship with many
>>> potential witnesses and/or potential parties to the litigation, I am
>>> of the view there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias should I
>>> hear this motion. See Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in
>>> Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et al,
>>> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the applicable test regarding
>>> allegations of bias. In the circumstances, although neither party has
>>> requested I recuse myself, I consider it appropriate that I do so.
>>>
>>>
>>> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator of
>>> the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion. There
>>> is no order as to costs.
>>>
>>> “B. Richard Bell”
>>> Judge
>>>
>>>
>>> Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment
>>> already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had sent
>>> to your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>>>
>>> I noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court
>>> Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the
>>> bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my
>>> lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada?
>>>
>>> "FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the
>>> most
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Original message ----------
>>> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca
>>> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM
>>> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My complaint against the CROWN in
>>> Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to
>>> submit a motion for a publication ban on my complaint trust that you
>>> dudes are way past too late
>>> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>
>>> Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre à
>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>
>>> Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel à
>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>
>>> Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at
>>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>>
>>> To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to
>>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>> Merci ,
>>>
>>>
>>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>>
>>>
>>> 83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more war
>>> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to
>>> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over
>>> five years after he began his bragging:
>>>
>>> January 13, 2015
>>> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate
>>>
>>> December 8, 2014
>>> Why Canada Stood Tall!
>>>
>>> Friday, October 3, 2014
>>> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes And
>>> Stupid Justin Trudeau
>>>
>>> Canada’s and Canadians free ride is over. Canada can no longer hide
>>> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s skirts.
>>>
>>> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister Jean Chretien
>>> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the second campaign
>>> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against or contrary to
>>> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers that were
>>> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation. There were
>>> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of the dearth
>>> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces for
>>> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last minute”
>>> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its mind.
>>> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would not
>>> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a
>>> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins to
>>> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it was
>>> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq. But
>>> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister Chretien’s
>>> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean Chretien’s
>>> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic,
>>> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI Battle
>>> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway
>>> campaign of 2006.
>>>
>>> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell you now, is that then
>>> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien committed, and deployed the
>>> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war” without the advice, consent,
>>> support, or vote of the Canadian Parliament.
>>>
>>> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant, uneducated, and babbling
>>> chattering classes are too addled to understand is the deployment of
>>> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is known by planners
>>> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the same as a
>>> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war” make.
>>>
>>> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan cousins have
>>> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian nation to war.
>>> That has been recently clearly articulated to the Canadian public by
>>> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can do is
>>> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a “vote of
>>> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien Government
>>> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in this
>>> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding a
>>> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East.
>>>
>>> President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror
>>> attacks in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state”
>>> Afghanistan was the source of logistical support, command and control,
>>> and training for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The
>>> initial defeat, and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital and
>>>
>>> P.S. Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions of
>>> the latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC have
>>> had my files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical.
>>> Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me.
>>>
>>> Subject:
>>> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35 -0400
>>> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)"MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
>>> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>>
>>> January 30, 2007
>>>
>>> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
>>>
>>> Mr. David Amos
>>>
>>> Dear Mr. Amos:
>>>
>>> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December 29,
>>> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the RCMP.
>>>
>>> Because of the nature of the allegations made in your message, I have
>>> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to Assistant Commissioner Steve
>>> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in Fredericton.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> Honourable Michael B. Murphy
>>> Minister of Health
>>>
>>> CM/cb
>>>
>>>
>>> Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote:
>>>
>>> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
>>> From: "Warren McBeath"warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>> To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net, MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
>>> nada.sarkis@gnb.ca, wally.stiles@gnb.ca, dwatch@web.net,
>>> motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>> CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com, riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.
>>> Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev BUSSON"bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>>> "Paul Dube"PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>> Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has
>>> forgotten me but the crooks within the RCMP have not
>>>
>>> Dear Mr. Amos,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on days off
>>> over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest assured I
>>> was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your concerns.
>>>
>>> As your attachment sent today refers from Premier Graham, our position
>>> is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs do not process
>>> testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are referred to the
>>> Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can provide these
>>> services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise in this
>>> instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be done.
>>>
>>> As for your other concerns regarding the US Government, false
>>> imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is clear
>>> that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in Canada
>>> the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of Detachment
>>> and policing in Petitcodiac, NB.
>>>
>>> It was indeed an interesting and informative conversation we had on
>>> December 23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future endeavors.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> Warren McBeath, Cpl.
>>> GRC Caledonia RCMP
>>> Traffic Services NCO
>>> Ph: (506) 387-2222
>>> Fax: (506) 387-4622
>>> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>>> Office of the Integrity Commissioner
>>> Edgecombe House, 736 King Street
>>> Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B 5H1
>>> tel.: 506-457-7890
>>> fax: 506-444-5224
>>> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca
>>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Justice Website <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>
>> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:21:11 +0000
>> Subject: Emails to Department of Justice and Province of Nova Scotia
>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com"<motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>
>> Mr. Amos,
>> We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy Minister of
>> Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of the
>> Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the Province
>> of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal claim
>> against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the Attorney
>> General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that we will
>> not be responding to further emails on this matter.
>>
>> Department of Justice
>>
>> On 8/3/17, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If want something very serious to download and laugh at as well Please
>>> Enjoy and share real wiretap tapes of the mob
>>>
>>> http://thedavidamosrant.
