Podcasts about atip

Patrick breaks down the Luis Elizondo AATIP/AAWSAP controversy. Luis Elizondo finds himself at the center of a new controversy regarding his involvement with government UFO programs. Questions have arisen about whether Elizondo ran a program called ATIP (Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program) or ASAP (Advanced Aerospace Weapon Systems Applications Program). This debate has sparked discussions within the UFO research community, with various figures weighing in on Elizondo's role and the nature of these programs.The controversy has led to conflicting statements from different sources. Some claim Elizondo had no direct involvement with ATIP, while others suggest he played a significant role. As the debate unfolds, researchers and enthusiasts are closely examining statements from key figures in the field, including Eric Davis, John Greenewald Jr., and James Lacatski, to piece together the truth about Elizondo's involvement in these secretive programs.

The Rebel News podcasts features free audio-only versions of select RebelNews+ content and other Rebel News long-form videos, livestreams, and interviews. Monday to Friday enjoy the audio version of Ezra Levant's daily TV-style show, The Ezra Levant Show, where Ezra gives you his contrarian and conservative take on free speech, politics, and foreign policy through in-depth commentary and interviews. Wednesday evenings you can listen to the audio version of The Gunn Show with Sheila Gunn Reid the Chief Reporter of Rebel News. Sheila brings a western sensibility to Canadian news. With one foot in the oil patch and one foot in agriculture, Sheila challenges mainstream media narratives and stands up for Albertans. If you want to watch the video versions of these podcasts, make sure to begin your free RebelNewsPlus trial by subscribing at http://www.RebelNewsPlus.com

On this episode we welcome researcher, author, investigator, and podcast host, Ryan Burns! Ryan has been investigating and researching the Unintah Basin in Utah for many years. We chat about his experiences with skinwalkers, UAP's, portals, and much much more! You can find out more about Ryan Burns and his research at the links below.Ryan Burns on the webhttps://www.facebook.com/HEROParanormalhttps://spacewolfresearch.com/https://www.youtube.com/@heroparanormal6387Host Eric Freeman-Sims on the interwebs https://www.unseenparanormalpodcast.com/https://www.facebook.com/eric.freeman.1048https://www.instagram.com/theunseenparanormalpodcast/https://twitter.com/TheUnseenParahttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7Nm2o2t_a1TlqDgqlpxxUghttps://www.facebook.com/groups/1048687775648517https://www.facebook.com/UnseenParanormalPodcastThis show is part of the Spreaker Prime Network, if you are interested in advertising on this podcast, contact us at https://www.spreaker.com/show/5862293/advertisement

On this episode we welcome researcher, author, investigator, and podcast host, Ryan Burns! Ryan has been investigating and researching the Unintah Basin in Utah for many years. We chat about his experiences with skinwalkers, UAP's, portals, and much much more! You can find out more about Ryan Burns and his research at the links below.Ryan Burns on the webhttps://www.facebook.com/HEROParanormalhttps://spacewolfresearch.com/https://www.youtube.com/@heroparanormal6387Host Eric Freeman-Sims on the interwebs https://www.unseenparanormalpodcast.com/https://www.facebook.com/eric.freeman.1048https://www.instagram.com/theunseenparanormalpodcast/https://twitter.com/TheUnseenParahttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7Nm2o2t_a1TlqDgqlpxxUghttps://www.facebook.com/groups/1048687775648517https://www.facebook.com/UnseenParanormalPodcastThis show is part of the Spreaker Prime Network, if you are interested in advertising on this podcast, contact us at https://www.spreaker.com/show/5862293/advertisement

CCFR Radio – Ep 153: CCFR Appealing Court Decision, Rod Testifies to Senate, Buyback Boondoggle CCFR announces intent to appeal Federal Court decision in press conference on Parliament Hill. Rod testifies on Bill C-21 at the Senate. Bill Blair and Trudeau are liars, ATIP reveals they knew the buyback would cost 2 billion all along. […]

Why did Canada abstain on an emergency resolution at the UN General Assembly calling for an “immediate, durable and sustained humanitarian truce leading to a cessation of hostilities” in Gaza? Mattea Roach, Emilie Nicolas, Ethan Cox & Murtaza Hussain will break down the past 3 weeks' worth of news in the backdrop of decades of context, and get granular about Canada's response to it all. Host: Mattea RoachCredits: Aviva Lessard (Producer), Noor Azrieh (Producer), Caleb Thompson (Audio Editor/Technical Producer), Annette Ejiofor (Managing Editor), Karyn Pugliese (Editor-in-Chief)Guests: Emilie Nicolas, Ethan Cox, Murtaza HussainBackground reading:Canada-Israel relationsCanada-West Bank-the Gaza Strip relationsWho governs the West Bank? Understanding Palestinian political leadership - NPRWhat is the Gaza Strip? - NPRA Canadian Politician Has Been Sacked for Calling for a Cease-Fire in Palestine - JacobinCanada's Rejection of Amnesty's Apartheid Report Not Based on Specific Evidence, according to ATIP request - CJPMEConservative MP Tim Uppal sorry for role in 'divisiveness' of Harper-era policies - CTV NewsThe Baffling Politics of Stephen Harper and Israel - Al JazeeraTrudeau says UN vote not a shift in Canada's 'steadfast' support of Israel - CBC NewsSponsors: Rotman, Douglas If you value this podcast, Support us! You'll get premium access to all our shows ad free, including early releases & bonus content. You'll also get our exclusive newsletter, discounts on merch, tickets to our live & virtual events, & more than anything, you'll be a part of the solution to Canada's journalism crisis, you'll be keeping our work free & accessible to everybody. You can listen ad-free on Amazon Music—included with Prime. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

CCFR Radio – Ep 151: CCFR's New Project Released! CCFR Called to Senate, Poly Exposed in ATIP & More CCFR's latest political project is released and Rod talks about upcoming ones as well. Poly loses their mind over ATIP data dump covered by Bryan Passifiume of the National Post. Couple killed in grizzly attack, time […]

Caio é um dos fundadores da aTip, uma startup que conecta neuroatípicos e o mercado de trabalho. Com objetivo de gerar impacto positivo para a comunidade autista, acabou gerando impacto na sua própria vida. Compartilhe para que o conteúdo chegue em mais gente. Obrigada ❤️ Equipe: Apresentação e roteiro: Amanda Ramalho Produção executiva: Natália Daumas Produção e estratégia digital: Juliana Mosca Beleza: Natália Stracieri Look: Dod Alfaiataria Direção de arte: Carol Oliveira Animação: Vinicius Kahan Captação: Agência de Podcast Música e Áudio: Pedro Zimmer Edição e arte: Isabella Garcia Direção: Alexandre Nickel Contato@esquizofrenoias.com.br

We have Joe on from Athletic Trainer Insurance Plus! He is on to show everyone how to save money on their professional and general liability!!!! Great listen. Oh and you know, some of the calssics as well, The Walking Dead, trainer, coach, doc...and more! https://www.healthyroster.com/ athletictrainerinsuranceplus.com $$$$ Off insurance with a Candid Membership!! www.smarttoolsplus.com 10% Off PROMO: CANDID10 Human Kinetics CEUs at 20% Off!!! Promo: CANDIDCEU Become a Network Provider of Structural Elements with Kevan!! MedBridge CEUs at a discount HERE!

Time Is Right For Disclosure

CCFR Radio – Ep 134: RCMP to Run Buy-Back on PEI? Alberta Fires at Feds Again! Is the Lee Enfield Next? Blacklock's Reporter reveals ATIP, RCMP to run assault weapon buyback on PEI. Alberta fires at feds yet again! Mendicino dodgy on future status of Lee Enfield rifles. 22 gauge rifle wielding Liberal educates media […]

