It’s funny how many fandroids get very upset at the fact that they cannot buy Huawei devices here and scream that there is no proof about any allegations of espionage.
The simple fact that the CIA and the NSA issued the warning isn’t good enough for them. I get not trusting some parts of our govt, but when the part that spies on other countries warns the American people that there is a real risk, I think we should listen.
the simple fact that the warning was taken out of context and exploited for political purposes SHOULD upset you.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
My take: Huawei is years ahead of US manufacturers in 5G backbone equipment. See Intel’s recent “by 2022 the USA will be ahead of Asia in 5G”. Implication: until then Asia (Huawei, Samsung) is ahead.
Remember the Broadcom attempted takeover of Qualcomm? Didn’t happen: govt didn’t want Qualcomm’s 5G IP getting into foreign hands.
To me the govt is fighting a rearguard action in order to give time to US manufacturers to catch up. Will it work? Do we want it to work?
Is this purely a battle between making the world safe for the NSA to spy on everyone vs making the world safe for the PLA to spy on everyone?
There aren't any U.S. manufacturers of 5G telecom systems. That was a decision of the "free market", where the U.S. Government took a hands off approach to 5G. Bet that isn't going to happen for 6G after all of the Huawei drama. In the meantime, the U.S. could rely on Ericsson or Nokia for systems.
Broadcom is owned, as I recall, by an Investment Group in Singapore, but that would need to be checked.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
It’s funny how many fandroids get very upset at the fact that they cannot buy Huawei devices here and scream that there is no proof about any allegations of espionage.
The simple fact that the CIA and the NSA issued the warning isn’t good enough for them. I get not trusting some parts of our govt, but when the part that spies on other countries warns the American people that there is a real risk, I think we should listen.
the simple fact that the warning was taken out of context and exploited for political purposes SHOULD upset you.
I already posted proof of Huawei spying in Poland, and in the infrastructure that Huawei provided for the African Union. More to the point, Western Intelligence agencies aren't going to provide details on whatever spying evidence that they find, so as not to indicate any National Technical Means, ie, how they obtained the data.
There is a Court that does handle such things in the U.S. overseen by a Judge, but even if Huawei was able to use that, they wouldn't be able to see the details of any findings that the Judge would see.
You should also understand why other countries resent being threatened on what to do with regards to their handling of 5G by the US. It is overreaching its power and this is seen as abuse. By extension you should also understand why Huawei is defending itself.
What you seem to be suggesting here is worrisome. You appear to see the deployment of 5G as some sort of global human ‘right’ to the extent that if the US impedes Hauwei’s deployment of 5G technology in the US that the US is ‘overreaching its power’. You seem to perceive that the US is accountable to other nations for what those nations want to do in the US.
Globalism is a nice idea that is completely impossible—people of the world will never ever be able to agree on how to live and do business with a single voice. If globalism continues to be pursued it will only work temporarily through silencing and oppressing the opposition. And eventually it will fall by rebellion. The US as an individual country is already showing it may be too big to accommodate the perspectives of its people (as the left tries to pull the country in a continually new direction), and a return to more individual state rights would probably be a more healthy thing for the country. Globalism is the opposite of what the world needs right now.
That would be true if Trump were limiting this to the U.S. -- but he's upping the stakes making a frantic effort to impose his will on every country in the world. And, many of them are now pushing back and calling bull to his bull.
But, even here in the U.S. he is depriving us of state of the art technology and a competitive environment based on what many consider to be bull. Huawei's case is contesting a law Trump had the Republicans ram through congress just prior to losing the House in the Midterms without meaningful debate and that deprived Huawei of the right to defend itself.
So, Huawei is taking it to court hoping that they get to counter Trump's politically motivated rhetoric with facts and truth.
Regardless of how the court rules, the American people deserve the truth rather than political rhetoric.
You should also understand why other countries resent being threatened on what to do with regards to their handling of 5G by the US. It is overreaching its power and this is seen as abuse. By extension you should also understand why Huawei is defending itself.
What you seem to be suggesting here is worrisome. You appear to see the deployment of 5G as some sort of global human ‘right’ to the extent that if the US impedes Hauwei’s deployment of 5G technology in the US that the US is ‘overreaching its power’. You seem to perceive that the US is accountable to other nations for what those nations want to do in the US.