>>> ilian.html
>>>
>>>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/
>>>>
>>>> As the CBC etc yap about Yankee wiretaps and whistleblowers I must
>>>> ask them the obvious question AIN'T THEY FORGETTING SOMETHING????
>>>>
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>>>
>>>> What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served upon the
>>>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament baseball
>>>> cards?
>>>>
>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>> 6
>>>>
>>>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/
>>>>
>>>> http://www.archive.org/
>>>>
>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>
>>>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>>>> Senator Arlen Specter
>>>> United States Senate
>>>> Committee on the Judiciary
>>>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>>>> Washington, DC 20510
>>>>
>>>> Dear Mr. Specter:
>>>>
>>>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man
>>>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the matters
>>>> raised in the attached letter.
>>>>
>>>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire tap
>>>> tapes.
>>>>
>>>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this previously.
>>>>
>>>> Very truly yours,
>>>> Barry A. Bachrach
>>>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
>>>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>>>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>
>>
>> Sunday, 19 November 2017
>> Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And Publishes
>> It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter Before
>> The Supreme Court
>>
>> https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.
>>
>>
>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>>
>> Amos v. Canada
>> Court (s) Database
>>
>> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>> Date
>>
>> 2017-10-30
>> Neutral citation
>>
>> 2017 FCA 213
>> File numbers
>>
>> A-48-16
>> Date: 20171030
>>
>> Docket: A-48-16
>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>> CORAM:
>>
>> WEBB J.A.
>> NEAR J.A.
>> GLEASON J.A.
>>
>>
>> BETWEEN:
>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>> (and formally Appellant)
>> and
>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>> (and formerly Respondent)
>> Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017.
>> Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2017.
>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
>>
>> THE COURT
>>
>>
>>
>> Date: 20171030
>>
>> Docket: A-48-16
>> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
>> CORAM:
>>
>> WEBB J.A.
>> NEAR J.A.
>> GLEASON J.A.
>>
>>
>> BETWEEN:
>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>> Respondent on the cross-appeal
>> (and formally Appellant)
>> and
>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>> Appellant on the cross-appeal
>> (and formerly Respondent)
>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
>>
>> I. Introduction
>>
>> [1] On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr. Amos)
>> filed a 53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court
>> against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11 million
>> in damages and a public apology from the Prime Minister and Provincial
>> Premiers for being illegally barred from accessing parliamentary
>> properties and seeks a declaration from the Minister of Public Safety
>> that the Canadian Government will no longer allow the Royal Canadian
>> Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass him and his clan
>> (Claim at para. 96).
>>
>> [2] On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of a
>> motion brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court (the
>> Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to
>> amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim
>> disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally vexatious,
>> and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment (the
>> Prothontary’s Order).
>>
>>
>> [3] On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC 93), by way of Mr.
>> Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge of the Federal
>> Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck all of Mr.
>> Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for damages
>> for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature in
>> 2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
>>
>>
>> [4] Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the
>> Federal Court Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of Status
>> Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19, 2016.
>> As such, the only matter before this Court is the Crown’s
>> cross-appeal.
>>
>>
>> II. Preliminary Matter
>>
>> [5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law in
>> relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March
>> 6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two of
>> the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal.
>> This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he believed
>> had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with this
>> Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict with
>> several judges but did not name those judges.
>>
>> [6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have to
>> identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because he
>> had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed
>> with the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal
>> Court of Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed in
>> the Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on
>> subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985,
>> c. F-7:
>>
>>
>> 5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her
>> office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the
>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court of
>> Appeal.
>> […]
>>
>> 5(4) Les juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour
>> d’appel fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
>> les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale.
>> […]
>> 5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by virtue of
>> that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all the
>> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court.
>>
>> 5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges de la
>> Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les
>> juges de la Cour fédérale.
>>
>>
>> [7] However, these subsections only provide that the
>> judges of the Federal Court are also judges of this Court (and vice
>> versa). It does not mean that there is only one court. If the Federal
>> Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no need for this
>> section.
>> [8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act provide
>> that:
>> 3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
>> — Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal Court of
>> Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It is
>> continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and
>> for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and as
>> a superior court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>>
>> 3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la Cour d’appel
>> fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale » en
>> français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est maintenue
>> à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté du
>> Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et
>> continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en
>> matière civile et pénale.
>> 4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
>> — Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court” in
>> English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an
>> additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for
>> the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior
>> court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>>
>> 4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada, appelée la Section de
>> première instance de la Cour fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée «
>> Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en anglais. Elle est
>> maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et
>> d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit
>> canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant
>> compétence en matière civile et pénale.
>>
>>
>> [9] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create
>> two separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal Court
>> (section 4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the Federal
>> Court were automatically also filed in this Court, then there would no
>> need for the parties to prepare and file appeal books as required by
>> Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in relation
>> to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court. The requirement to
>> file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an appeal from a
>> decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only documents
>> that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of that
>> appeal book.
>>
>>
>> [10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact and law filed on
>> March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court, in which
>> Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have a
>> conflict in any matter related to him.
>>
>>
>> [11] On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion
>> before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming or denying the
>> conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of the Federal
>> Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction noting that if
>> Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of the Federal
>> Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
>> Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of this
>> cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before this
>> Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal Court
>> will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion brought
>> before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed in
>> relation to that motion are not part of the record of this Court.