In this week's episode, cycling journalist and former CyclingTips Editor-in-Chief Caley Fretz joins Randall to discuss cycling's changing media landscape, the economic headwinds facing professional journalists, emerging models for supporting quality reporting and story-telling, and how the meaning of cycling changes as one pedals through life. Also: press-fit bottom brackets, hookless road rims, and too-stiff components and frames. Episode sponsors: Thesis Bike and Logos Components  Support the Podcast Join The Ridership  Links to Caley's work: The Road to Nairo's House: https://cyclingtips.com/2018/01/the-road-to-nairos-house/ The Teaching Toe Strap: https://www.velonews.com/news/road/the-toe-strap/ Tales From The Tour: The Rest Day Pose: https://cyclingtips.com/2018/07/tales-from-the-tour-the-rest-day-pose/ Automated Transcription, please excuse the typos: [00:00:00] Craig Dalton: Hello and welcome to the gravel ride podcast. I'm your host Craig Dalton. This week on the show, I'm handing the microphone off to my co-host Randall Jacobs. Who's got veteran cycling journalists, Kaylee frets on the pod. To discuss some of the challenges and opportunities facing cycling journalism. You may know Kaylee from his work as editor in chief, over at cycling tips. And prior to that over at Velo news, both publications have undergone some downsizing of late. The economic headwinds facing professional journalists. Our strong, particularly in the cycling world. If we want to have quality reporting and storytelling. A new model needs to emerge. I don't know where this is all gonna end up, but I was super excited that Kaylee agreed to join Randall on the podcast. To just get his perspective and to get into some good old fashioned by geekery. Before we jump in we need to thank this week sponsors from thesis and logos components As many of you know, I'm a long time it's thesis. OB one rider for a limited time thesis is offering $500 off a thesis, OB one with access custom wireless shifting, and your choice of high-end carbon wheels. It's a bike that I can personally attest, stands up to every other carbon bike out there on the market at a really great price. One of the things that I've always appreciated about thesis is that they allow. A unique level of customization. So if you want size appropriate cranks down to, I think 160 or 165 millimeters, you can do that. You can get your stem size, you can customize everything. Based on a free one-on-one consult. So go check out thesis.bike, or contact. Hello at thesis stoplight to get started. I also want to give a shout out to logos components. Logos just receive huge recognition from bike packing.com and was awarded the gear of the year award for the wheelset category in 2022. You might recall an episode. We did a while back on how to choose a gravel wheel set, where Randall went through detail by detail on the design considerations When constructing a carbon wheelset I encourage you to listen to that as it provided a lot of riders with reflection on what they were looking for and what all the different things were, all logos wheels are built on proven open standards with non-proprietary components and with a manufacturing precision. That rivals anybody in the industry, the wheels are backed by Logus is five-year warranty, lifetime at-cost incident protection. And a US-based warehouse and support team to keep you rolling for many years to come. So head on over to logos components.com and use the code community free shipping all one word to take advantage of a free shipping offer. With that business behind us I'm going to pass the microphone back over to randall and his conversation with kaylee frets [00:03:06] Randall R. Jacobs: It's been quite a bit. I think I last saw you at Sea Otter. How have you been? What's going on in your world? [00:03:11] Caley Fretz: Well, I'm unemployed as of November 15th. I mean, yeah, let's just, we can get that one right outta the way. Right. I was part of the layoffs at Outside Inc. To be somewhat differentiated from Outside Magazine for anybody out there. I mean, outside Inc. Does own outside magazine, but it also owns lots and lots of other things. Yeah, myself the editor-in-Chief of Venu as well and two of the CT staff, two really core CT staff. Matt, our managing editor, and Dave Rome, one of our tech editors and, and kinda a legend in space. We're all let go on the same day on November 15th. So I am currently super fun employed and I think after we chat today, I'm probably gonna go skiing cuz it's snowing up in the mountains right now. And so I'm, I'm somewhat enjoying myself. But, you know, fun employment brings with it some level of stress as well, . So that's, that's how I'm doing right now. Yeah. [00:03:59] Randall R. Jacobs: Well, and I appreciate you sharing. I think last we rode together. You were still living in Boulder and you've since moved to beautiful Durango. When was that move? [00:04:07] Caley Fretz: That was shortly after we had our, our first child. My wife grew up here and, and we have grandparents here to help with childcare and all the rest. And we just wanted to get off the front range. No offense to the front range. There's too many people and there's fewer people here. And I can go skiing 18 minutes from here, from my door, and I can't really complain about that. [00:04:27] Randall R. Jacobs: Housing costs are probably a little bit less bonkers out that way as well. I was in Denver and particularly Boulderer lately, and it is nuts. [00:04:34] Caley Fretz: it's a little bit better here, although not as, Not as good as it was four or five years ago. It, it, it's a zoom town, right? So in the last couple years it has, it's gone up like 28% or something ridiculous in, in 2021. We love it here. It's amazing. Durango, the bike community here is, is unbelievable. The mountain biking is unbelievable. And there's nobody that, you have not as many people to share all the trails with. So I, we like that bit of it as well. [00:04:59] Randall R. Jacobs: Very, very cool. And so let's just dive into, cuz, cuz I've been curious share a bit about your background. So I, I've only known you as, you know, in your role as, as a journalist and editor at Cycling Tips. But how do you end up on this path? [00:05:13] Caley Fretz: Oh I mean, how far back do you want to go? I, I, I started racing mountain bikes at 12 or 13 years old. My dad was a cyclist. My dad was, I think one of the founding members of the Penn State cycling team, collegiate cycling team back in the day. So I grew up around bikes and I grew up around bike racing and watching the tour and all these things. And yeah, started racing when my family moved to Burlington, Vermont back in the day at Catamount Family Centers. Anybody who, yep. Very, very northeast connection. That's where I, that was all my youth. Yeah. Any, any any new [00:05:45] Randall R. Jacobs: and, and your dad is still in Vermont, if I recall [00:05:48] Caley Fretz: Yeah, yeah. He he actually just retired, but he, he used to run a small like sort of children's museum aquarium thing called Echo on the, on the waterfront in Burlington. And yeah so, so grew up, grew up racing, grew up around bikes, and went to school out here in Colorado. Mostly to ride by bike to, to ma major in bike racing, pre primarily . Much to my parents chagrin, I would say. And let's see what it, what would've been like junior year, summer in between junior and senior year of, of college. Shout out to a friend of mine, Brian Holcomb, who's still in, in the bike world basically came to me and was like, Hey, you should, you should be an intern at Be News. And so I did that and I, and I, I became an intern at Bean News and worked the summer there. And Ben Delaney was the editor-in-chief at the time, and Ben was, Ben was kind enough to bring me on in a, in a kind of part-time capacity that fall. and then it kind of just went from there. So, so yeah, a couple folks who were still floating around the bike world, I, I owe a lot to at this point. Ben and, and Brian and Zach Vest, who was sort of one of my first mentors and has been a, a marketing manager at Niner and a other, a Scott and a couple other places recently. Math yeah, and just kinda worked from there. So I was a tech editor at sort of tech writer at Be News for a couple years, tech editor at Be News for a couple years. And then kinda worked my way into bigger and broader beats basically, and, and kind of stepped into the racing space a little bit more. Became, I think it was like think it was senior editor or whatever the title was at the end of my, my Bella News tenure which was 2017 which is when Wade Wallace got in touch from cycling tips and he was actually just looking for a person to fill a somewhat similar role, kind of like a features writer do a bit of everything kind of writer. And I loved the idea. I loved cycling tips. I loved the brand. I loved everything that stood for, I loved the fact that it was kinda an up and comer and I had been at Villa News long enough that I was just was looking for a change basically. And so I, I jumped ship from one to the other, from Helen News to ct. Remained really good friends with lots of folks at, at vn particularly guys like Andrew Hood who had done a bunch of Tour de France with and things like that. It's like no hard feelings in that, in that jump. Just wanted something new. And within about a year of that for a number of different reasons Wade had promoted me to editor-in-chief at ct. So that was around 20, mid middle of 2018. And it was an interesting time kind of from a business perspective cuz it was near the end of a period when, when CT was owned by bike Exchange in Australia and we were about to be purchased by Pink Bike. And with all of that happening and then in particular with the purchase from Pink Bike we got a bunch more resource and really could expand into what I think most people probably know, cycline tips as now or maybe we'll say six months ago what they knew it as up, up until quite recently. And yeah. I'm trying to think this, there's not my time. My my time as EIC of, of CIP is, is obviously I think what most listeners out there would probably know, if not of me, then you at least know CIP and you know what we were trying to do there. [00:08:52] Randall R. Jacobs: I know how much grief there is out there for, that core team having been broken up. A lot of people, myself included, who value the perspective that you bring to the industry. It's not simply you know, flipping press releases which, you know, there's a place for like, there's, you know, some people that's, they wanna see what the press releases are but doing really interesting journalism. One of your colleagues Ian tralo, he's done some interesting pieces on Central Asian despots in their role in cycling and on the Afghan women's cycling team. And the controversy with how the UCI was prioritizing getting certain members of that team and the organization out of Afghanistan when the US was backing out. Like, this is not your standard bike industry journalism. And that's an angle that I think is going to be very much missed in the vacuum that's created by your departure and the departure of others from that team. [00:09:42] Caley Fretz: Yeah. It's a sad thing. I think the overwhelming emotion for a lot of us is, is just sadness because we spend a lot of time building this thing and a lot of time and energy and effort and, and yeah. No blood, but probably some sweat and tears in there. And yeah, and it feels that's just sad. You know, I. I enjoyed my time there tremendously. I enjoyed working with people like Ian, with James Huang, with Dave, who got laid off alongside me. It was just a really, I can't say it was massively surprising giving a number of things that I can't actually talk about. But I I, oh, I am still very saddened by it. Yeah, I mean, it's not gonna be what it was because a bunch of the people are gone like that, that, that I can say . Yeah. [00:10:28] Randall R. Jacobs: Yeah. Now, remind me, when did James join the team? Because he, he's someone I've admired for years [00:10:33] Caley Fretz: yeah. He, he joined a, I think about 18 months before I did. So when, when bike exchange, when, when Wade first sold a, a large portion of cycling tips to bike exchange that was sort of the first. Let's say capital infusion that, that the company got. And a lot of that was used to pick up kind of high profile folks, particularly in the United States which is what's sort of their next, the next market that, that Wade wanted to go after. So that was, they picked up James and they picked up Neil Rogers in the us as well as some other folks like, like Shane Stokes in the uk or Ireland, I believe he is right now. Yeah, so, so that was all a little bit before I got there. And part of my, sort of what they asked me to do, what Wade asked me to do when, when I became editor in chief was to figure out exactly how to best use people like James, who do phenomenal work. I mean, I, I, I maintain to this day that the three-person team, the three-person tech team that, that we had at Zeman Tips over the last year which would be James and Dave Rome and Ronan McLaughlin in Ireland as well. Was the best anywhere in cycling media? There's no, there's no question in my mind about that. And so basically trying to figure out how to steer that talent was one of the big things that I was tasked with doing over the last three, four years. [00:11:44] Randall R. Jacobs: Well, and you know, when you read a review from any of those team members that you're, you're getting it straight you know, for better or for worse for the brands that are at the mercy of, of that team. But honestly, it keeps the industry honest. And I recall early in my career in the bike particularly James' writing be being something that I referenced constantly. And in fact, when I was at one of the big players, if I needed to make an argument, I would oftentimes grab an article from someone like him to bring to the argument like, no press fit is not acceptable. And we're gonna spend the extra money and add the weight, and we're gonna tell a story about how a two piece thread together is a better solution. And honestly, it's a solution to fix what was broken when you went, you know, but that's, that's a, that's a, a hobby horse that I think we've all been riding for some time. [00:12:29] Caley Fretz: love hearing that though. I, I genuinely love hearing that because I mean, oh, first of all, James would also love hearing that. He'd be very proud of that fact. I think and yeah, like we, we know that that was the case, right? I mean, we, we the three of us have been making a, a podcast called Nerd Alert for, for, for the last year and a half or two years or whatever. And I got a fair number of, of Less than pleased emails off the back of, of that podcast. Cause we were quite honest in our assessment of what we thought was happening in the industry. And in particular, like I haven't been a tech editor for. Eight, nine years. I'm just a cyclist at this point. But Dave and James are so deep inside it and think they spend so much of their lives thinking about that stuff that yeah. You, you can't ignore their opinions, right? You absolutely can't ignore their opinions. And I think that's, that's a testament to one, the fact that they do their research. And two the fact that they've been right a number of times. And like over the years, I would say that CT is, was known as the anti press fit media outlet, right? Which is like, there are worse things to be associated with, I think, than hating on creaky bottom brackets. Like, who, who wouldn't wanna hate 'em? Creaky bottom brackets. That makes perfect sense to me. [00:13:33] Randall R. Jacobs: Well, and it, and it's deeper than just a creaky bottom bracket. It's detracting from this experience that we are all so passionate about. And so, I think that having someone out there who has influence saying no, this is not the way it should be. Hear the arguments and, and, you know, let a case be made. Hey, you know, come on the podcast and talk about why you think press fit is, is the best way to go about it if you really wanna make that case. But yeah, it's an approach that I, you know, I, I'll take you up on it, but I, I'd probably be on the same side with you on more or less every issue with the exception of maybe a few nuances here and there. But yeah, actually let's have some fun with this. Other stuff other than press fit bottom brackets that would be your hill to die on. [00:14:15] Caley Fretz: well. So actually Dave Ro and I so reminder, Dave Ro and I were both just recently laid off. And so our free, we, we are free to do whatever we want. I don't have a non-compete or anything like that. Right. So, we've kicked, we've kicked off a little podcast and. [00:14:28] Randall R. Jacobs: What is it called? [00:14:29] Caley Fretz: It's called, [00:14:29] Randall R. Jacobs: do people find it? [00:14:30] Caley Fretz: well at the moment it's called the redundant placeholders because we have no idea what to call it. So if you search it, I think any of the, any of the podcast platforms, if you search redundant placeholders, able to find it, you can also find it on, on any of my social channels. I'm at K Fretz on everything cause I'm the only person on the planet with my name. So that's very handy. Anyway David and I were talking about like, okay, so if we were actually literally talking about this yesterday, which is why it's funny that you bring up bottom brackets. Like if, if the bottom bracket the anti press fit bandwagon was the one that we were leading before, what's our, what's our new thing that we get to hate on? And we've actually decided that one of the things that we're most interested in pushing, and if you listen to the episode from this week, you would, you would hear this is bikes that are too stiff and just stuff that's too stiff. So specifically Dave, this, this week brought up the topic of of handlebars that are just like, Way too stiff. Right? Just, just ridiculously stiff. We were talking about the, the 35 mill trend on in mountain bikes, which I hate. And like, I've got a, you know, I've got a giant, I've got a giant trail bike with 170 Mill fork, and then I wanna stick like a, just a two by four in my hands. I don't really understand why I want to do that. And I've ended up with like, like more sort of hand cramp and hand pain on this bike than I've ever had previously. And it's got more travel than any bike that I've, I've had previously. So that, those two things don't really line up in, in my head, right? And, and so Dave and I were basically talking about pushing, pushing back on this need for for stiffer and stiffer and stiffer and stiffer all the time. And the fact that a lot of us don't need that, or really don't want it either. Not only do we not need it, we really don't want it because it makes the broad experience worse. I told a little story about how one of the best bikes I've ever ridden was a not particularly expensive mazzi steel frame, steel fork, steel frame. Then I put a pair of zip 3 0 3 carbon wheels on, so nice, nice light stiff wheel set with a somewhat flexi bike, flexi fork, flexi flexi frame. But it rode like an absolute dream, you know, 27 2 post it might have even had, it might have even not had oversized bars. I can't remember. This is, this is like eight, nine years ago now. And I loved it. I absolutely loved this bike. It, it, it got up and went when I asked it to, and I think the wheel set made a huge difference in, in that. But then it, it cornered like an absolute dream and it was comfortable and it was, it was just beautiful. And it was a, a not particularly expensive steel mozzie, right? Like . So that's, that's, that's the that's the high horse upon which we find ourselves now. The fight for less stiff. Bicycles, I think is what we're gonna go after next. [00:17:06] Randall R. Jacobs: Well, and you can kind of take that a step further, talking about steel frames, for example. If you get a steel frame, even a, a pretty decent steel frame at say o e m cost is going to be quite a bit less than a monocot carbon frame. And you don't have all the tooling costs and everything else, and you can change the geometry if you need to without having to retool. And those bikes are gonna be inherently more affordable at the same time. And unless you're an elite racer who's having to sprint off the line or so on, you know, you either spend less money for an equivalent bike that suits your needs well and is comfortable, or you spend the same money and you put it into say, better wheels. You don't get the cheap out wheels with the three Paul hubs that fall apart and in a year and what have you. Yeah, that's one I'll join you on. [00:17:46] Caley Fretz: So that, so [00:17:47] Randall R. Jacobs: right. So I'm joining the battalion. What? [00:17:50] Caley Fretz: That's what we're pushing from [00:17:51] Randall R. Jacobs: I've got another one for you. And, and this, this one I don't think you'll disagree with cuz we talked about sea otter hooks, bead hooks. So bead bead hooks on any real wheels that are marketed for use with road tubeless. [00:18:05] Caley Fretz: I, yeah. I, I don't feel like I am, I, I like having this conversation with James or Dave around because they know the actual technical reasons. You, yourself probably in the same boat. You know, the actual tech technical reasons why this is, this is a, a terrible idea or a good idea, I guess if, if you're talking other direction. I just know that as a, essentially, like I am kind of just a consumer these days, right? Like I said, I, I, I have not been a tech editor. It has not been my job to follow. Bicycle technology