Globalism is a nice idea that is completely impossible—people of the world will never ever be able to agree on how to live and do business with a single voice. If globalism continues to be pursued it will only work temporarily through silencing and oppressing the opposition. And eventually it will fall by rebellion. The US as an individual country is already showing it may be too big to accommodate the perspectives of its people (as the left tries to pull the country in a continually new direction), and a return to more individual state rights would probably be a more healthy thing for the country. Globalism is the opposite of what the world needs right now.
That would be true if Trump were limiting this to the U.S. -- but he's upping the stakes making a frantic effort to impose his will on every country in the world. And, many of them are now pushing back and calling bull to his bull.
But, even here in the U.S. he is depriving us of state of the art technology and a competitive environment based on what many consider to be bull. Huawei's case is contesting a law Trump had the Republicans ram through congress just prior to losing the House in the Midterms without meaningful debate and that deprived Huawei of the right to defend itself.
So, Huawei is taking it to court hoping that they get to counter Trump's politically motivated rhetoric with facts and truth.
Regardless of how the court rules, the American people deserve the truth rather than political rhetoric.
"While not the only area where Chinese investments in Europe concern the Pentagon, the 5G issue has risen to the forefront. Earlier this month, Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan issued a statement: “Secure and resilient 5G telecommunications is vital to the security and prosperity of the United States, and DoD is working closely with our industrial and research partners to develop comprehensive and innovative solutions for both the Department and commercial industries. “The United States and our allies and partners must demand nothing less than robust, trusted, and secure next-generation communications systems,” Shanahan said."
Our military alliances depend on secure communications, and there is enough risk to veto Huawei.
That is certainly a truth that you are not providing.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
Are they forbidden to sell their phones here? I thought it was only infrastructure equipment (for 5G) that was banned. I have no problems with them selling their crappy phones in the US. Let them. If there are morons to buy this garbage they get what they deserve.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
LOL... we were talking about the similarities between the Republican party and the Communist Party -- but you're diverting the discussion to the U.S. political system. Nice try!
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
The fact that Trump has to fall back on his fake case against Iran and hold the daughter of Huawei's founder as a political prisoner, kind of exposes the fact that his allegations of spying are just Protectionist, Nationalist bull.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
LOL... we were talking about the similarities between the Republican party and the Communist Party -- but you're diverting the discussion to the U.S. political system. Nice try!
No, that isn't what "we" were talking about in the other posts on other threads, nor in your posts here. This is entirely your thinking, not mine.
While I certainly don't identify as a Republican, I can state that they are in fact elected, and on a number of occasions, have not given lockstep support to the sitting President.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
LOL... we were talking about the similarities between the Republican party and the Communist Party -- but you're diverting the discussion to the U.S. political system. Nice try!
No, that isn't what "we" were talking about in the other posts on other threads, nor in your posts here. This is entirely your thinking, not mine.
While I certainly don't identify as a Republican, I can state that they are in fact elected, and on a number of occasions, have not given lockstep support to the sitting President.
DBAD, asshole.
Do yourself and everyone else a favor and just block “George”. I identified him as a time-wasting troll a long time ago.
Yep this was predictable, this happen because we have idiots in this country who think our laws and constitution apply to everyone in the world. We have individuals who do not live here trying to use our laws against us for their own benefit why shouldn't a foreign company try and do the same.
For those who think this will be dismiss immediately think again, this will play out.
Pretty sure SCOTUS has already ruled that non-resident, non-citizens have no standing to challenge the US government on Constitutional grounds. And Congress absolutely has the power to "regulate commerce with foreign nations" (see Article I), so even in the unlikely event SCOTUS decides to hear this (I don't think any lower court's ruling would be binding on Congress without the approval of SCOTUS; I could be wrong), I doubt it will actually go anywhere.
We shall see, however.
What case are you referring to in the first sentence? What you suggest may be the case in particular contexts, but it isn't broadly the case. A non-resident, non-citizen can have standing to challenge the actions of the U.S. government on constitutional bases. See, e.g., Boumediene v Bush. At any rate, it doesn't matter here as this complaint is being brought by Huawei Technologies USA, Inc.
Standing is about (1) injury, (2) traceability, and (3) redressability.