>>
>>
>> [12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos alleged that
>> the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest and
>> submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of a
>> conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was also
>> afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the conflict
>> that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in his
>> view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages of
>> documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized the
>> documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the particular
>> judge and then, immediately following that biography, by including
>> copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim that
>> such judge had a conflict.
>>
>>
>> [13] The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice Webb is
>> that before he was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in
>> 2006, he was a partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and before
>> that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted that he
>> had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law and
>> therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was a partner
>> of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was
>> personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which Mr.
>> Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that he
>> was a member of such firm.
>>
>>
>> [14] During his oral submissions at the hearing of his
>> appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice Webb,
>> focused on dealings between himself and a particular lawyer at
>> Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr. Amos at
>> the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with this
>> particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with this
>> lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings were
>> after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the Tax
>> Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
>>
>>
>> [15] The documents that he submitted in relation to the
>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings between
>> Byron Prior and the St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office of
>> Patterson Palmer, which is not in the same province where Justice Webb
>> practiced law. The only document that indicates any dealing between
>> Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of Stephen May
>> who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer. The
>> affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a number of e-mails
>> that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also included a
>> letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is John
>> Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of Patterson
>> Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed to
>> “John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen Street,
>> Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to a
>> possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.
>> [16] Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice Webb
>> was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In Wewaykum
>> Indian Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R.
>> 259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of a
>> judge is to be determined based on whether there is a reasonable
>> apprehension of bias:
>> 60 In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as the
>> criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by de
>> Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National Energy
>> Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is the
>> reasonable apprehension of bias:
>> … the apprehension of bias must be a reasonable one, held by
>> reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to the
>> question and obtaining thereon the required information. In the words
>> of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an informed person,
>> viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and having thought
>> the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more likely
>> than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously or
>> unconsciously, would not decide fairly."
>>
>> [17] The issue to be determined is whether an informed
>> person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and having
>> thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations
>> give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this Court has
>> previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that judges will
>> administer justice impartially” and this presumption will not be
>> rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins v.
>> Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins]. See
>> also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151 D.L.R.
>> (4th) 193).
>>
>> [18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd. v.
>> Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the Supreme
>> Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed the
>> particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing a
>> case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was
>> involved in the litigation that was now before that judge. The Ontario
>> Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not disqualified if the
>> judge had no involvement with the person or the matter when he was a
>> lawyer. The Ontario Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for
>> determining whether a judge is disqualified are different from the
>> rules to determine whether a lawyer has a conflict:
>> 27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary to a
>> finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case over
>> which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no involvement,
>> as here, it cannot be said that the judge is disqualified.
>>
>>
>> 28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr. Patterson been
>> asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his appointment to
>> the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him from
>> taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of the
>> defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a trial
>> judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by the
>> Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v. Bayfield
>> Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58, that
>> there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a judge
>> and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances."
>>
>>
>> 29 It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an
>> inconsistency in application of rules can be explained by the
>> different contexts and in particular, the strong presumption of
>> judicial impartiality that applies in the context of disqualification
>> of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of allegations of
>> conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's previous
>> involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by Sopinka J.
>> in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249 (S.C.C.),
>> for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a disqualifying
>> interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a conclusory
>> statement from the lawyer that he or she had no confidential
>> information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is the
>> opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial judge.
>> His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case and
>> had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face value
>> unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para. 19.
>>
>>
>> 30 That brings me then to consider the particular circumstances
>> of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find a
>> disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there are
>> two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not to
>> recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties accept,
>> that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm and
>> that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage of
>> time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85:
>> To us, one significant factor stands out, and must inform
>> the perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of this
>> involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That factor is
>> the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on
>> circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the decision-making,
>> or that occurred within a short time prior to the decision-making.
>> 31 There are other factors that inform the issue. The Wilson
>> Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by the time of
>> trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J. had
>> been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship with
>> his former firm for a considerable period of time.
>>
>>
>> 32 In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter
>> realistically would conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly
>> and impartially with this case. I take this view principally because
>> of the long passage of time and the trial judge's lack of involvement
>> in or knowledge of the case when the Wilson Walker firm had carriage.
>> In these circumstances it cannot be reasonably contended that the
>> trial judge could not remain impartial in the case. The mere fact that
>> his name appears on the letterhead of some correspondence from over a
>> decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to believe that he would
>> either consciously or unconsciously favour his former firm's former
>> client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would throw
>> off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour a
>> client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six years
>> earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case involving
>> events from over a decade ago.
>> (emphasis added)
>>
>> [19] Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter
>> involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer or
>> Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made it
>> clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for the
>> alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member of
>> Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough for
>> Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos with
>> Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would have
>> had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when he
>> was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of any
>> involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos had
>> with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself is
>> sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since
>> Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would
>> also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in Justice
>> Webb hearing this appeal.
>>
>> [20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man. R.
>> (2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no
>> reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member of
>> the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no involvement
>> with the accused while he was a lawyer with that firm.
>>
>> [21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000] 4
>> F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be a
>> reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was a
>> lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who
>> was before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as
>> Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on any files involving Mr.
>> Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law.
>>
>> [22] Mr. Amos also included with his submissions a CD. He
>> stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that there is a “true copy
>> of an American police surveillance wiretap entitled 139” on this CD.
>> He has also indicated that he has “provided a true copy of the CD
>> entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law enforcement authorities
>> and not one of the police forces or officers of the court are willing
>> to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an “American
>> police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American law
>> enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests, a
>> conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy.