for close to a decade now. So I'm basically just a, a, a heavily invested consumer who pays, you know, quite close attention, right? And as a heavily invested consumer, I cannot figure out if my wheels and tires are going to kill me at the moment. And I think that that is not really an acceptable way forward. I don't , I don't think that that should be allowed in the cycling space. And I, and I, every single time I say that, I get a bunch of hook list aficionados coming back at me saying that, oh, it's quite easy. This works with this and this. I'm like, yeah, but I, I, as a person who does not want to go through a bunch of like charts to figure out what tire to run, I don't want that. Just put hooks back on my rims. I don't care about the 40 grams or whatever. It's, I just don't care. [00:19:14] Randall R. Jacobs: Well, would you like some more ammo for those arguments when they come up? [00:19:17] Caley Fretz: give me more. Am. [00:19:18] Randall R. Jacobs: All right. So, so first off the, it used to be the case that it was a substantial, you know, a reasonable weight penalty and higher cost that is substantially mitigated by new forming techniques for the bead hooks and mini hooks that you can create that have the same impact resistance as hook list, add about five, maybe 10 grams per rim at the high end. And cost, yeah, the cost is a little bit higher, but, you know, insurance premiums aren't cheap either. And if you have a single incident, that's gonna be a problem. So, you know, it was an obvious investment when we made that choice for any wheel that we're marketing for use with anything, say smaller than a 34. Plus you get the compatibility with non tules as you well know. But the other part is you think about the fact that there are compatibility charts that exist, right? [00:20:05] Caley Fretz: I don't want [00:20:06] Randall R. Jacobs: that [00:20:06] Caley Fretz: in charts. [00:20:08] Randall R. Jacobs: yeah. It, it's like if that is the case, then maybe the tolerances are too tight and it, it's actually, I'll tell you from the inside, it, it's actually worse than that because any good company is going to check every single rim for its bead seat circumference, right? So those are pretty easy to get within spec. And then the tires, the tires are not all checked. To my knowledge. They're kind of randomly checked. So, okay, now you, now you could have a variation. You only need one. That's not to tolerance, but let's say both of those are in are intolerance. Well, now you have the. and if the tape is too thick or too thin, or someone puts two layers on, they replace the tape or whatever. Maybe it was intolerance initially, but, and then you change it and you know, you do two layers. Now the bead is too tight, it wants to drop into the channel and then pop over the edge of the, of the hook. And so it's just not good. It's just all sorts of not good [00:21:03] Caley Fretz: I hate it so much. It's just, yeah. Yeah. I mean, I, I, I always, I was cognizant when, back in, when we were making the Nerd Alert podcast that, you know, we didn't just want to complain about things. Right? Like, we didn't just want to tell the industry that it was, it was doing things wrong. Cuz most of the time this industry does great things and they build lots of amazing bikes that I love to ride. There's just a couple things like this that are like, what, what are we doing? Like, is, is this, is this the beam counters? Is it the gram counters? What counters are, are causing ? This particular, it must be the bean counters at this point. But I hate it either [00:21:42] Randall R. Jacobs: Bean counter. And then, then also the, the marketing hypers. Right? So there's a new thing. Hopeless is a new thing. Car, car wheels don't have hooks. Why do bicycle school wheels have hooks? Well, you know, because it's 110 p s i that people are sometimes putting in there. That's why [00:21:57] Caley Fretz: car wheels have 33 Psi . Yeah. It's like a mountain bike tire. Yes. Well, I, we agree on that point. And I, I think that that is one that we will continue to complain about. And I will just continue to be annoyed that I, that I can't feel confident in what I'm writing without doing a bunch of, of searching and Google searching, and I don't want to have to do that. [00:22:15] Randall R. Jacobs: Nor should your average rider need to rely on that in order to be safe like that. That's the part that I find kind of, kind of bonkers. [00:22:23] Caley Fretz: Average rider doesn't even know to do that. That's the problem. [00:22:26] Randall R. Jacobs: yeah. True. And the la the last part of that is why do the tire pressure recommendation charts kind of go to 70 proportional with the weight and then they just kind of taper off. You know, that that also kind of tells you something about the confidence in this you know, particular combination of tire and rim and, and pressure and so on. But all right. Should we, well, I guess we hop off this high horse then. That was good fun. I could do this all day. So you mentioned Ben Delaney, and he's an interesting person to bring up because he's a, a mutual acquaintance. Also somebody who's writing, I've been reading since my early days in the industry and also somebody who has been trying to figure out how to navigate the changing landscape in cycling media, which the business model for, for media in general has undergone a dramatic shift. And in his case, he's has his new YouTube channel and is doing freelance work for certain publications and is making a go of it that way. But how would you describe the industry dynamics as having changed during your time in the media side? [00:23:29] Caley Fretz: Oh, I mean, I would say I was relatively insulated from it personally for a long time. And until I kind of reached a, a, a level of management, so to speak, that it became my problem , I didn't spend a whole lot of time thinking about it. Yeah, Ben was unfortunately the, the, the, the victim of a, an outside layoff a, a while ago. So he's been making a solo go of it since I think May or June of, of, of last year. Or this year, 2022. And yeah, like his, his he's experimenting and, and it's, it's good to, I like watching him trying to figure this out, right, because I feel like he's kind of doing it for all of us at the moment and, and trying to figure out exactly, you know, various ways to, to make this thing work and. He is, got his, his YouTube channel's. Great. I mean, I watch it all the time. I'm actually gonna be on it sometime soon. I just, just recorded a thing with him picking our favorite products of the year. I think I went in a slight, I think I went in a slightly different direction than, than probably most of his guests. Cause my favorite product was bar Mitz for my cargo bike. So slightly different place than, than probably a lot of folks he's talking to. But the, the media as a whole, I mean, it's rough out there. It's rough out there, right? Like I have spent an inordinate amount of time thinking about this and trying to figure this out over the last couple years as has like weighed my former boss at C T E before he left over the summer. As is everybody, I mean, frankly, like as is Robin Thurston the CEO of outside, right? Like he is genuinely trying to make this thing work. And at the moment as layoffs kind of. It's hard, right? It's really, really hard to, to get people to pay for something that they haven't had to pay for historically, you're, you're trying to put the genie back in the bottle, right? That's what we are trying to do. And it's really, really, really difficult. And then, frankly, it's one of the things we were most proud of at Cycline Tips is that we did have this core, hyper engaged audience that was willing to pay us for, for what we did. And not only just pay us for like, the content that they had access to, but pay us for the whole community that we had built. Right. I mean there, there's a, there's a Velo Club, which is the, the sort of membership program. Atip, there's a Slack group for Velo Club which I, which I'm concerned about right now. But that group of people, couple thousand people not, it's not the entirety of the membership. It's, it's like sort of the most hardcore of the membership, I would say. And it's a couple thousand people. It's sort of like its own little private forum, right? And, and they support each other and they ask each other questions, and they ask us questions asked, past tense, asked us questions. You know, when, when, when they had a tech question, they, they, they ping James and they had a racing question. They, they would, they would ping me or they would ping Matt e or something like that. And they would also just answer each other's questions. And they've built this, this incredible community there. That for me, underpins any successful, particularly sort of niche media or, or, or, or vertical media business. Because those are the people that not only are they giving you money to, to keep lights on, but they're, they're your, they're your biggest advocates, right? They're your, your most important advocates in the space. They're the people that, that tell their friends. They're the people that get other people signed up. They are, they're more important than any marketing spend you could, you could ever possibly utilize. Right? So that, that was one of the things we were really proud of the last couple years. And I think that that is a model in some ways for, for, for going forward. So, you know, like I said, I'm, I don't have a non-compete. I can start anything I want right now and, and I, and to be, to be very blunt, like I fully plan to I think that, [00:26:54] Randall R. Jacobs: think you absolutely should at this. You clearly have an audience that that misses your voice and that values what you brought to the table. [00:27:00] Caley Fretz: Yeah. And, and I would say it like, honestly, it's, it's even, it's less my voice and it's more like Dave Rome and Matt and like the rest of the crew because I, I, I do like to put, you know, put the folks that that were writing day, day in, day out for ct, like, well ahead of anything that I was doing. But I, I did spend more time than they did thinking about how to, how to build a media business. And so, yeah, I, you know, we wanna, we wanna, we wanna do something here. That there's it's only been a couple weeks since we were, we were. Let go. So we're still figuring out what the details are. But like I said, you know, we've already kicked off a little podcast. We know that there's a lot of people out there that are kind of waiting for this. And we will, we will just try to give them what they want, I guess. I mean, my, in my mind, the, ideal sort of media entity of the future and I, I've used this term a couple times with, with Dave in, in talking about these things is, is essentially an aggregation of niches or niches if, depending on which pronunciation you prefer. So rather than try to go really broad and talk about a little bit of everything, which, which tends to be kind of the model across most of cycling media, I prefer a concept where you, you essentially allow editors to. To dive into their, their interests and their strengths. Right? You know, you take, you take Dave Rome and you say, Dave, you love tools. You're real weirdo about it. But we appreciate your weirdness and we, we, we embrace it and, and do it. Like, tell me everything you can possibly tell me about tools, because I'm pretty sure there's an audience there. And even if it's not that big, even if it's a couple thousand people, if they are hyper engaged with you, a couple thousand people in a recurring membership model, recurring revenue model is enough to pay Dave plus some, right? And then you sort of, you take that concept and you, and you expand it out. And yeah, it's, it's, it becomes the basis by which you can build a, a, a media entity. That I think is, is sustainable. Not none, nothing I'm saying here is wholly original, right? Like this is the broadly the direction that a lot of different media entities are going. Anybody sort of follows that world. There's, there's like, there's a new politics site called S four that is essentially the same rough concept, right? You, you dive headlong into, into particular beats. You provide a ton of depth in those beats. You hit the, the audience, people who, who really care about that particular topic, and you pull that group in and then you do the same thing over here and you pull that group in, you do the same thing over here, and you pull that group in. And there's for sure people that care about more than one obviously. But you really, like, you focus really deep on each one of these things. And that's the, that's the, if I could build something and, and I, you know, like I said, I, I intend to try, that's the concept. I think that that makes the most sense to me from a. from a business perspective, from an editorial perspective, from from every perspective I can, I can think of, basically. [00:29:59] Randall R. Jacobs: Yeah, so I've had folks like Russ Roca from PathLessPedaled. On the pod. He has a YouTube channel you may or may not be familiar with, but that's become his livelihood, right. And he has sustainers through Patreon. He doesn't do endorsements and things like that. I don't think he's doing any sort of sponsored episodes or anything of that sort. And he's been able to make a living. And there are obviously plenty of YouTuber influencer types who may have less scruples about promoting things and things of that sort. But who I'm curious, either within bike or, or outside a bike what projects do you see succeeding in the model that you could imagine emulating or building upon? Because I've seen a bunch of attempts at it and it's, it's a really tough nut to [00:30:43] Caley Fretz: it's a tough not to crack. I, I would say that the biggest and most obvious is the athletic, which was just purchased by the New York Times for something like, I think it was 425 million. Now, so the sort of caveat around that is that that's probably less than they were actually hoping for. This is a, a VC funded media entity that, that primarily covers ball sports. And their whole thing was you take, you, you, you essentially apply the beat reporter model of like a local newspaper. You know, you, you, the, the, the Denver Post for example, will have a Broncos beat reporter. Then all they do is talk about the Broncos, right? And, and they're even allowed to kind of be fans of the Broncos a little bit. They take that and they apply it to every single ball sport. So both types of football, you know, baseball, basketball, all the rest. And they apply a beat reporter to every major team. And sometimes more than one beat reporter to, to really big teams. You know, like if we're talking English, English Premier League you know, Manchester United has a couple different writers on it. Aston Villa has probably won, right? So, but, but, but even so, if you're a massive Aston Villa fan and you just want your Aston Villa News, you can go, you know that the athletics gonna have it cuz they have a person who is dedicated to your team and nothing else but your team. So you can also get like, okay, well I want some broader, I want World Cup news, I want, I want the Manchester United news. I want the Ronaldo news, but I really want my Aston Villa guy, right. That is essentially the same model that I'm talking about where like, I believe that people really want Dave Rome's tool. They probably also care about lots of other things that, that we will write about. But they really want Dave room's tool stuff. And that's probably the thing that's actually gonna get them across the line from a, from a membership perspective, right? Is that deep, deep, deep love of this one thing that a content creator they like is talking about. That's the kind of thing that, that, that moves the needle in. So yeah, the athletic is, is kind of the biggest, most obvious example of this kind of working. They made I think some strategic areas early on in the way that they pulled staff together that made it quite an expensive organization to run. And I think that's part, probably part of the reason why they didn't get quite as much cash for it as they thought. But still building a media a media entity from nothing in the last, I think it started five years ago or so. I remember sitting at a Tor de France press buffet with some of the. The British. So at the time it was, you know, sky Era. A lot of big name British sport writers, sports writers were coming over the tour, and a couple of those guys were talking about job offers from the athletic and actually like how insanely well paid they were going to be So I think [00:33:13] Randall R. Jacobs: And the, these are full, full-time positions. We're not [00:33:15] Caley Fretz: oh, yeah, yeah. [00:33:16] Randall R. Jacobs: Just shifting everything to freelance. Like so [00:33:18] Caley Fretz: No, no, no. These are, yeah, [00:33:20] Randall R. Jacobs: models Do. [00:33:21] Caley Fretz: no, I mean, I don't, I mean, perhaps they're contractors or something, but like, you know, the, the, these individuals are writing a, a story a day most of the time about the particular beat that they're talking about. A story every other day, depending on the, on the, on the writer probably. But anyway, yeah, about about five years ago. So you see, you know, you've got a media entity that's only about five years old and just sold to the New York Times for half a million or whatever it was, or sorry, half a billion. [00:33:43] Randall R. Jacobs: Yeah. [00:33:43] Caley Fretz: a pretty, that's a success story in my mind. And shows that the. The model can work, I think. There's no guarantees and that's a scale that I don't really have any need, want, or desire to come anywhere near. But I do think that the core essentially value proposition of membership that they, that they showed worked, can work elsewhere. It can work in cycling, can work across endurance media, I think. [00:34:12] Randall R. Jacobs: Well, and again, with my kind of very cursory understanding of the space, they were required by the New York Times, which itself went through its own economic model crisis and had to make the switch to a paywall. And the quality of the content was sufficient that they're, they're making such large acquisitions, so they must be doing something right. They're, they're not the failing New York Times. As some folks called them a few years ago. I think there's also something to be said for consolidating quality and having the interaction of the sort that you did at at cycling tips, not just through Velo Club but also just the comments section. It, it was a very unique space and your team was in there. Interacting and the, the nature of the communication that I saw, the way that your readers were engaging there, it didn't seem hierarchical at all. It was a conversation with, with you and your team and that that was very, very cool to see. And that was something quite special that I think is more a consequence of the people involved than of the particular platform as special as cycling tips was. And I was one of the early readers that was, those are my racing days when it was literally just the blog and it was pointers on how to train. It was the cool thing at the time. And. Actual cycling tips. Yeah. That name was, was a direct, directly correlated with the contents. But I don't know if I've shared this with you, but in addition to the podcast, which is founded by Craig Dalton we also started this Slack community called the Ridership, which also is bit over a couple thousand members, and also has these like healthy dynamics. We call it a, a community of Rogers Helping Riders. And that was directly inspired by what you guys do at Velo. like saw what you were doing over there was just something that wanted to emulate, found inspiring saw a place for. And I'd be curious one of the things that Craig and I have talked about, is some form of shared platform that's somehow democratically governed. Where content creators and those who are engaging with their content who wanna support them and so on, can all meet and having that be something centralized in the sense that it's all meeting in the same place, but decentralized in terms of the governance structure, and then maybe even set up as a non-profit. I'm curious if you've had any thoughts around that sort of thing. [00:36:35] Caley Fretz: Yeah, I've actually sort of played around with similar ideas. We, yeah. In this, well, and again, in the sort of couple weeks that I've been thinking about, really thinking about this now we thought through, so, so ironically, one of the things that. There's been a fair number of complaints around with outside was was essentially like web three and, and NFT stuff. However some of that technology would actually make something like what you're talking about potentially work quite a bit better. Again, I haven't spent, we, we didn't go too far down this, this, this rabbit hole cause we feel like getting something off the ground relatively quickly is, is, is a priority. But I agree that, that something platforms work, right? Like that's essentially, that, that's all YouTube is, is just a platform for other people to, to, to put content on. They monetize it over top. They give you a cut, they take most of it. That's a, it's a pretty good business actually. So like could you do that for endurance sports, perhaps? Probably. Are there enough? Are there enough really high quality individual content creators out there to make that work? Probably, maybe like, are, are there enough Ben Delaney's, who would love to probably work with a platform that, that increased their