As for lower court rulings, they can be binding (as you are using that term here) on Congress. A federal district or circuit court can, e.g., find that a provision enacted by Congress is unconstitutional and enjoin its enforcement. That happens fairly often. Such decisions can, of course, be appealed. But if they aren't, or if appeals are unsuccessful, a lower court ruling stands and has effect.
Lastly, yes, Congress has the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations. That's among its enumerated powers. But, as is the case with other enumerated powers, it still can't use that power in a way that violates other provisions of the Constitution. Congress has the power to, e.g., punish the counterfeiting of U.S. coins, but it can't use that power in a way that violates, e.g., the Equal Protection Clause.
The question does come down to "standing" there is also another standard which "jurisdiction." US laws and Constitution only has jurisdiction over the citizens of this country and the court have held that companies are considered a legal person for the purpose of law in the US so they have standing and jurisdiction. The US has no jurisdiction over Huawei unless they are incorporated in the US which they are not since they are a Chinese company so they do not have any protect rights in our country. With that said, and my point above, we have people in our legal system who consider anyone in the world if they choose they are protect by our laws and can do exactly this.
I will give you a good example, today if someone is visiting the US under diplomatic immunity, they can come here and do as they like, break our laws and the US had no recourse but to remove them from the US. As long as they are citizen of another country and diplomat US law has no Jurisdiction over them, as such they can not file any claims against us even is they were somehow "injured" in the US. They can not go to court and sue someone because they felt they were wrong, this is what our complicate laws say, but courts have chosen not to follow the laws. Just look at the ISIS woman who is trying to get back into the US. she is not a citizen and has no standing in our legal system all because her dad was diplomate and the US is using this against her as an example and her dad is now suing since he is a citizen. Problem is his daughter is legally an adult so he really have not standing on her behalf.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
LOL... we were talking about the similarities between the Republican party and the Communist Party -- but you're diverting the discussion to the U.S. political system. Nice try!
No, that isn't what "we" were talking about in the other posts on other threads, nor in your posts here. This is entirely your thinking, not mine.
While I certainly don't identify as a Republican, I can state that they are in fact elected, and on a number of occasions, have not given lockstep support to the sitting President.
DBAD, asshole.
Do yourself and everyone else a favor and just block “George”. I identified him as a time-wasting troll a long time ago.
I should, but he, like Avon B7, is a source of misinformation.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
The fact that Trump has to fall back on his fake case against Iran and hold the daughter of Huawei's founder as a political prisoner, kind of exposes the fact that his allegations of spying are just Protectionist, Nationalist bull.
The U.S. has no 5G Telecom system production; how could we be "protectionist"?
You and Avon B7 don't really understand what that term means, as if you would be inclined to.
You appear ill informed about Meng Wanzhou, as if I and others haven't posted enough on that subject.
Personally, I would like you and Avon B7 banned, but fortunately for you and him, I'm not the one making that decision.
Yep this was predictable, this happen because we have idiots in this country who think our laws and constitution apply to everyone in the world. We have individuals who do not live here trying to use our laws against us for their own benefit why shouldn't a foreign company try and do the same.
For those who think this will be dismiss immediately think again, this will play out.
Pretty sure SCOTUS has already ruled that non-resident, non-citizens have no standing to challenge the US government on Constitutional grounds. And Congress absolutely has the power to "regulate commerce with foreign nations" (see Article I), so even in the unlikely event SCOTUS decides to hear this (I don't think any lower court's ruling would be binding on Congress without the approval of SCOTUS; I could be wrong), I doubt it will actually go anywhere.
We shall see, however.
What case are you referring to in the first sentence? What you suggest may be the case in particular contexts, but it isn't broadly the case. A non-resident, non-citizen can have standing to challenge the actions of the U.S. government on constitutional bases. See, e.g., Boumediene v Bush. At any rate, it doesn't matter here as this complaint is being brought by Huawei Technologies USA, Inc.
Standing is about (1) injury, (2) traceability, and (3) redressability.
As for lower court rulings, they can be binding (as you are using that term here) on Congress. A federal district or circuit court can, e.g., find that a provision enacted by Congress is unconstitutional and enjoin its enforcement. That happens fairly often. Such decisions can, of course, be appealed. But if they aren't, or if appeals are unsuccessful, a lower court ruling stands and has effect.
Lastly, yes, Congress has the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations. That's among its enumerated powers. But, as is the case with other enumerated powers, it still can't use that power in a way that violates other provisions of the Constitution. Congress has the power to, e.g., punish the counterfeiting of U.S. coins, but it can't use that power in a way that violates, e.g., the Equal Protection Clause.