>>
>> [23] As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable
>> apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for him
>> to recuse himself.
>>
>> [24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past professional
>> experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in deciding
>> the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice Near
>> confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in the
>> Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself.
>>
>> [25] Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr.
>> Amos’ allegations against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges
>> that she is incapable of hearing this appeal because he says he wrote
>> a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien in 2004. At that time,
>> both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney were partners in the law firm
>> Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question, which is rude and angry,
>> begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me suing
>> you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that the letter
>> was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by Mr.
>> Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no reason
>> for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question does
>> not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
>>
>>
>> III. Issue
>>
>> [26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as follows: Did the
>> Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the Claim
>> in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that Mr.
>> Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick
>> legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action?
>>
>> IV. Analysis
>>
>> A. Standard of Review
>>
>> [27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside the
>> Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review to
>> be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and decisions
>> made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in Hospira
>> Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA 215,
>> 402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel of
>> this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with that
>> articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235
>> [Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the Federal
>> Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by a
>> prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of the
>> case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal if
>> the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and overriding
>> error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and
>> law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere with
>> a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary order
>> if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error in
>> determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law
>> (Hospira at paras. 82-83).
>>
>> [28] In the case at bar, the Judge substituted his own
>> assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This Court
>> must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the Judge
>> erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing to
>> interfere.
>>
>>
>> B. Did the Judge err in interfering with the
>> Prothonotary’s Order?
>>
>> [29] The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following
>> paragraphs from the Crown’s submissions as the basis for striking the
>> Claim in its entirety without leave to amend:
>>
>> 17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff
>> addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four
>> of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in 2006
>> in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of
>> the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right of
>> the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province
>> or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged
>> does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court.
>> (…)
>>
>>
>> 21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant
>> provide no details as to the individuals involved or the location of
>> the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the
>> Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible to
>> determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to advance.
>> A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to
>> only speculate as to the true and/or intended cause of action. At
>> best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized as: he
>> suspects he is barred from the House of Commons.
>> [footnotes omitted].
>>
>>
>> [30] The Judge determined that he could not strike the Claim
>> on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge noted
>> that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the
>> liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the actors
>> who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004
>> included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In considering
>> the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge identified
>> paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as it
>> identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting as
>> Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment at
>> para. 27).
>>
>>
>> [31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support a
>> cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and
>> identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v. Canada,
>> 2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111:
>>
>>
>> [13] As in both the cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC
>> 69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must
>> determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of claim pleads each
>> element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public office:
>>
>> a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and unlawful
>> conduct in his or her capacity as public officer;
>>
>> b) The public officer must have been aware both that his or her
>> conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff; and
>>
>> c) There must be an element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public
>> officer and knowledge of harm alone is insufficient to conclude that a
>> public officer acted in bad faith or dishonestly.
>> Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28
>> (Federal Court Judgment at para. 28).
>>
>> [32] The Judge determined that Mr. Amos disclosed sufficient
>> material facts to meet the elements of the tort of misfeasance in
>> public office because the actors, who barred him from the New
>> Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so for
>> “political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29).
>>
>> [33] This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of pleadings
>> in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321
>> D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt:
>>
>> …When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to
>> assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or
>> negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did steal”.
>> “The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is called
>> upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making bald,
>> conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an abuse
>> of process…
>>
>> To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in public office
>> requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in carrying
>> out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the public
>> officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or her
>> office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations is
>> mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization of
>> allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of
>> a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.”
>> (at paras. 34-35, citations omitted).
>>
>> [34] Applying the Housen standard of review to the
>> Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge interfered
>> absent a legal or palpable and overriding error.
>>
>> [35] The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim
>> disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the
>> basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material facts to
>> ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which addresses
>> the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the RCMP officer
>> engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or her
>> conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in bad
>> faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred from
>> the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious reasons,
>> these allegations are not particularized and are directed against
>> non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Legislative
>> Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As such,
>> the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the RCMP
>> barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of
>> supporting a cause of action.
>>
>> [36] In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of bare
>> allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it discloses no
>> reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal
>> Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside the
>> Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further, we
>> find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend.
>> The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that
>> amendment could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26).
>>
>> V. Conclusion
>> [37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the Crown’s
>> cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court Judgment,
>> dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order, dated
>> November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety
>> without leave to amend.
>> "Wyman W. Webb"
>> J.A.
>> "David G. Near"
>> J.A.
>> "Mary J.L. Gleason"
>> J.A.
>>
>>
>>
>> FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
>> NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
>>
>> A CROSS-APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT DATED
>> JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET NUMBER T-1557-15.
>> DOCKET:
>>
>> A-48-16
>>
>>
>>
>> STYLE OF CAUSE:
>>
>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>
>>
>>
>> PLACE OF HEARING:
>>
>> Fredericton,
>> New Brunswick
>>
>> DATE OF HEARING:
>>
>> May 24, 2017
>>
>> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
>>
>> WEBB J.A.
>> NEAR J.A.
>> GLEASON J.A.