visibility? But, you know, in, in exchange for a cut of whatever he's making, probably. I mean, that's essentially the, the deal that he's made with YouTube, right? Like we were saying. I think there's something there. I don't, I think it'd, I think it'd be incredibly difficult to, to get off the ground and would almost have to be quite organic and you'd have to be kind of willing to, to sit on it and let it grow for quite some time or, or sit on a bunch of investment money and, and do it that way. Which I don't necessarily have the time for at this point in time, but I like the idea. I really, I like, I genuinely, you know, I've, I've had a lot of conversations with other people in, in bike media over the last couple weeks because for obvious reasons, people giving me a ring. They're saying a lot of 'em are saying basically like, Hey, I'm sorry just checking in on you. Stuff like that. And we, and we get to talking about this sort of thing. And one of the things that keeps coming up is this desire to stop competing so directly with each other as bike media, right? Like the space is too small. We all do our own thing. We talk to maybe the same audience in general, but we talk to them in very different ways. And you know, like I I I, I, I've been on the phone with editor in chiefs of, of, of a couple different major bike outlets in the last week and all have said something along those lines. And I think that some sort of collective would, would hit the same. Yeah, it would hit, it would hit the same. there, right? Of a, of a desire to provide a space for everybody to just create really good work that they actually get paid for. Cuz that's the hard thing again, you're still talking about putting the genie back in the bottle. You're still talking about trying to get people to pay for, for something that they historically haven't paid for, or you're running an advertising based model, which is incredibly difficult. And in part, and this particular moment is very, very difficult. I mean, you know, Robin, the CEO of outside mentioned that specifically in the letter that came along with with these layoffs is like the advertising world out there right now, particularly in endemic media, like cycling is bad. It is bad news. You know, they're, they're looking into 2023 and seeing and seeing steep drop-offs in the amount that that is being spent. So you've run up against kind of similar problems, I think with that model. But it is certainly something that is The incentives to me feel like they're lined up for creators in a, in a model like that, right? Because they, if done right, they would directly benefit from their, their work. Whereas, you know, something that's always kind of frustrated me in this space is like, the value of myself and, and, and editorial teams have increased the value of entities tremendously o over my career. And then they get sold and I see none of it And so like that, that the incentive, [00:40:24] Randall R. Jacobs: and [00:40:25] Caley Fretz: structure is not, is not great within most of bike media [00:40:29] Randall R. Jacobs: Yeah. It's bad enough in the tech space where there are stock options, but generally to the founder goes most of the spoils. Even though and I say this as a founder, I don't create most of the value, right? Nothing that, that I could do would get off the ground without all the other people who make it happen. And so, it's only right that there be a distribution of ownership and a sharing of the rewards if there's success, which in turn incentivizes success. In the case of cycling tips, in reading the comments it's very clear that the readership knows it. They're not there for cycling tips. Cycling tips is the bander under which all the people whose perspectives they valued. It's where those people are. And so, your standalone brand and that of your colleagues, has value and has value in particular, if it's brought in a single place where people can interact with you as, as they had in the past it's a terrible thing to lose. And you know, whatever the reasons for it, obviously there are economic headwinds. But it's, it's unfortunate. But there's a saying that I, I live by that seems to apply, which is change happens when the fear of change is less than the pain of staying the same. [00:41:36] Caley Fretz: Hmm. [00:41:37] Randall R. Jacobs: And there's nothing quite like a radically changing economic model or layoffs or things like that that make staying the same, really painful. And so whether the fear has changed or not, time to take the leap and people like yourself and Ben and others have been making that leap. I wonder you mentioned that some sort of platform would have to. Either be funded by a bunch of VC money, which honestly I don't, if you wanna end up with a small fortune, start with a big one. Throwing VC money at things is a really good way to end up with Juicero. I don't know if you recall that [00:42:10] Caley Fretz: Oh, yes. [00:42:11] Randall R. Jacobs: 130 or 160 million of Sandhill Road money lit on fire for a a glorified electric press for If anyone's curious, look this up. It is. It'll, it'll make you feel that yeah, it, it'll make you question the judgment of, of Silicon Valley in a way that I have learned too from the inside over the years. But the organic piece let's, let's unpack that cuz I, I have a couple of ideas that I'd like to bounce off of you. So platforms like YouTube, I suspect it's gonna be very hard for somebody who has an audience on YouTube or who wants to build an audience to leave YouTube. But having a platform that is essentially an a. So if you're a content creator, wherever your content is, this is the one place where you can find all of it along with, categorized content from other players. So you want to learn about tools you have, Dave Romes YouTube videos about tools. You have his podcast about tools. You have other content creators content there. And then it becomes kind of platform agnostic like you can be anywhere, but this is the place where you go to find it. And this is the place where you go to interact. Cuz the YouTube comments, that's not an interaction space that's largely a trolling space or, or it's a largely one directional sorts of conversation happening. Even, even the healthiest version of it is still not a conversation. But if you have a YouTube video embedded in a a community, [00:43:27] Caley Fretz: Mm-hmm. [00:43:28] Randall R. Jacobs: Now all of a sudden people are in digital community together and not just over say Dave and his tool-based content or his tool focused content. Not to say that's all he does, but using that as an example, but also Dave in community, in his local chapter, right. In his local riding community. And in the context of a place where people are also going for, James' bike reviews and you know, your Twitter de France coverage and, and things like this that's one model that I've wondered, like if there was such a platform. [00:43:59] Caley Fretz: how, how, how do you monetize it? Is it, is it pay? Walled, [00:44:03] Randall R. Jacobs: That's a big question, right? [00:44:04] Caley Fretz: Well, so, so, the reason I ask is because I, I, like, I would see a couple different options, right? And, and we're getting into real sort of media theory here, but , [00:44:11] Randall R. Jacobs: This, this was actually part of the conversation I wanted to have with you long before all these changes. And it's something we've discussed on the pod before as well with other content creators. [00:44:19] Caley Fretz: I, I think So I, I'll say that first and foremost that I'm, I'm not anti paywall. I know some of the, some others are in, in the media space, but I fundamentally believe that if done properly you're essentially only targeting. So, so, so I'm, I'm a big advocate of what, what we call meter paywall, which is basically you get a couple free stories in a given amount of time whatever the number is, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, whatever you want. And then at some point you, you pay right? Now, the nice thing about that is that you know, if we, if we take a, let's take a hypothetical cycling media outlet with somewhere in, you know, we, we'll call it, we'll call it 2 million unique users a month, right? You've got 2 million people showing up at a website every month. The number of people who are actually gonna get to the paywall that are gonna go to enough stories to get to that paywall is probably something in the neighborhood of like, Less than 5% of those people. It's a tiny, tiny, tiny number because a huge number of those people are coming in from Google. They're, they're, they're seo, they're coming into SEO stories, they're coming into, you know, how to bet in my disc brakes. And they're, they're in and they find out how to do that and they're out. Right? And that's the only interaction you have with them. And they're useful from a page view perspective if you're monetizing that. But they're not particularly useful from a membership perspective cuz who's gonna pay to get one story, right. That, that's, that doesn't make any sense. So you're really only trying to monetize your super users. So your super users are that 5%, the people that actually end up hitting paywall. And part of the reason why I'm not anti paywall is because those people that, that, that small group of people that is coming back day after day after day after day, they value you. And if they truly value you, they should pay for you. , like, I don't have any problem with, you know, we put a ton of time and energy and effort into this and it is our jobs. And we need to get paid. And if people, if people appreciate what we're doing enough to come back every single day and they're not willing to pay for that, then as far as I'm concerned, they need to look at themselves and, and, and ask why. Right? Like, all I'm asking for is, is, you know, eight bucks a month or whatever to continue doing so that, so that you can do something that you do every single day that you enjoy, that you, that you gain information and entertainment from inspiration from even. I think that that's a pretty reasonable trade off. I don't really have any problem asking the super user to do that. I think that there are other paywall versions of a paywall that, that I, that I don't agree with, sort of philosophically, I don't agree with paywall in a hundred percent of content. I also think that that just ruins your discoverability and it, it, it doesn't allow anybody [00:46:49] Randall R. Jacobs: was, I was gonna say, is [00:46:50] Caley Fretz: Yeah. Then nobody, [00:46:53] Randall R. Jacobs: thing or is it more just practically like, you're, you're gonna cut off all the channels for discovery? [00:46:58] Caley Fretz: Both. Yeah. I, I, it, it realistically, yeah. Like I said, your discoverability goes to zero. People can't tell that you make good content. I have kind of a similar issue with the, the like premium content model. So you, you know, you give away your, your crappy stuff for free and the really good stuff you gotta pay for, like, I don't like that either. Cause why then anybody's strolling around your website, it's gonna be like, well, it's the only thing is I can read are crap. So why would I pay for the, i, I don't know that [00:47:23] Randall R. Jacobs: poor, it's a poor pitch. [00:47:24] Caley Fretz: It's a bad pitch. So, so I have issues with that. I also just like philosophically, you know, the, the sort of fully hard pay wall that you can't read anything without paying beyond the discovery of discoverability problems. I just kinda have issues with that because like if we do write a, how to bet in your disc brake so they don't make noise story. Like, I want people to be able to access that, right? Like, then I don't have to listen up. people's loud disc breaks. You know, like people, I, I have no problem sort of providing that much content to somebody for free. And I think that the fully pay well in that is, is, is isn't great. But again, I I'm not against paywalls in general. Meter paywalls I think work quite well. They yeah, we know that they're effective. They can be incredibly effective, particularly if you have this sort of requisite essentially story volume to make them work and, and sort of audience size to make them work. So given that like the, the sort of concept that you are talking about, paywall seems like a, like a, a, a good way forward because again, you're sort of avoiding the avoiding the need to, to chase advertising dollars constantly. And this is, this is gonna be somewhat a reflection of what I'm thinking for, for. For myself going forward, obviously you're avoiding, you're, you're avoiding chasing advertising dollars incessantly, which, you know, I'm not against advertising either. I think the right advertising partners can be, can be crucial, right? They provide lots of actually value to an audience at some point, right. You know, the fact that you get bikes to test the fact that you have a good relationship there. Those, those are all valuable things. So not, not anti advertising either. I'm just more anti, constantly chasing every single cent you can possibly get out of advertising. And the, and the sort of the, the, the extra resource that, that very concept requires. And so yeah, some sort of like membership driven thing lines up with the sort of ethos of what you're talking about, which is very community driven. We know communities are willing to invest in their own space where they can be a community. And so that would make sense as well. And if you start to do things like add too much advertising to something like that, then you do the incentives start to shift. Cuz you start working for the advertisers instead of working for the community. And that I think goes against the whole ethos that you're talking about of the sort of communal thing. So that would be my, that would be my 2 cents on, on, on how to build something like that. Like I said, it is a concept that, that we played around with and I've played around with in my head for, for some time actually. I personally, again, it's more of a, more of a time issue for me than anything. Not that I don't think it could be cool and don't think it could work. I just think that the, to build that community would take quite a bit of time. And also figuring out the precise method of paying. So the other roadblock that I, that I came across when I was thinking through this was the precise method of paying content creators in that scenario, it's quite complicated. Cause are you paying them? Are you paying them by page view? Are you paying them? Is there a tip jar? Is there some sort of, of, you know, rank voting system when people sign up, like, I like these three creators and I don't like these three, and so the top three get, get my money. And the, and the other three don't. That starts to create some perverse incentives toward bad content as well, right? And, and essentially that's the, that is the YouTube problem. The YouTube problem is that YouTube is incentivized for clickbait. It's incentivized for garbage content, , because that's, that's the stuff that gets picked up. And think about, think about your average, like YouTube headline or YouTube sort of, title card. Versus what you would find on a, a site like cycling tips these days. Right. It's a dramatic difference. Like we, we would have to change headlines depending on whether it was going on YouTube or going on on the site back in the day. Cuz YouTube is incentivized to be like all caps and exclamation points and somebody crashing in the title card and all these things that we kind of hate because that's what you end [00:51:25] Randall R. Jacobs: Kaylee, Fritz destroys X, Y, [00:51:27] Caley Fretz: Exactly. So after the monetization question, how do you actually split up that money with the content creators? It's a, it's a, again, I like, I love the, the idea, I love the concept, but the sort of those particular decisions. Be crucial to success and crucial to it actually working for the people that, that you, that you know, that you want, want, would want it to work for. And it'd be hard. It'd be really hard. I I don't have the solution to those questions, which is why I, again, thought through a lot of this and, and thought through a similar concept, not, not identical but a similar concept and, and basically came to the conclusion that in the near term, a a slightly more traditional model is not the worst thing in the world, right? Like, build really good content, pay people for it make people pay for it. , that's essentially the, that's the, the, the three part business plan of most membership driven media entities these days. Does that all make sense? I feel like I went in a bit of rant there. [00:52:31] Randall R. Jacobs: Not at all. Not at all. And in fact, it's a conversation I'd like to continue cuz I have a few ideas that probably we, we don't want to dedicate a whole episode to just this conversation. But certainly appreciate you pulling back a curtain on the sorts of questions that you as an editor in the space and an editor for one of the most respected publications in the space and for good reason, providing that perspective in the sorts of things that you are thinking about from this new Vantage point is very much appreciative. So thank you for that. I wanna go in a completely different direction. What are the pieces that you've written that you most enjoyed or found most challenging, or that were most meaningful for you as a writer? [00:53:08] Caley Fretz: Hmm. Internally at cycling tips. We called them riddles. It was a, it was a coin, a term that I intro coined for his little, the little essays. Right. There's a couple of those that I, that I really enjoyed writing and, and liked writing. It's just sort of the pure act of, of, of sort of language, basically like playing with language. Which is still fundamentally like why I started doing this to begin with is cause I really enjoyed doing that. And the last couple years have stepped away from writing almost entirely. Not entirely, but almost entirely. And, and so when I did get a chance to write, it was always, it was always meaningful and I, and I liked it. That tended to be at things like the Tor de Frances where, you know, I would essentially send to myself cuz I, I wanted to go cover the to Frances again. I had plenty, plenty, plenty of, plenty of talented, talented writers that, that reporters that could have gone instead of me. But at some point you pull the boss card and I'm like, I'm gonna the tour So, so yeah, there's a couple pieces on that front. Actually one of the first pieces I ever wrote for segment tips it's, it was called The Road to Niro's House. And it was about a trip that my wife and I and two friends took to Columbia. And it, it, like half the photos are broken on it now. It's, it's, it's from like 2017 like 6,500 words of a trip around Columbia and all the sort of things that, that riding in Columbia. Particularly in 2017 meant sort of keeping in mind that that, you know, a relatively large and disastrous war there only kind of wrapped up around the 2010 mark depending on who you ask . So I, I, I really enjoyed that piece. And then, yeah, like these, these little riddles, you know, there's a couple that I've written over my career that I that you tend to write them in 20 minutes, right? Because something just hits you in the head and, and you just, I mean, you just get it out, but it, because of that, it's, they're very pure. I think. I wrote one about the toe strap that my dad would use to attach a sock full of Tube tire, co2, you know, flat fixing implements underneath his saddle. Right? And he would, he would strap this thing underneath his saddle with a, with a strap, like a tube sock underneath his saddle with a, with a, with a tow strap, like a leather tow strap. And, and I, and I wrote this story about how, like, you know, I just remember when I was 12, 13 years old. And you know, my dad is obviously a much stronger cycl cyclist than me at that point. And just like, you know, trying to stay on his wheel with this like, toe strap dangling in front of me as like the, you know, I'm just, I'm just, I just need to stay on the tow strap. Wrote a piece about that at some point that I, that I ended up, I, I really liked. And it was meaningful to me because of my, my relationship with my dad is like very tied into my relationship with cycling because we grew up doing it together and, and still ride together when we can and things like that. There was one about eating Castle and Carcassone during a rest day, Tor de France that I liked. Again, these, you know, [00:55:59] Randall R. Jacobs: Castle in Per, [00:56:01] Caley Fretz: Castle is is like a, [00:56:03] Randall R. Jacobs: I'm, I'm, I'm not so [00:56:04] Caley Fretz: is like, is like a meat, like a meaty stew thing you know, white beans and, and, and some, some meat. And Carcassone is a town in southern France with a big kind of world heritage site castle over top of it. And it's always hot as hell there. They often have restage there at the torque. It's always hot as hell. And I have yet to find a hotel or an Airbnb there that has air conditioning. So you're always just like baking, you know, second rest day of the Tor De France. You know, I, I think I was sitting in a cafe. And I had a couple roses like you do and, and eating a castle, which is also hot. So I'm like, I'm hot eating a hot castle and just watching the world kind of go by like the sort of Tor de France rest day world go going by and, you know, like Greg Van Ama coming up and, and stopping at a red light. I'm this, I've wrote the story a while ago and I'm trying to remember what I even talked about. You kn