The question does come down to "standing" there is also another standard which "jurisdiction." US laws and Constitution only has jurisdiction over the citizens of this country and the court have held that companies are considered a legal person for the purpose of law in the US so they have standing and jurisdiction. The US has no jurisdiction over Huawei unless they are incorporated in the US which they are not since they are a Chinese company so they do not have any protect rights in our country. With that said, and my point above, we have people in our legal system who consider anyone in the world if they choose they are protect by our laws and can do exactly this.
I will give you a good example, today if someone is visiting the US under diplomatic immunity, they can come here and do as they like, break our laws and the US had no recourse but to remove them from the US. As long as they are citizen of another country and diplomat US law has no Jurisdiction over them, as such they can not file any claims against us even is they were somehow "injured" in the US. They can not go to court and sue someone because they felt they were wrong, this is what our complicate laws say, but courts have chosen not to follow the laws. Just look at the ISIS woman who is trying to get back into the US. she is not a citizen and has no standing in our legal system all because her dad was diplomate and the US is using this against her as an example and her dad is now suing since he is a citizen. Problem is his daughter is legally an adult so he really have not standing on her behalf.
I was under the impression that this was a British matter, and she was a British Citizen, before they withdrew her citizenship, but it's quite possible hat I missed this in the news.
Either way, her situation is of her own making, whatever influences she was under while in Britain.
Comments
Broadcom is owned, as I recall, by an Investment Group in Singapore, but that would need to be checked.
I already posted proof of Huawei spying in Poland, and in the infrastructure that Huawei provided for the African Union. More to the point, Western Intelligence agencies aren't going to provide details on whatever spying evidence that they find, so as not to indicate any National Technical Means, ie, how they obtained the data.
There is a Court that does handle such things in the U.S. overseen by a Judge, but even if Huawei was able to use that, they wouldn't be able to see the details of any findings that the Judge would see.
But, even here in the U.S. he is depriving us of state of the art technology and a competitive environment based on what many consider to be bull. Huawei's case is contesting a law Trump had the Republicans ram through congress just prior to losing the House in the Midterms without meaningful debate and that deprived Huawei of the right to defend itself.
That is certainly a truth that you are not providing.
Get some new talking points.
Here's another link to Huawei's CFO predicament;
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-huawei-tech-insight/long-before-trumps-trade-war-with-china-huaweis-activities-were-secretly-tracked-idUSKCN1QN2A8
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/huawei-us-hacked-our-servers-stole-our-emails-and-source-code-2003874You think that there might be incriminating evidence in those "hacks" that Huawei accuses the U.S. of, without evidence, mind you?
I'll throw this in; a short article on how Chinese Diplomats are coping under Xi's leadership:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-06/diplomatic-outbursts-mar-xi-s-plan-to-raise-china-on-world-stage
While I certainly don't identify as a Republican, I can state that they are in fact elected, and on a number of occasions, have not given lockstep support to the sitting President.
DBAD, asshole.
I will give you a good example, today if someone is visiting the US under diplomatic immunity, they can come here and do as they like, break our laws and the US had no recourse but to remove them from the US. As long as they are citizen of another country and diplomat US law has no Jurisdiction over them, as such they can not file any claims against us even is they were somehow "injured" in the US. They can not go to court and sue someone because they felt they were wrong, this is what our complicate laws say, but courts have chosen not to follow the laws. Just look at the ISIS woman who is trying to get back into the US. she is not a citizen and has no standing in our legal system all because her dad was diplomate and the US is using this against her as an example and her dad is now suing since he is a citizen. Problem is his daughter is legally an adult so he really have not standing on her behalf.
The U.S. has no 5G Telecom system production; how could we be "protectionist"?
You and Avon B7 don't really understand what that term means, as if you would be inclined to.
You appear ill informed about Meng Wanzhou, as if I and others haven't posted enough on that subject.
Personally, I would like you and Avon B7 banned, but fortunately for you and him, I'm not the one making that decision.
You are just a common troll.
I was under the impression that this was a British matter, and she was a British Citizen, before they withdrew her citizenship, but it's quite possible hat I missed this in the news.
Either way, her situation is of her own making, whatever influences she was under while in Britain.