>>
>> DATED:
>>
>> October 30, 2017
>>
>> APPEARANCES:
>> David Raymond Amos
>>
>>
>> For The Appellant / respondent on cross-appeal
>> (on his own behalf)
>>
>> Jan Jensen
>>
>>
>> For The Respondent / appELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>>
>> SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
>> Nathalie G. Drouin
>> Deputy Attorney General of Canada
>>
>> For The Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: "Kulik, John"<john.kulik@mcinnescooper.com>
>>> Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 17:37:49 +0000
>>> Subject: McInnes Cooper
>>> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com"<motomaniac333@gmail.com>,
>>> "david.raymond.amos@gmail.com"<david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Dear Mr. Amos:
>>>
>>> I am General Counsel for McInnes Cooper. If you need to communicate
>>> with our firm, please do so through me.
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> John Kulik
>>> [McInnes Cooper]<http://www.
>>>
>>> John Kulik Q.C.
>>> Partner & General Counsel
>>> McInnes Cooper
>>>
>>> tel +1 (902) 444 8571 | fax +1 (902) 425 6350
>>>
>>> 1969 Upper Water Street
>>> Suite 1300
>>> Purdy's Wharf Tower II Halifax, NS, B3J 2V1
>>>
>>> asst Cathy Ohlhausen | +1 (902) 455 8215
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Notice This communication, including any attachments, is confidential
>>> and may be protected by solicitor/client privilege. It is intended
>>> only for the person or persons to whom it is addressed. If you have
>>> received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by e-mail or
>>> telephone at McInnes Cooper's expense. Avis Les informations contenues
>>> dans ce courriel, y compris toute(s) pièce(s) jointe(s), sont
>>> confidentielles et peuvent faire l'objet d'un privilège avocat-client.
>>> Les informations sont dirigées au(x) destinataire(s) seulement. Si
>>> vous avez reçu ce courriel par erreur, veuillez en aviser l'expéditeur
>>> par courriel ou par téléphone, aux frais de McInnes Cooper.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>> Date: Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:35 AM
>>> Subject: RE My complaint against the CROWN in Federal Court Attn David
>>> Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to submit a motion for a
>>> publication ban on my complaint trust that you dudes are way past too
>>> late
>>> To: David.Hansen@justice.gc.ca, peter.mackay@justice.gc.ca
>>> peacock.kurt@telegraphjournal.
>>> david.akin@sunmedia.ca, robert.frater@justice.gc.ca,
>>> paul.riley@ppsc-sppc.gc.ca,
>>> greg@gregdelbigio.com, joyce.dewitt-vanoosten@gov.bc.
>>> joan.barrett@ontario.ca, jean-vincent.lacroix@gouv.qc.
>>> peter.rogers@mcinnescooper.com
>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, gopublic@cbc.ca,
>>> Whistleblower@ctv.ca
>>>
>>> https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-
>>>
>>> http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/
>>>
>>> http://thedavidamosrant.
>>>
>>> I repeat what the Hell do I do with the Yankee wiretapes taps sell
>>> them on Ebay or listen to them and argue them with you dudes in
>>> Feferal Court?
>>>
>>> Petey Baby loses all parliamentary privelges in less than a month but
>>> he still supposed to be an ethical officer of the Court CORRECT?
>>>
>>> Veritas Vincit
>>> David Raymond Amos
>>> 902 800 0369
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 14:10:14 -0400
>>> Subject: Yo Mr Bauer say hey to your client Obama and his buddies in
>>> the USDOJ for me will ya?
>>> To: RBauer@perkinscoie.com, sshimshak@paulweiss.com,
>>> cspada@lswlaw.com, msmith@svlaw.com, bginsberg@pattonboggs.com,
>>> gregory.craig@skadden.com, pm@pm.gc.ca, bob.paulson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>>> bob.rae@rogers.blackberry.net, MulcaT@parl.gc.ca, leader@greenparty.ca
>>> Cc: alevine@cooley.com, david.raymond.amos@gmail.com,
>>> michael.rothfeld@wsj.com, remery@ecbalaw.com
>>>
>>> QSLS Politics
>>> By Location Visit Detail
>>> Visit 29,419
>>> Domain Name usdoj.gov ? (U.S. Government)
>>> IP Address 149.101.1.# (US Dept of Justice)
>>> ISP US Dept of Justice
>>> Location Continent : North America
>>> Country : United States (Facts)
>>> State : District of Columbia
>>> City : Washington
>>> Lat/Long : 38.9097, -77.0231 (Map)
>>> Language English (U.S.) en-us
>>> Operating System Microsoft WinXP
>>> Browser Internet Explorer 8.0
>>> Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET
>>> CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; InfoPath.2;
>>> DI60SP1001)
>>> Javascript version 1.3
>>> Monitor Resolution : 1024 x 768
>>> Color Depth : 32 bits
>>> Time of Visit Nov 17 2012 6:33:08 pm
>>> Last Page View Nov 17 2012 6:33:08 pm
>>> Visit Length 0 seconds
>>> Page Views 1
>>> Referring URL http://www.google.co...
>>> Search Engine google.com
>>> Search Words david amos bernie madoff
>>> Visit Entry Page http://qslspolitics....-wendy-
>>> Visit Exit Page http://qslspolitics....-wendy-
>>> Out Click
>>> Time Zone UTC-5:00
>>> Visitor's Time Nov 17 2012 12:33:08 pm
>>> Visit Number 29,419
>>>
>>> http://qslspolitics.blogspot.
>>>
>>>
>>> Could ya tell I am investigating your pension plan bigtime? Its
>>> because no member of the RCMP I have ever encountered has earned it yet
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:36:04 -0400
>>> Subject: This is a brief as I can make my concerns Randy
>>> To: randyedmunds@gov.nl.ca
>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>
>>> In a nutshell my concerns about the actions of the Investment Industry
>>> affect the interests of every person in every district of every
>>> country not just the USA and Canada. I was offering to help you with
>>> Emera because my work with them and Danny Williams is well known and
>>> some of it is over eight years old and in the PUBLIC Record.