Since the 2017 NYT article about ATIP, the idea of an imminent UFO/UAP disclosure has been on the tip of our tongues, but we've been here before. This week the crew behind Black Cat Report is taking a step back from the script and the stories to talk about theories, ideas, and the reality of disclosure. This is us getting back to the roots of what inspired the show, a heated chat between us. We hope you'll enjoy :) --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/black-cat-report/message

No terceiro episódio da série sobre autismo e mercado de trabalho, Tiago Abreu e Caio Bogos descrevem o que são planos de carreira, como as empresas geralmente estruturam cargos e o desenvolvimento pessoal de seus funcionários, e os desafios que pessoas no espectro do autismo vivem nessas questões. Arte: Vin Lima.Acesse a comunidade da aTip clicando aqui.Transcrição do episódio disponível no site do Introvertendo.

No segundo episódio da série sobre autismo e mercado de trabalho, Tiago Abreu e Caio Bogos conversam sobre as possíveis adaptações e ações de acessibilidade que podem ser feitas para autistas, os processos de trabalho, as características aparentemente opostas entre autistas e o diálogo sobre acessibilidade com os gestores. Arte: Vin Lima.Acesse a comunidade da aTip clicando aqui.Transcrição do episódio disponível no site do Introvertendo.

Tom and Michael discuss a recent report authored by Michael and its implications for upcoming votes on Palestinian human rights at the United Nations General Assembly. The report, based on documents obtained through an access to information request, found that Canada's career foreign affairs officials are highly critical of Canada's staunchly pro-Israel record, and have been pushing for a change in the government's approach. We break down the report's findings and what they say about Canada and its reputation on the international stage.Links from this podcast:CJPME Report: Voting Against Its Own InterestsCJPME's UN Dashboard Subscribe to this podcast, and donate to CJPME to support the work that we do. 

Apesar de existir o estereótipo de que autistas tendem a ser melhores em exatas, há autistas em todas as áreas. Neste episódio que estreia uma nova série sobre mercado de trabalho com o apoio e co-produção da aTip, Tiago Abreu recebe Caio Bogos, que aborda as múltiplas áreas e habilidades autistas no ambiente empresarial e os entraves que ainda existem no acesso e na permanência de pessoas neurodivergentes nas corporações. Arte: Vin Lima.Acesse a comunidade da aTip clicando aqui.Transcrição do episódio disponível no site do Introvertendo.

Você sabe como é a acessibilidade no mercado de tecnologia? E como a tecnologia pode ajudar as pessoas com deficiência? No episódio de hoje trouxemos dois convidados incríveis que são da aTip, para trocar uma ideia sobre o tema de diversidade PCD e tecnologia. Então chega+ e bora ouvir esse episódio, que tá muito massa! --- Edição completa por Rádiofobia Podcast e Multimídia: https://radiofobia.com.br/ --- Nos siga no Twitter e no Instagram: @luizalabs @cabecadelab Dúvidas, cabeçadas e sugestões, mande e-mail para o cabecadelab@luizalabs.com Participantes: Milene Mancini Vasconcelos | instagram.com/m_mvasconcelos/ Caio Bogos | linkedin.com/in/caiobogos/ Talita Pagani | linkedin.com/in/talitapagani/

Caio Bogos da aTip Hoje no Metatalks fala sobre projetos no metaverso para pessoas neuroatípicas Ronaldo Fenômeno investe em startup voltada para o mundo geek Quer entrar para o clube do livro e apoiar o ResumoCast https://www.resumocast.com.br/apoiase Essas são as manchetes de hoje, terça-feira dia  de Junho de 2022 E você está no RC NEWS. Escutando notícias e matérias para empreendedores O RC NEWS é um  programa multiplataforma e estamos ao vivo no Youtube, Facebook, Linkedin, Twitter e Twitch do ResumoCast. As edições ficam gravadas nas plataformas podendo ser acessadas a qualquer hora do dia. _____________ Gutenberg Ventures A edição de hoje tem o apoio da Gutenberg Ventures, a primeira Venture Builder do Metaverso, que já está pré-cadastrando startups de tecnologia para seu programa de Buildagem. Então se você tem uma startup ou conhece alguém? Visita https://gutenbergventures.com E você pode enviar mensagens pelas redes sociais e quando acompanha ao vivo de Segunda à Sexta às 7:13h da manhã.  

WOT #2 ▶ 13 June 2021 - Mainstream UFOs & UAPs! Tonight, we take a look at US Military reports of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs), UFOs, ATIP, and more! We make predictions about the forthcoming Pentagon report on UAPs -- will they tell the truth? + Chad C. Meek, Eric Newman, & Kyle Leigh

UFO's, UAP's USO's - We know you have questions and we have answers??!?  This month Congress will receive a report from the Pentagon on the Unidentified Objects in our skies.  We discuss the ramifications, and possibilities in this episode and we just might have a better idea than the likes of Neil Degrasse Tyson.With No Due Respect S02E12 (UFO, UAP, USO & the Pentagon)SHOW NOTES:USS Nimitz TictacUFO's near Nuclear activityhttps://www.history.com/news/ufos-near-nuclear-facilities-uss-roosevelt-rendleshamWWII Foo FightersFormer Sen. Harry ReidHarry Reid on ATIPhttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/47/Reid_letter_2009_1532565293943_49621615_ver1.0.pdfRobert BigelowLuis ElizondoSR71B2 Stealth Bomber - Flying Wing    Gimbal UFO - USS Roosevelt - FloridaTriangle UFO filmed by NAVYBall LighteningBioluminescenceH.G. Wells - "The Time Machine"Battle of L.A. 1942One of Russia's Hypersonic MissilesNavy Cmd. David FravorBob LazarCNN article with Thomas Zurbuchenhttps://www.cnn.com/2021/06/04/tech/ufos-nasa-study-scn/index.html

In theory, everyone living in what is now Canada should be able to file access to information and privacy (ATIP) or freedom of information (FOI) requests with their governing bodies. In practice, it isn't always that simple—especially when it comes to First Nation bands. This week, our intern-in-residence, Ellen Riopelle, tries to find out why it's so difficult—and, at times, impossible—to access information about First Nations governments. We hear from former Elsipogtog chief Susan Levi-Peters and reporters Wawmeesh Hamilton and Paul Barnsley about how a lack of access affects not only those filing the requests, but communities at large. A big thank you to Ellen, who has been with us since April working on this story, and to King's College for facilitating the internship.

The New York Times is running stories about recovered extraterrestrial spaceships, the Navy has confirmed UFOs are real, and the Pentagon says it's preparing to disclose further information to the public. Is the government about to reveal the existence of aliens... or is this all click bait? If so... where's it coming from and how has it seeped into legacy media?

Matt Tiller holds a Masters in Advanced Psychological Studies as well as other certifications and academic degrees that include psychology, sociology, theology, and various foreign languages. In 2018, Matt says he was inspired to take action in the field of Ufology after reading the New York Times’ report on AATIP. Opportunity or perhaps fate led him to the SCU in 2019. Today, Matt is the senior editor of the SCU Review.

Matt Tiller holds a Masters in Advanced Psychological Studies as well as other certifications and academic degrees that include psychology, sociology, theology, and various foreign languages. In 2018, Matt says he was inspired to take action in the field of Ufology after reading the New York Times’ report on AATIP. Opportunity or perhaps fate led him to the SCU in 2019. Today, Matt is the senior editor of the SCU Review.

This Podcast is meant for Mature Audiences with a good grasp of reality. Multiple topics are discussed, form your own opinion and do your own research. This Week Fame and Tim sit down with Special Guest Jason Causey to discuss: - The UFO community and dis-information spread throughout it - Aliens and Tom DeLonge's To the Stars Academy program. - Why there aren't to many people involved with the UFO scene. - Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself -and more “A society doesn’t have to be uniform in order to be united” - An Unidentified Black Male Follow on youtube @ tha block is hot podcast Twitter: @_thablockishot Discord: Tha Block is Hots --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/unidentified-blackmale/support

Gav and Peter talk about the surprise news about Bobby Duncan and a possible move away from the club. Joel Matip, Anfield and tea making procedures get a mention too!Brought to you by Paddy Power.

Gav and Peter talk about the surprise news about Bobby Duncan and a possible move away from the club. Joel Matip, Anfield and tea making procedures get a mention too!Brought to you by Paddy Power.

Aaron Davidson and Jayden Quinlan from Hornady dive deep into the history, development process and specifications of the new 300 PRC round from hornady. They discuss the cartridge's strengths and ideal applications as well as load data and bullet selection to optimize the performance of this long range 30 caliber round. They touch on Hornady's new Atip bullet line. The New 300 PRC From Hornady Gunwerks Magnus 300 PRC 1 Mile shot with Gunwerks 300 PRC

Allan Dawson of the Manitoba Co-operator reports on conversations at the Canadian Crops Convention about China’s decision to block Richardson International’s canola shipments (includes audio recordings of Chrystia Freeland, Canada’s minister of foreign affairs, and David Dzisiak past chair of the Canola Council of Canada), a quick take with Marie-Claude […]

There were a lot of big promises in that 2015 LPC Campaign, weren't there? Such as electoral reform. Such as eliminating the National Energy Board and having new project hearings. Such as a new "relationship" with Indigenous Peoples. Such as "fixing" C-51. See a common theme here? Well, add another one to the growing pile. After promising to renew and replace Canada's 1982 Privacy and Access to Information laws, we get Bill C-58 which amends those 35 year old laws instead of replacing them. Why have corporate media ignored this issue so consistently except for the odd cursory update of its progress on the Order Paper? Why have only the usual suspects of independent media kept it current? TVUH will look at what there is to fear for the mainstream media. The 'consultation' started like they meant business, in the spring of 2016. Stakeholders, academics, expert groups and the Commissioners of Information and Privacy gave input. Then a funny thing happened. Bill C-58 hit the floor of the House on First Reading and effectively ignored all of that consultation. As Suzanne Legault neared the end of her term as Information Commissioner, she repeatedly called out C-58 as inadequate and regressive. Her replacement Caroline Maynard has not changed that position in any real effect. Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien has not been a fan of C-58, also using the terms regressive and not helping regarding any current backlogs or deficiencies. Time allocation, wholesale rejection of a lengthy list of Committee amendments and near invisible passage to the Senate is where we are now. Sunny ways, friends. The Red Chamber seems determined to take this bill apart, calling all the same detractors to tell them about its failures. Will it be sent back to the House with huge amendments? Will the threat of Proroguement kill it and many other bills? Would we be better off where C-58 is concerned?

Episode 14-aTip#3 of 28 wedding tips. What should you expect the day of your wedding when you hire a wedding Professional hair and make up artist

Each fall, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada releases their annual Immigration Levels Plan. Currently these levels are set at just over 300,000 for 2017. This sure seems like a lot of new immigrants. However, have you every really thought about how many actually stay in Canada after they arrive? This is the question Canadian Immigration lawyer Carter Hoppe and I discussed in Episode 10 of the Canadian Immigration Podcast. This is the second time Carter Hoppe has joined me on my Podcast. Previously, Carter and I discussed the various immigrant investor programs in Canada and abroad in Season 2 Episode 2. Carter did such an awesome job in that Episode, that I just had to have him back. Carter is a Member of the Law Society of Upper Canada and practices out of his office in Dubai, UAE. You can learn more about Carter's background from the show notes in Season 2 Episode 2. In this episode Cater and I discuss the effect the residency requirements have had on Canadian permanent residents who have not yet decided, or who may not yet be ready to centralize their mode of existence in Canada just yet. In other words, there are a fairly significant portion of those 300,000 newly landed PRs who may, for a number of reasons, choose not to remain in Canada. So how does this fact impact on IRCC's Annual Levels Plans? Does IRCC even track this information? So if you are an official within IRCC who has knowledge regarding the statistics for PRs who ultimately renounce or otherwise lose their PR status, we would love to get our hands on that data. You can send me an e-mail to mholthe@stringam.ca if you'd like to share it because I really do not want to have to file…yet another….ATIP request.