>>>
>>> All you have to do is stand in the Legislature and ask the MInister of
>>> Justice why I have been invited to sue Newfoundland by the
>>> Conservatives
>>>
>>>
>>> Obviously I am the guy the USDOJ and the SEC would not name who is the
>>> link to Madoff and Putnam Investments
>>>
>>> Here is why
>>>
>>> http://banking.senate.gov/
>>>
>>> Notice the transcripts and webcasts of the hearing of the US Senate
>>> Banking Commitee are still missing? Mr Emory should at least notice
>>> Eliot Spitzer and the Dates around November 20th, 2003 in the
>>> following file
>>>
>>> http://www.checktheevidence.
>>>
>>> http://occupywallst.org/users/
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: "Hansen, David"David.Hansen@justice.gc.ca
>>> Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 19:28:44 +0000
>>> Subject: RE: I just called again Mr Hansen
>>> To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>
>>> Hello Mr. Amos,
>>>
>>> I manage the Justice Canada civil litigation section in the Atlantic
>>> region. We are only responsible for litigating existing civil
>>> litigation files in which the Attorney General of Canada is a named
>>> defendant or plaintiff. If you are a plaintiff or defendant in an
>>> existing civil litigation matter in the Atlantic region in which
>>> Attorney General of Canada is a named defendant or plaintiff please
>>> provide the court file number, the names of the parties in the action
>>> and your question. I am not the appropriate contact for other
>>> matters.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> David A. Hansen
>>> Regional Director | Directeur régional
>>> General Counsel |Avocat général
>>> Civil Litigation and Advisory | Contentieux des affaires civiles et
>>> services de consultation
>>> Department of Justice | Ministère de la Justice
>>> Suite 1400 – Duke Tower | Pièce 1400 – Tour Duke
>>> 5251 Duke Street | 5251 rue Duke
>>> Halifax, Nova Scotia | Halifax, Nouvelle- Écosse
>>> B3J 1P3
>>> david.hansen@justice.gc.ca
>>> Telephone | Téléphone (902) 426-3261 / Facsimile | Télécopieur (902)
>>> 426-2329
>>> This e-mail is confidential and may be protected by solicitor-client
>>> privilege. Unauthorized distribution or disclosure is prohibited. If
>>> you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us and delete
>>> this entire e-mail.
>>> Before printing think about the Environment
>>> Thinking Green, please do not print this e-mail unless necessary.
>>> Pensez vert, svp imprimez que si nécessaire.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 02:23:24 -0300
>>>> Subject: ATTN FBI Special Agent Richard Deslauriers Have you talked to
>>>> your buddies Fred Wyshak and Brian Kelly about the wiretap tapes YET?
>>>> To: boston@ic.fbi.gov, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov,
>>>> bob.paulson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>>>> Brian.Kelly@usdoj.gov, us.marshals@usdoj.gov, Fred.Wyshak@usdoj.gov,
>>>> jcarney@carneybassil.com, bbachrach@bachrachlaw.net
>>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, birgittaj@althingi.is,
>>>> shmurphy@globe.com, redicecreations@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> FBI Boston
>>>> One Center Plaza
>>>> Suite 600
>>>> Boston, MA 02108
>>>> Phone: (617) 742-5533
>>>> Fax: (617) 223-6327
>>>> E-mail: Boston@ic.fbi.gov
>>>>
>>>> Hours
>>>> Although we operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week, our normal
>>>> "walk-in" business hours are from 8:15 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday
>>>> through Friday. If you need to speak with a FBI representative at any
>>>> time other than during normal business hours, please telephone our
>>>> office at (617) 742-5533.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 01:20:20 -0300
>>>> Subject: Yo Fred Wyshak and Brian Kelly your buddy Whitey's trial is
>>>> finally underway now correct? What the hell do I do with the wiretap
>>>> tapes Sell them on Ebay?
>>>> To: Brian.Kelly@usdoj.gov, us.marshals@usdoj.gov,
>>>> Fred.Wyshak@usdoj.gov, jcarney@carneybassil.com,
>>>> bbachrach@bachrachlaw.net, wolfheartlodge@live.com, shmurphy@globe.com,
>>>> >> jonathan.albano@bingham.com, mvalencia@globe.com
>>>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com, oldmaison@yahoo.com,
>>>> PATRICK.MURPHY@dhs.gov, rounappletree@aol.com
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bostonglobe.com/
>>>>
>>>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/
>>>>
>>>> As the CBC etc yap about Yankee wiretaps and whistleblowers I must ask
>>>> them the obvious question AIN'T THEY FORGETTING SOMETHING????
>>>>
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>>>
>>>> What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served upon the
>>>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament baseball
>>>> cards?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.archive.org/
>>>>
>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>
>>>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/
>>>>
>>>> http://www.archive.org/
>>>>
>>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>>
>>>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>>>> Senator Arlen Specter
>>>> United States Senate
>>>> Committee on the Judiciary
>>>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>>>> Washington, DC 20510
>>>>
>>>> Dear Mr. Specter:
>>>>
>>>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man
>>>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the matters
>>>> raised in the attached letter.
>>>>
>>>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire tap
>>>> tapes.
>>>>
>>>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this previously.
>>>>
>>>> Very truly yours,
>>>> Barry A. Bachrach
>>>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
>>>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>>>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "David Amos"david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>>> To: "Rob Talach"rtalach@ledroitbeckett.com
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 10:59 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Attn Robert Talach and I should talk ASAP about my suing
>>>> the Catholic Church Trust that Bastarache knows why
>>>>
>>>> The date stamp on about page 134 of this old file of mine should mean
>>>> a lot to you
>>>>
>>>> http://www.checktheevidence.
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:37:08 -0400
>>>> Subject: To Hell with the KILLER COP Gilles Moreau What say you NOW
>>>> Bernadine Chapman??
>>>> To: Gilles.Moreau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, phil.giles@statcan.ca,
>>>> maritme_malaise@yahoo.ca, Jennifer.Nixon@ps-sp.gc.ca,
>>>> bartman.heidi@psic-ispc.gc.ca, Yves.J.Marineau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>> david.paradiso@erc-cee.gc.ca, desaulniea@smtp.gc.ca,
>>>> denise.brennan@tbs-sct.gc.ca, anne.murtha@vac-acc.gc.ca,
>>>> webo@xplornet.com, julie.dickson@osfi-bsif.gc.ca,
>>>> rod.giles@osfi-bsif.gc.ca, flaherty.j@parl.gc.ca, toewsv1@parl.gc.ca,
>>>> Nycole.Turmel@parl.gc.ca,Cleme
>>>> >> oig@sec.gov, whistleblower@finra.org, whistle@fsa.gov.uk,
>>>> david@fairwhistleblower.ca
>>>> Cc: j.kroes@interpol.int, david.raymond.amos@gmail.com,
>>>> bernadine.chapman@rcmp-grc.gc.
>>>> Juanita.Peddle@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, oldmaison@yahoo.com,
>>>> Wayne.Lang@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Robert.Trevors@gnb.ca,
>>>> ian.fahie@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/nb/
>>>>
>>>> http://nb.rcmpvet.ca/
>>>>
>>>> From: Gilles Moreau Gilles.Moreau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 08:03:22 -0500
>>>> Subject: Re: Lets ee if the really nasty Newfy Lawyer Danny Boy
>>>> Millions will explain this email to you or your boss Vic Toews EH
>>>> Constable Peddle???
>>>> To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> Please cease and desist from using my name in your emails.
>>>>
>>>> Gilles Moreau, Chief Superintendent, CHRP and ACC
>>>> Director General
>>>> HR Transformation
>>>> 73 Leikin Drive, M5-2-502
>>>> Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0R2
>>>>
>>>> Tel 613-843-6039
>>>> Cel 613-818-6947
>>>>
>>>> Gilles Moreau, surintendant principal, CRHA et ACC
>>>> Directeur général de la Transformation des ressources humaines
>>>> 73 Leikin, pièce M5-2-502
>>>> Ottawa, ON K1A 0R2
>>>>
>>>> tél 613-843-6039
>>>> cel 613-818-6947
>>>> gilles.moreau@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>>>
>>>
>>> First things first have a Look at the 3 documents hereto attached (Not
>>> a big read)
>>>
>>> Listen to these old voicemails from interesting FEDS at about the
>>> same point in time (Won't take long)
>>>
>>> http://www.archive.org/
>>>
>>> then ask youselves or the lawyers Senator Shelby or Spizter or Cutler
>>> or Bernie madoff's old buddy Robert Glauber where the webcast and
>>> transcript went for a very important hearing held in late 2003 by the
>>> United States Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
>>>
>>> http://www.banking.senate.gov/
>>>
>>> Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the
>>> Mutual Fund Industry
>>>
>>> November 20, 2003 02:00 PM
>>> The Committee will meet in OPEN SESSION to conduct the second in a
>>> series of hearings on the “Review of Current Investigations and
>>> Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry.”
>>>
>>> Archived Webcast
>>>
>>> Witness Panel 1
>>>
>>> Mr. Stephen M. Cutler
>>> Director - Division of Enforcement
>>> Securities and Exchange Commission
>>> cutler.pdf (175.5 KBs)
>>>
>>> Mr. Robert Glauber
>>> Chairman and CEO
>>> National Association of Securities Dealers
>>> glauber.pdf (171.1 KBs)
>>>
>>> Eliot Spitzer
>>> Attorney General
>>> State of New York
>>> spitzer.pdf (68.2 KBs)
>>>
>>> Permalink:
>>> http://www.banking.senate.gov/
>>>
>>>
>>> Trust that the evil women and men that PM Trudeau "The Younger"
>>> appointed to to his cabinet will continue to play dumb because of
>>> their oath to The Privy Council. However it does not follow that
>>> everybody who works for them are dumb and they have no such oath to
>>> uphold N'esy Pas?.
>>>
>>> Veritas Vincit
>>> David Raymond Amos
>>> 902 800 0369
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Lisa Porteous <lporteous@kleinlyons.com>
>>> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 14:46:22 +0000
>>> Subject: RCMP
>>> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> David,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your email inquiring about our class action against the
>>> RCMP. As you may know, the Notice of Claim was filed in the British
>>> Columbia Supreme Court on March 27, 2012. The lawsuit has been
>>> brought by former RCMP constable Janet Merlo on behalf of female RCMP
>>> members. Unfortunately, we cannot assist you with your claim.