Each fall, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada releases their annual Immigration Levels Plan. Currently these levels are set at just over 300,000 for 2017. This sure seems like a lot of new immigrants. However, have you every really thought about how many actually stay in Canada after they arrive? This is the question Canadian Immigration lawyer Carter Hoppe and I discussed in Episode 10 of the Canadian Immigration Podcast.       This is the second time Carter Hoppe has joined me on my Podcast. Previously, Carter and I discussed the various immigrant investor programs in Canada and abroad in Season 2 Episode 2. Carter did such an awesome job in that Episode, that I just had to have him back. Carter is a Member of the Law Society of Upper Canada and practices out of his office in Dubai, UAE.  You can learn more about Carter’s background from the show notes in Season 2 Episode 2. In this episode Cater and I discuss the effect the residency requirements have had on Canadian permanent residents who have not yet decided, or who may not yet be ready to centralize their mode of existence in Canada just yet. In other words, there are a fairly significant portion of those 300,000 newly landed PRs who may, for a number of reasons, choose not to remain in Canada. So how does this fact impact on IRCC’s Annual Levels Plans? Does IRCC even track this information? So if you are an official within IRCC who has knowledge regarding the statistics for PRs who ultimately renounce or otherwise lose their PR status, we would love to get our hands on that data. You can send me an e-mail to mholthe@stringam.ca if you’d like to share it because I really do not want to have to file…yet another….ATIP request.

CanadianImmigrationPodcast.com Mark Holthe: I'm here with my good friend and colleague, Raj Sharma. Raj, thanks for joining me. Raj Sharma: My pleasure. Mark Holthe: We're testing this out with our digital recorder here. I usually do these interviews via Skype call, but I've got high hopes that the audio is going to be great regardless. Thanks for putting up with me, Raj, and happy to have you with us. Today, Raj has agreed to come in and talk a little bit about criminal inadmissibility and some of the consequences that can flow when people get themselves into trouble here in Canada, but before we get into that I want to take a moment to share a little bit of background on Raj, and where he's come from professionally, and where he's at. Raj Sharma's a lawyer and founding partner of Stewart Sharma Harsanyi, one of Western Canada's largest dedicated immigration law firms. He received his masters of law from Osgoode Hall and is a former refugee protection officer with the Immigration and Refugee Board. Now, I'll get to the question of how you got into immigration and I'm going to go out on a limb and think that that probably influenced it a little bit. Raj Sharma: That's right. Mark Holthe: With over a hundred reported decisions, Raj has indicated to me, he frequently appears before all divisions, as well as the Federal Court, the court of appeal, and has also appeared before every level of court in Alberta. Raj regularly speaks on immigration matters in the media, and he's been a panelist and speaker at the CBA National Immigration Conference in 2014 and '15. He also writes a lot on immigration, multiculturalism, and diversity. Recently he was the recipient of the Legal Aid of Alberta's Access to Justice award and has been recognized as well as one of Calgary's Top 40 Under 40. Raj is an extremely accomplished individual and I know that he won't plug himself, so I'll do that for him, but whenever I have a difficult case with respect to enforcement, or appeal work, or anything like that I send it to him and his firm. Once again, thanks for joining, Raj. Raj Sharma: Thanks, Mark. I'm East Indian, or as I like to describe ourselves as brown, so no matter how accomplished I am, obviously given that I'm not a doctor I'm probably a disappointment to my parents. Mark Holthe: Well, we'll have to get your parents on to come back and I'm almost positive with everything that you've done, at least within our industry and how you've distinguished yourself, that there wouldn't be a parent on this planet that wouldn't be proud of you. Enough of the feel good stuff, fill us in. How did you get into immigration? Raj Sharma: I never intended to get into immigration law. I did my JD at the University of Alberta. While I was there, I didn't take any immigration courses, immigration just wasn't even on my radar. I summered at a large law firm here in Calgary, Burnet, Duckworth & Palmer. I didn't like the large law firm milieu so to speak. Then I spent some time with Dennis Edney, who's now the lawyer for Omar Khadr. Then I also clerked up the Alberta Court of Appeal and ended up doing my articles with the federal department of justice. I think I had at that point an understanding that I would be somewhat closer to a barrister or a litigator than I would be in terms a solicitor. There was one case that I handled and my mentor at that time at the federal Department of Justice was Glennys Bembridge, who is now a Federal Court justice with a different last name, but there was one case and it involved a family, they're doctors, and their son had autism. I was the articling student, so I had to put together the affidavit and supporting the officer's finding of medical inadmissibility. I found that really, really interesting, but I kept saying to my mentor at that why can't we just consent on this file, the family's really deserving, and ultimately I think that the family did get relief. After that, I'd met my wife at Winnipeg at a wedding ... Mark Holthe: I'm going to jump in. Raj Sharma: Yes. Mark Holthe: You said, "Why can't we just consent to this?" What was his response? Raj Sharma: It was a strange response. The response was just like, "Oh, we just have to ..." Mark Holthe: Carry it through. Raj Sharma: It was more like it was like, "Oh, the client instructions ..." I'm like, "What client? We're the government." I was explained that different departments are actually clients of the department of justice. I found that very odd because I don't think that's true. I think that a client/solicitor relationship doesn't encapsulate departments of government being clients of each other. I found that odd. In any way, I'd met my wife in Winnipeg at a wedding, my cousin's wedding. She was in Calgary, born and raised in Calgary, so I needed a way to get to Calgary somehow, so I was applying for jobs in Calgary and I got this called up to do this test or examination at the Immigration Refugee Board. I was offered this position to become a refugee protection officer. That's where in fact I met my partner, Bjorn Harsanyi, so we both started off as refugee protection officers, hearings officers in 2002. Mark Holthe: Obviously that makes a pretty nice background for sliding over to the other side. It gives you an opportunity at least having worked on the other side to get a better understanding of how the government operates, how the department operates, a little bit more inside to the minds of what goes through a decision maker on that side. I have to assume that that helped you as you moved over to the other side with your advocacy on behalf of clients. Raj Sharma: I think so and I think that, and again there's this tradition of this entrepreneurial tradition within my community, and of course my second and third languages also helped, there was a burgeoning South Asian community in Calgary at that time. Really, it was timing, and so Calgary's just really good to me. I'd moved to Calgary at about the right time and I went into private practice at about the right time, right before Calgary took off, so to speak. 2004 I started my practice, late 2004 I started my practice. At that time, just trying to take whatever you can get, so again, I wasn't really centered in immigration. Then there was this legal aid file, this three hour legal aid file for criminal inadmissibility. It involved a foreign national in Canada accused or there was an allegation of weapons, and gun smuggling, and weapons trafficking. At that point I thought, "Well, this is a foregone conclusion." I looked at the IRPA and I said, "Well, this is just, there's no way out here," but my partner at that time pushed me a little bit and so I looked at it, I looked at it again. I put in far more hours than the three hours allotted to me, and low and behold I was able to succeed. I think that was the first time that I was in the media, that was the first time I was on TV or the newspapers, at least when it came to my legal practice. It was after that that my practice in immigration took off because it was after that that I joined Caron & Partners and then again after I left Caron & Partners there was another Vietnamese fellow, [another] fork in the road. There was another Vietnamese client, Jackie Tran, and that file I took on in 2009. Both of these cases probably had something to do with the direction of my practice. Mark Holthe: Yeah, that makes perfect sense because I think for most of us business immigration lawyers, I guess that's how I classify myself, when there's a sticky situation I get uncomfortable pretty quick. I have a tendency to try to take the path of easiest and least resistance with my clients. If there's push back from the government, I tend to try and say, "Do we need to refile? Do we need to rethink our strategy?" Sometimes it's faster to just accept the stupid decision that you get from an officer and then just try to satisfy whatever they want, and refile, and get it approved, but there's a number of situations where people get themselves into a corner where they really don't have a nice, easy solution other than taking the government on. Raj Sharma: I think .. it depends on what you're facing. Now, in your case you have to solve a sort of business problem. Prior to 2009, before Tran, I was actually doing hundreds of LMIA's, or LMO's that they were called at the time, so I was representing major corporations, I was getting fat, I was just doing pure solicitor work, and I think again timing came to my rescue because once I got into the Tran file, which necessitated three different Federal Court applications, [emergency] stay application, IAD, ID, and right about that same time the economy in Calgary sort of collapsed, so to speak. If you're a one trick pony, that is you're only doing one aspect of immigration, you could be susceptible to that sort of change. I was very lucky in the sense of I did quite a bit of solicitor business work, but given that strong litigation year we were able to just basically switch our practices over to a litigation aspect. In business [immigration], you're tasked with making sure that the business runs smoothly. Where it's an individual facing loss of status, it's a zero sum game. In business there may be not, it's not a zero sum game, but in someone facing removal or deportation to a country that they haven't been in since they were a kid, it's a zero sum game which is you win or you lose, so at that point you start bringing out all the arrows in your quiver and you're doing whatever you can for your client because it is, for them to some degree, it's life or death in the sense of it's a death of a relationship, it's a death of your relationship to Canada, and it's a death of your status in this country. Mark Holthe: Let's shift to the topic at hand. I think a lot of our listeners, this isn't something that they're very familiar with because I think genuinely people try to avoid committing crimes in Canada and getting themselves removed. Raj Sharma: Right, and we know for a fact that immigrants or first generation Canadians have a lower crime rate than native born Canadians, so you're absolutely right. Most of your listeners and our clients, most of them, the vast majority enjoy a lower criminal rate or criminality than Canadians would. Mark Holthe: Yes, absolutely. As those that are listening in here, as I introduced when I started the podcast here, the interview with Raj Sharma, I indicated that we're going to be talking a little bit about criminal inadmissibility, so Raj, can you give us a little bit of an introduction? When we talk about criminal inadmissibility, how does that play into this world of immigration? Raj Sharma: Immigration is about, and notwithstanding whatever we hear these days from Donald Trump or Hilary Clinton, there are no such thing as truly open borders. A country will always dictate who enters and who remains, so there was a case that went to the supreme court of Canada involving a woman actually -- most of the cases I deal with actually do involve men -- but Medovarski involved a woman and Medovarski reaffirmed that concept that non-citizens do not have an unqualified right to enter or remain inside of Canada. When we look at criminality, the threshold for removing non-citizens from Canada is spelled out in intricate detail in the Immigration Refugee Protection Act and there is a bifurcation, i.e., it's somewhat harder to remove permanent residents from Canada and quite a bit easier to remove foreign nationals from Canada. When we talk about foreign nationals, we're talking about students and those here on work permits or those that are visitors in Canada. When we talk about permanent residence, obviously those are individuals that have applied for permanent residency, they're not citizens yet, and so we have a paradigm, a very detailed framework that deals with non-citizens that get in trouble with the law. Mark Holthe: When we talk about getting in trouble with the law, does the Immigration Act or the government, do they view certain crimes more seriously than others? How is that distinction set up? Raj Sharma: No, and maybe they should. That would have been a proper starting point. Maybe you should have been involved in this sort of legislation of these laws, but unfortunately the distinction of the severity of a crime is based on the maximum term of imprisonment or the actual incarceral or term that's imposed. When we talk about prison or incarceral term, we're including conditional sentences or sentences to be served in the community, so the distinction is not between the type of offense, someone that's convicted of a white collar offense such as fraud could face removal just as easily or perhaps more easily than someone accused or charged with simple assault. Mark Holthe: Even if an offense, let's say it's a hybrid offense, so it could proceed summarily or via indictment, the person that is sentenced to ten years imprisonment for that offense versus someone that's sentenced to six months under the eyes of the lovely immigration authorities, it's irrelevant. Raj Sharma: That's right, and it also doesn't take into account your length of time in Canada, so you could be a permanent resident and you could be here since you were two or three, and you could be [here] thirty years, and you could have an issue. Of course, this is the fragility of the human condition, we all make mistakes, so it doesn't take into account the length of time that you're in Canada…, nor does it take into account the nature of the offense, whether it's violent or whether it's non-violent. It's a blunt instrument unfortunately, Section 36 in particularly. Mark Holthe: If you have an individual that's committed a crime in Canada it's pretty clear we know what the offense is, we know what the conviction was, there's not a lot of debate about it, but what happens if someone wants to enter Canada or comes to Canada and has a conviction that occurred over seas or in another country, how does Canada treat those? Raj Sharma: Those things get complicated really quickly because different countries have different legal systems and different countries have different standards in terms of the ... You could have a situation [if] you're from China. Now, China has a 99.9% conviction rate. Mark Holthe: Wow, maybe I won't ask too many questions as to how that justice system plays out for those people accused, but ... Raj Sharma: I mean, so when we start making equivalent, or making offenses, or acts that individuals have done outside of Canada, and we have to somehow try and make them equivalent to offenses in Canada, those things get tricky really, really quickly. That's one subset of what we do.[But] I just keep getting reminded, even this morning, had a client applied on the Alberta Immigrant Nominee Program, skilled individual, excellent English, everything's fantastic, no criminal record whatsoever, applied on the ANP, got the nomination, applied for the PR forms to [CPC] Sydney. We got the passport request two days ago, three days ago, problem. Last week after a birthday party or someone's party, one in the morning, [he's] charged with impaired driving. Those are the sort of simple, understandable criminality because I think some politicians paint criminals as this broad brush, but criminals are no different than [you or I], it's just there's one incorrect decision. I think impaired driving is like that, this is impaired driving, could result in no jail time whatsoever, probably will result in a fine if he ever gets convicted, and a driving suspension. Won't spend a day in jail, but that's a hybrid offense and that [a conviction] makes him [as a foreign national] inadmissible. That's where I feel a lot of sympathy because you're seeing literally in front of you the end of a dream and you're seeing a person that for all other purposes would be an ideal addition to Canada's multicultural fabric. It's not really the media, it's not my cases that hit the news or the front pages that really give a proper idea of my practice. It really is those guys that are within an inch of permanent residency and we wouldn't consider them to be criminals, but of course they've made a grievous and horrendous error by drinking and getting behind the wheel of a car. Mark Holthe: Let's carry that through, I think that would be interesting. An individual who is in that type of a situation, this happens to them. What can they expect? Raj Sharma: Number one, if they come to me my first response to them, and there may be some sort of false hope, or some sort of strange fever dream that they're existing under, or they may get some sort of strange advice from someone, or a friend, or a cousin, and there may be a suggestion as to just somehow let it ride out and CIC may not figure this out. My first advice to them is that if they want my assistance, that we will be disclosing the charge and the encounter with the police immediately. That's the first thing that should happen and once they agree to these sort of terms, then we can start figuring out a solution. Now, the solution of course, and I kind of outlined that earlier today in my speech here, which is now start looking into conviction options or post conviction options. These conviction options, number one, beat out the charge in trial, because the system is binary, because it's a zero sum game, we can't now ... I think criminal lawyers and immigration lawyers that dabble in criminal law, there's no options now. You actually have to go and try to beat this out, you got to find, even if your client is factually guilty, you got to find a way to make him legally not guilty because if he's not guilty, that doesn't lead to any criminal consequences. If it's an offense, a domestic violence type of situation, and a peace bond is in the offering, take a peace bond. A peace bond doesn't have any criminal consequences either. There may be possibilities for some offenses for absolute or conditional discharges, take it, take it. That bird in the hand, we can safeguard that immigration at that point. In terms of a DUI, we're really looking to these curative discharges now and that's one option as well. Mark Holthe: Maybe you can explain what that is. What is a curative discharge? Raj Sharma: Curative discharge involves a process by which there is a guilt or there is factual guilt and there's again…. A curative discharge we've used where there's indication of alcoholism [as a] medical condition. If we can establish that, then the judge may see fit to grant a curative discharge. If that happens, then there is no criminal record that could waylay an immigration application or application for permanent residence. That's not to say, by the way, that that won't lead to other issues, i.e., you may still need a waiver to get into the US, but the curative discharge is something that we explore for impaired driving, and conditional, and absolute where ever possible [for other offences]. Now, bear in mind there's a whole host of offenses that result in mandatory minimum sentences and so we can't do any number of these things for those types of offenses, but those are some of the arrows in our quiver in terms of post conviction. Where ever possible, if you are facing a charge, either you're a permanent resident or a foreign national, try to get immigration lawyer involved alongside your criminal lawyer. There may be options to get positive sentencing remarks or positive remarks that are spoken into the record. Those transcripts can come in handy. If you are convicted, if you are sentenced, it's important that the client demonstrate remorse, and rehabilitation, engage in programming, and try to turn that life around. If we can demonstrate that, there are some options, which is that that initiating document to establish criminal inadmissibility, the Section 44 report, there is a scope for the officer not to write that report. Again, when I started down this journey I didn't realize the scope of discretion that's in the act. There is significant discretion. An officer may choose not to write a report against a permanent resident or foreign national and that may be the first, and maybe the last, real line of defense for a lot of these individuals. We've seen that happen, we've seen permanent residents, I've represented permanent residents, young guys, a technical armed robbery, four years plus sentence ... Mark Holthe: A technical armed robbery. Raj Sharma: A technical armed robbery... Mark Holthe: I love this terminology, technical versus a real, is there any distinction there? Raj Sharma: Let me tell you and you tell me whether that terminology or that splitting of hairs is appropriate. A guy got fired from a job at a liquor store, was angry, young guy, and decides to rob the liquor store as some sort of payback, buys a gun that is not operational, just this old, rusted out gun. There's no bullets in it, it's inoperable. Goes into the store, people see the gun, so they flee, so he goes to the cashier, he tries to open the cash box, is unable to do so, and runs out without stealing anything. Misfortune added to his idiocy, there's an off duty police officer who immediately arrests him outside the liquor store, so this guy goes through this process and his criminal lawyer after wasting tens of thousands of dollars of his money, pleads him guilty to an offense that includes a mandatory minimum sentence. At that point, and I met the judge actually afterwards and the judge said, "Hey, I wonder why that lawyer did that because if the lawyer challenged that on a charter ground of cruel and unusual punishment, that that mandatory minimum sentence in this case offends the Charter, I would have granted it to him." This lawyer tells this guy and his family, "That's it, game over, you will be deported," but of course that's not actually the end of it. [So] I do stand by my characterization of that as a technical armed robbery because this guy, he's more of an idiot than he was a criminal. This family went through a lot, this family, his sister in fact, who lived with was married, [her] husband had some mental issues, and she was attacked actually. The police attended and in fact that man was actually brought down by the CPS, so the family went through a lot. We put all this together, put the sentencing transcripts in, the judge, they got a really compassionate judge who said a lot of things into that record. [The client] was out on bail for four years, and upgraded himself, and it really was an ill advised decision. Ultimately, we had an understanding officer. She ended up interviewing him over the telephone, I think, at the Remand institution, and [she ultimately] decided not to write the report. Mark Holthe: I guess that's the beauty of this is the discretion that's laced into the immigration process. Raj Sharma: They won't lightly do it, but if you've got the goods .. it can be done. We had another case, we had another individual originally from Hong Kong, came over as a kid, got into some gambling issues, and then got into selling drugs to pay off some of those debts. Served his time, was a model prisoner, and his entire family was here, we set out everything. In this case we asked the Report not to be written, it was written. We challenged the Report at the Federal Court, we received approval or leave on one, it went back, and ultimately a Minister's Delegate decided to issue a warning letter. That's drug trafficking [involving a “hard” drug] and that was again significant, so these things can be done for the right individual. You will have people that have turned their lives around and you can see, you can tell. There's no faking this because it's a year's long journey. If you've got it, you've got it, and thankfully our officers, what I've seen is that we have fair individuals, open minded individuals, and that's not to say that I haven't lost on something that I think I should have won, I have, but even that decision, at least that individual had an open mind. I think our [CBSA/CIC] officers by and large are open minded individuals. Again, this may be the last line of defense for a lot of these individuals because there may not be an appeal to the ID anymore because the atrociously entitled Fast Removal of Foreign Criminals Act has amended the IRPA, so permanent residents that have been sentenced to more than six months, including conditional sentences, don't have an appeal to the IAD anymore. Whatever they've got, they've got to address that Section 44 report, that procedural fairness process, maybe Federal Court, maybe a TRP, maybe an H&C, a humanitarian and compassion application, but without that IAD backup, options are limited. Mark Holthe: That's really interesting because like I said, from my perspective, someone who does not do a lot of that type of work, very little in fact, I see walls, absolute walls sometimes for people that I can't see past, whereas individuals such as yourself who have a little bit of a broader perspective, and have actually gone and looked behind the wall have realized that sometimes there's ways through. The message that I got, especially, and just to clarify for the listeners, Raj and I are just meeting at the Canadian Bar Association Office here in Calgary after Raj gave a presentation [to the CBA Immigration Subsection] on this similar topic. One of the messages that came through loud and clear is that maybe people give up too easy, especially counsel, us. I put us under the bus in many circumstances because sometimes we're just too willing to roll over. We need to take a serious look at what the possibilities, are and not be afraid to question and challenge an allegation that's being made against our clients. Even in circumstances where based on a clear reading of the law there's a certain outcome that's supposed to flow doesn't necessarily mean there isn't discretion to go around that and that there isn't some compassion laced into the system. Raj Sharma: I learned this relatively recently. I went to visit my eighty-five, ninety years old grandmother in Edmonton. I didn't learn until much later -- my grandfather died, so my grandmother came over with my youngest uncle to Canada to her children here. None of us kids actually knew that our uncle was actually her sister's son. Her sister had died, so she had taken my uncle in. I guess his dad wasn't interested in caring for him, so I learned this later that Uncle is not actually our uncle, he's actually my mom's cousin. …I knew that there was some immigration issues that he was going through early on when he came, so my grandmother explained it to me, because there was no adoption papers and because my grandmother I think is incapable of lying, she's very straight out that we have no adoption papers, but he has nowhere else to be other than with me. They battled for like three or four years to try and get my uncle to be here. Ultimately CIC indicated, "Well, he can't be here, there's no adoption papers, we have no consent from his guardian, or his biological father, or whatever the case may be." We're from this small mining town in BC and the family was helped by an immigration lawyer out of Vancouver. Ultimately my uncle got what was then called a minister's permit, which is now we call a TRP, a temporary resident permit. When I learned that I was, "Well, I guess that's what I do." So I [do] think people minimize or perhaps don't understand the scope of discretion that's available. There are roadblocks, there's hurdles, [but] there's very few problems without an absolute solution. That being said, if you are unmitigated, incorrigible criminal, no officer's going to give you the benefit of whatever doubt there may be, but there are these avenues that can be pursued and there is a sort of system. You got to work through that system, work with the criminal lawyers, put your client in the best possible light, take advantage of any little nook, cranny, any little shaft of light, and you might be able to widen that crack a little bit for your client to step through, but yes, very few things are foregone conclusions and it's our job as counsel to put the best possible foot forward for the client. Again, in my twelve years of practicing immigration law there's very few actual incorrigible [criminals]. I said this before … that hard cases make bad law and outliers shouldn't make the world a harder place for the vast majority of people that simply want to come to Canada and give their families a better life. These outliers don't reflect the vast majority of cases that we deal with. The vast majority of cases we deal with are human fragility, human error, understandable mistakes. Mark Holthe: You mentioned this concept of a TRP, a temporary resident permit, which is now the new version of a Minister's Permit. Raj Sharma: That's right. Mark Holthe: In some circumstances, individuals will have appeal rights when there is criminality involved and they're facing some harsh consequences, they have appeal rights and other times they don't. You had talked a little bit about the discretion that an officer has to write that report to refer it or not. Can you maybe clarify that just a little bit for counsel who maybe have individuals that are at the stage where the consequences could be pretty nasty? Maybe there is no appeal right and you indicated that sometimes an officer does have some discretion whether or not to write it. Raj Sharma: That's right. That Section 44 report, so let's say there's a conviction in Canada. Establishing that would be pretty straightforward, pretty easy. What counsel can do is respond to a procedural fairness letter, say, "Please don't write the Section 44 report and here's why," and these are going to be [modeled on] the typical Section 25 type of application or submission, so time in Canada, establishment in Canada, those ties here, the family ties here, hardship, or adverse conditions, or challenges upon return, children that are affected by the decision, the circumstances leading to the events, any indicia of remorse, rehabilitation, insight. All those should be placed squarely before the officer and you say to the officer, "Don't write this report, please. The guy's been here for a long time, this is a singular mistake, the criminal record is limited or none other than this lapse in judgment." If the officer writes the report, its then has to be referred under Section 44 sub 2 by a Minister's Delegate. If it's referred, for a permanent resident that means it goes to the immigration division. If it's criminality or serious criminality in Canada, that's Section 44 sub 2, that becomes a removal order for a foreign national. Again, there's less options for foreign nationals here. If it's referred to the immigration division, not much you can do if it's a conviction in Canada. The ID is not going to look beyond the certificate of conviction. If it's a conviction outside of Canada or an allegation that some offense has occurred outside of Canada, that would be equivalent to serious offenses inside of Canada. Then the immigration proceeding becomes a substantive proceeding. That's when it takes on some degree of significance. You are then going to start talking about foreign legal laws, standard of proof, burden of proof, and at that point you probably should be retaining a foreign legal expert. It gets complicated really quickly at that point. After a removal order is issued, post removal order options are limited. A TRP can overcome or allow you to remain in Canada notwithstanding a removal order. An H&C can do the same. One option might be to get a TRP pending record suspension for a conviction inside Canada, for example, if there's eligibility. Mark Holthe: If an officer chooses to write the report when you've made your submissions, can you challenge that part before it gets to the immigration division? Raj Sharma: Yes, you can challenge both the writing of a Report to the Federal Court and the referral of the report to the Federal Court. You probably won't do that if the person concerned is a permanent resident and has an appeal right to the IAD, there's no sense in that, but if you don't have that appeal, you're left with these limited options, so you're going to buy some more time. By going to the Federal Court either you buy some more time, it goes back, a different officer might come to a different conclusion, or you simply might need time for record suspension. Mark Holthe: Just buying the time, interesting. Raj Sharma: Might be one because you need strategic depth, so strategic depth is usually time, more time in Canada gives you more options. Mark Holthe: Define strategic depth for those who are not following. What are you talking about when you use that terminology? Raj Sharma: Strategic depth I was thinking more in terms of war. If you've got a country like Russia and you want to invade Russia, and Napoleon and Hitler both tried that. One of the problems is that Russia has a lot of depth, so you can invade, and invade, and keep invading, and the Russians will have time to mount a response. You can contrast that with, for example, Pakistan, which is thin wasted [country] geographically speaking, there's not a lot of strategic depth there. If we were to apply that terminology to immigration in Canada, then I would say strategic depth would be time. A lot of time, we don't have time, and so give me some time, give me enough time and I can do quite a bit. You need time to marshal resources, to file Federal Court obligations, to file TRP applications, to file H&C applications, to maybe get a rehabilitation application in, so time is our strategic depth and most of the time we don't have it. Mark Holthe: Yes, that is abundantly clear within our practice. I really appreciate that overview and the insight, it was awesome. Let's talk about some practice tips maybe. If counsel finds themselves in these types of positions dealing with an issue, a potential criminal inadmissibility, what are some of the things that go through your mind right away that you'd give in terms of advice, things that people want to make sure they do every single time, or little tips or strategies? You've already indicated here that you want to try to buy as much time as you can, that's obviously really important, but are there any specific things or pieces of advice that we haven't maybe talked about yet that you'd like to share with the listeners? Raj Sharma: I think definitely take a look at the IRCC or CIC policy manuals, Enforcement Manual 5, Enforcement Manual 6, take a look at the loose leaf publication by Mario Bellissimo and Genova, Immigration and Admissibility, they've got a handbook as well. You need to get an understanding of the facts and understand the law in a relatively quick fashion. Once you understand the context that you're in, so if the context is a permanent resident, and there's an offense, and you're looking at the loss of appeal rights, and you've got a procedural fairness letter, and the sentence has been served, what I would do immediately is probably do ATIP requests, access to information requests, and I would try to get and reconstruct the client's immigration history as much as possible. That's probably the first thing I would do is do an ATIP request. I would do FOIP requests for the correctional service documents, the institution documents, and see what's been going on over there and try to get access to those parole documents, take a look at their recidivism rankings. I would probably get the sentencing transcripts right away, I would get any pre-sentence reports that were filed or that were before the sentencing judge right away. After I looked at that I would see if I could update that pre-sentence report by a qualified forensic expert and reassess recidivism. Then I would probably put together these substantive submissions. Again, relying on maybe the IRB, IAD, Removal Order Appeals publication. Having regard to the sort of H&C factors and Ribic and Chieu factors. I would put all that together and get it into that officer probably as soon as possible. That's probably what I would do and that's probably what anyone should probably do with a PR facing removal where there's been a length of sentence greater than six months. If it was less than six months, then obviously maybe I'd just keep my powder dry to some degree, I'd still put in something, but I'd probably just keep my powder dry for the IAD. Mark Holthe: It's pretty much they're going to send it that way and choose not to make a decision at that stage. Raj Sharma: I would think as an officer, this is not in the manuals at all, but ... Mark Holthe: This is what we want, Raj, yes. Raj Sharma: As an officer, and I used to be an officer, but as an officer if I saw that a PR had a right of appeal, then really I would probably give short shrift to any sort of request for exercising my discretion at the 44 stage. I'd be like, "Look, let me just do my job, let me write this 44 report, and refer it, and let them make whatever submissions he needs to the IAD." I think the relationship to discretion and the loss of appeal rights is inverse, so if there's an appeal right, then I would narrow my own discretion. Then if there's no appeal rights, then I would probably take and expand my scope of discretion within, of course, the ambit of the law. Mark Holthe: That's awesome and it makes perfect sense. Officers, despite how some people feel, are human beings. When they feel like someone is trying to screw the system over, they're probably not going to give you a lot of help, but if they feel people are genuine and they've made a mistake, and there's a whole host of ... Raj Sharma: The system, maybe the system has been narrowed against, for example, any further request for relief. I think that they'll substantively consider. Mark Holthe: That's awesome. I really appreciate everything that you've shared here. Raj Sharma: Any time. Mark Holthe: This is fantastic. Now, as always when I have guests on, people are going to listen to this and they're going to say, "Hey, I've got a friend," or, "I know someone who's in this exact situation," and their counsel that they have right now is telling them that they might as well start singing 'Happy Trails,' and packing their bags, and they're saying to themselves, "There must be something else that I can do." They're going to listen to this and they're going to say, "Raj Sharma, how do I get a hold of this guy?" How do people track you down? What's the best way of getting in contact with you and engaging your services? Raj Sharma: For sure, Mark. Anyone can email us at info@sshlaw.ca, that's info@sshlaw.ca, number is 403-705-3398. I think we have a toll free number, but I'm not sure what it is. Mark Holthe: You can go to the website, right, too. Raj Sharma: Yes, you can definitely reach us and we'd be happy to help. It's something that we've developed for the last seven, eight years or so. Mark Holthe: Awesome, thanks a lot. I appreciate your time. Take care. Raj Sharma: Thanks a lot, Mark.