>>>
>>> We recommend that you contact Mr. Barry Carter of Mair Jensen Blair
>>> LLP to discuss any claim you may have against the RCMP for harassment.
>>> His contact information is as follows:
>>>
>>> Mr. Barry Carter
>>> Mair Jensen Blair LLP
>>> 1380-885 W. Georgia Street
>>> Vancouver, BC V6C 3E8
>>> Phone: 604-682-6299
>>> Fax 1-604-374-6992
>>>
>>> This is not intended to be an opinion concerning the merits of your
>>> case. In declining to represent you, we are not expressing an opinion
>>> as to whether you should take further action in this matter.
>>>
>>> You should be aware that there may be strict time limitations within
>>> which you must act in order to protect your rights. Failure to begin
>>> your lawsuit by filing an action within the required time may mean
>>> that you could be barred forever from pursuing a claim. Therefore, you
>>> should immediately contact another lawyer ( as indicated above) to
>>> obtain legal advice/representation.
>>>
>>> Thank you again for considering our firm.
>>>
>>> Yours truly,
>>>
>>> Lisa Porteous
>>> Case Manager/Paralegal
>>>
>>> lporteous@kleinlyons.com
>>> www.kleinlyons.com
>>>
>>> KLEIN ∙ LYONS
>>> Suite 400-1385 West 8th Avenue
>>> Vancouver BC V6H 3V9 Canada
>>> Office 604.874.7171
>>> Fax 604.874.7180
>>> Direct 604.714.6533
>>>
>>> This email is confidential and may be protected by solicitor-client
>>> privilege. It is intended only for the use of the person to whom it is
>>> addressed. Any distribution, copying or other use by anyone else is
>>> strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please
>>> telephone us immediately and destroy this e-mail.
>>>
>>> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Kevin Leahy <kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
> Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2018 11:03:56 -0500
> Subject: Re: Attn Daniel Gosselin why I have not recieved any response
> from you or your lawyers to my phone calls and emails about the
> questionable fax and emails your people have sent me recently?
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Please be advised that I will be on leave from December 21st th to
> January 3rd. I will not be monitoring my emails, or available by
> phone, during my absence. S/Sgt Sebastien Brillon will be the acting
> EMRO during my absence, he can be reached on Groupwise. Should an
> urgency require you to get in touch with me during this period S/Sgt
> Brillon will be happy to relay a message.
> Happy Holidays!
>
>
> Veuillez noter que je serai en congé du 21 décembre au 3 janvier
> compris. Je ne surveillerai pas mes courriels et je ne serai pas
> disponible par téléphone pendant mon absence. Le SMEM Sébastien
> Brillon sera l’OREE intérimaire pendant mon absencer. En cas
> d’urgence, le SMEM Brillon sera dans la capacité de me transmettre un
> message. Joyeuses Fêtes!
>
>
> Kevin F. Leahy B.B.A.
> Superintendent/Surintendant
> HQ Divison DG
> Employee Management Relations Officer/Officier responsable des
> Relations employeur-employés
> 613-843-4725
>
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2018 12:03:38 -0400
> Subject: Attn Daniel Gosselin why I have not recieved any response
> from you or your lawyers to my phone calls and emails about the
> questionable fax and emails your people have sent me recently?
> To: daniel.gosselin@cas-satj.gc.ca
> Bruce.Preston@cas-satj.gc.ca, Beatriz.Winter@cas-satj.gc.ca,
> Gib.vanErt@scc-csc.ca, marc.giroux@fja-cmf.gc.ca,
> Lorri.Warner@justice.gc.ca, jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca,
> bill.pentney@justice.gc.ca, Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca,
> Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
> Clare.Barry@justice.gc.ca, David.Hansen@justice.gc.ca,
> Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, liliana.longo@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
> hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca, Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
> Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, pm@pm.gc.ca, andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca,
> maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca, Michael.Wernick@pco-bcp.gc.ca,
> complaints@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca, Newsroom@globeandmail.com,
> Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Larry.Tremblay@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
> Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov,
> Boston.Mail@ic.fbi.gov>
> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Complaints <complaints@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca>
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 14:06:44 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: I just secure the proof of the Crown's
> latest trick containing the fact that Jan Jensen and his buddy Bruce
> Preston are LIARS
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> This automated email is being sent to acknowledge receipt of your
> recent correspondence to the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission
> for the RCMP.
> The material you have provided will be reviewed and actioned as
> necessary, which may include additional follow-up.
> Thank you
> The Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP
> ______________________________
> Ce courriel automatique confirme la réception de votre correspondance
> envoyée récemment à la Commission civile d’examen et de traitement des
> plaintes relatives à la GRC.
> Les documents que vous avez fournis seront examinés et les mesures
> nécessaires seront prises, ce qui pourrait comprendre un suivi
> additionnel.
> Merci.
> La Commission civile d’examen et de traitement des plaintes relatives à la
> GRC
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 14:07:11 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: I just secure the proof of the Crown's
> latest trick containing the fact that Jan Jensen and his buddy Bruce
> Preston are LIARS
> To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
>
> Thank you for writing to the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Member
> of Parliament for Vancouver Granville.
>
> This message is to acknowledge that we are in receipt of your email.
> Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence, there
> may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured that your
> message will be carefully reviewed.
>
> To help us address your concerns more quickly, please include within
> the body of your email your full name, address, and postal code.
>
> Please note that your message will be forwarded to th...
[Message clipped] View entire message