CanadianImmigrationPodcast.com Mark Holthe: I'm here with my good friend and colleague, Raj Sharma. Raj, thanks for joining me. Raj Sharma: My pleasure. Mark Holthe: We're testing this out with our digital recorder here. I usually do these interviews via Skype call, but I've got high hopes that the audio is going to be great regardless. Thanks for putting up with me, Raj, and happy to have you with us. Today, Raj has agreed to come in and talk a little bit about criminal inadmissibility and some of the consequences that can flow when people get themselves into trouble here in Canada, but before we get into that I want to take a moment to share a little bit of background on Raj, and where he's come from professionally, and where he's at. Raj Sharma's a lawyer and founding partner of Stewart Sharma Harsanyi, one of Western Canada's largest dedicated immigration law firms. He received his masters of law from Osgoode Hall and is a former refugee protection officer with the Immigration and Refugee Board. Now, I'll get to the question of how you got into immigration and I'm going to go out on a limb and think that that probably influenced it a little bit. Raj Sharma: That's right. Mark Holthe:  With over a hundred reported decisions, Raj has indicated to me, he frequently appears before all divisions, as well as the Federal Court, the court of appeal, and has also appeared before every level of court in Alberta. Raj regularly speaks on immigration matters in the media, and he's been a panelist and speaker at the CBA National Immigration Conference in 2014 and '15. He also writes a lot on immigration, multiculturalism, and diversity. Recently he was the recipient of the Legal Aid of Alberta's Access to Justice award and has been recognized as well as one of Calgary's Top 40 Under 40. Raj is an extremely accomplished individual and I know that he won't plug himself, so I'll do that for him, but whenever I have a difficult case with respect to enforcement, or appeal work, or anything like that I send it to him and his firm. Once again, thanks for joining, Raj. Raj Sharma:  Thanks, Mark. I'm East Indian, or as I like to describe ourselves as brown, so no matter how accomplished I am, obviously given that I'm not a doctor I'm probably a disappointment to my parents. Mark Holthe: Well, we'll have to get your parents on to come back and I'm almost positive with everything that you've done, at least within our industry and how you've distinguished yourself, that there wouldn't be a parent on this planet that wouldn't be proud of you. Enough of the feel good stuff, fill us in. How did you get into immigration? Raj Sharma: I never intended to get into immigration law. I did my JD at the University of Alberta. While I was there, I didn't take any immigration courses, immigration just wasn't even on my radar. I summered at a large law firm here in Calgary, Burnet, Duckworth & Palmer. I didn't like the large law firm milieu so to speak. Then I spent some time with Dennis Edney, who's now the lawyer for Omar Khadr. Then I also clerked up the Alberta Court of Appeal and ended up doing my articles with the federal department of justice. I think I had at that point an understanding that I would be somewhat closer to a barrister or a litigator than I would be in terms a solicitor. There was one case that I handled and my mentor at that time at the federal Department of Justice was Glennys Bembridge, who is now a Federal Court justice with a different last name, but there was one case and it involved a family, they're doctors, and their son had autism. I was the articling student, so I had to put together the affidavit and supporting the officer's finding of medical inadmissibility. I found that really, really interesting, but I kept saying to my mentor at that why can't we just consent on this file, the family's really deserving, and ultimately I think that the family did get relief. After that, I'd met my wife at Winnipeg at a wedding ... Mark Holthe:  I'm going to jump in. Raj Sharma:  Yes. Mark Holthe: You said, "Why can't we just consent to this?" What was his response? Raj Sharma: It was a strange response. The response was just like, "Oh, we just have to ..." Mark Holthe: Carry it through. Raj Sharma: It was more like it was like, "Oh, the client instructions ..." I'm like, "What client? We're the government." I was explained that different departments are actually clients of the department of justice. I found that very odd because I don't think that's true. I think that a client/solicitor relationship doesn't encapsulate departments of government being clients of each other. I found that odd. In any way, I'd met my wife in Winnipeg at a wedding, my cousin's wedding. She was in Calgary, born and raised in Calgary, so I needed a way to get to Calgary somehow, so I was applying for jobs in Calgary and I got this called up to do this test or examination at the Immigration Refugee Board. I was offered this position to become a refugee protection officer. That's where in fact I met my partner, Bjorn Harsanyi, so we both started off as refugee protection officers, hearings officers in 2002. Mark Holthe:  Obviously that makes a pretty nice background for sliding over to the other side. It gives you an opportunity at least having worked on the other side to get a better understanding of how the government operates, how the department operates, a little bit more inside to the minds of what goes through a decision maker on that side. I have to assume that that helped you as you moved over to the other side with your advocacy on behalf of clients. Raj Sharma:  I think so and I think that, and again there's this tradition of this entrepreneurial tradition within my community, and of course my second and third languages also helped, there was a burgeoning South Asian community in Calgary at that time. Really, it was timing, and so Calgary's just really good to me. I'd moved to Calgary at about the right time and I went into private practice at about the right time, right before Calgary took off, so to speak. 2004 I started my practice, late 2004 I started my practice. At that time, just trying to take whatever you can get, so again, I wasn't really centered in immigration. Then there was this legal aid file, this three hour legal aid file for criminal inadmissibility. It involved a foreign national in Canada accused or there was an allegation of weapons, and gun smuggling, and weapons trafficking. At that point I thought, "Well, this is a foregone conclusion." I looked at the IRPA and I said, "Well, this is just, there's no way out here," but my partner at that time pushed me a little bit and so I looked at it, I looked at it again. I put in far more hours than the three hours allotted to me, and low and behold I was able to succeed. I think that was the first time that I was in the media, that was the first time I was on TV or the newspapers, at least when it came to my legal practice. It was after that that my practice in immigration took off because it was after that that I joined Caron & Partners and then again after I left Caron & Partners there was another Vietnamese fellow, [another] fork in the road. There was another Vietnamese client, Jackie Tran, and that file I took on in 2009. Both of these cases probably had something to do with the direction of my practice. Mark Holthe:  Yeah, that makes perfect sense because I think for most of us business immigration lawyers, I guess that's how I classify myself, when there's a sticky situation I get uncomfortable pretty quick. I have a tendency to try to take the path of easiest and least resistance with my clients. If there's push back from the government, I tend to try and say, "Do we need to refile? Do we need to rethink our strategy?" Sometimes it's faster to just accept the stupid decision that you get from an officer and then just try to satisfy whatever they want, and refile, and get it approved, but there's a number of situations where people get themselves into a corner where they really don't have a nice, easy solution other than taking the government on. Raj Sharma:   I think .. it depends on what you're facing. Now, in your case you have to solve a sort of business problem. Prior to 2009, before Tran, I was actually doing hundreds of LMIA's, or LMO's that they were called at the time, so I was representing major corporations, I was getting fat, I was just doing pure solicitor work, and I think again timing came to my rescue because once I got into the Tran file, which necessitated three different Federal Court applications, [emergency] stay application, IAD, ID, and right about that same time the economy in Calgary sort of collapsed, so to speak. If you're a one trick pony, that is you're only doing one aspect of immigration, you could be susceptible to that sort of change. I was very lucky in the sense of I did quite a bit of solicitor business work, but given that strong litigation year we were able to just basically switch our practices over to a litigation aspect. In business [immigration], you're tasked with making sure that the business runs smoothly. Where it's an individual facing loss of status, it's a zero sum game. In business there may be not, it's not a zero sum game, but in someone facing removal or deportation to a country that they haven't been in since they were a kid, it's a zero sum game which is you win or you lose, so at that point you start bringing out all the arrows in your quiver and you're doing whatever you can for your client because it is, for them to some degree, it's life or death in the sense of it's a death of a relationship, it's a death of your relationship to Canada, and it's a death of your status in this country. Mark Holthe:  Let's shift to the topic at hand. I think a lot of our listeners, this isn't something that they're very familiar with because I think genuinely people try to avoid committing crimes in Canada and getting themselves removed. Raj Sharma:    Right, and we know for a fact that immigrants or first generation Canadians have a lower crime rate than native born Canadians, so you're absolutely right. Most of your listeners and our clients, most of them, the vast majority enjoy a lower criminal rate or criminality than Canadians would. Mark Holthe:  Yes, absolutely. As those that are listening in here, as I introduced when I started the podcast here, the interview with Raj Sharma, I indicated that we're going to be talking a little bit about criminal inadmissibility, so Raj, can you give us a little bit of an introduction? When we talk about criminal inadmissibility, how does that play into this world of immigration? Raj Sharma:  Immigration is about, and notwithstanding whatever we hear these days from Donald Trump or Hilary Clinton, there are no such thing as truly open borders. A country will always dictate who enters and who remains, so there was a case that went to the supreme court of Canada involving a woman actually -- most of the cases I deal with actually do involve men -- but Medovarski involved a woman and Medovarski reaffirmed that concept that non-citizens do not have an unqualified right to enter or remain inside of Canada. When we look at criminality, the threshold for removing non-citizens from Canada is spelled out in intricate detail in the Immigration Refugee Protection Act and there is a bifurcation, i.e., it's somewhat harder to remove permanent residents from Canada and quite a bit easier to remove foreign nationals from Canada. When we talk about foreign nationals, we're talking about students and those here on work permits or those that are visitors in Canada. When we talk about permanent residence, obviously those are individuals that have applied for permanent residency, they're not citizens yet, and so we have a paradigm, a very detailed framework that deals with non-citizens that get in trouble with the law. Mark Holthe:  When we talk about getting in trouble with the law, does the Immigration Act or the government, do they view certain crimes more seriously than others? How is that distinction set up? Raj Sharma: No, and maybe they should. That would have been a proper starting point. Maybe you should have been involved in this sort of legislation of these laws, but unfortunately the distinction of the severity of a crime is based on the maximum term of imprisonment or the actual incarceral or term that's imposed. When we talk about prison or incarceral term, we're including conditional sentences or sentences to be served in the community, so the distinction is not between the type of offense, someone that's convicted of a white collar offense such as fraud could face removal just as easily or perhaps more easily than someone accused or charged with simple assault. Mark Holthe: Even if an offense, let's say it's a hybrid offense, so it could proceed summarily or via indictment, the person that is sentenced to ten years imprisonment for that offense versus someone that's sentenced to six months under the eyes of the lovely immigration authorities, it's irrelevant. Raj Sharma: That's right, and it also doesn't take into account your length of time in Canada, so you could be a permanent resident and you could be here since you were two or three, and you could be [here] thirty years, and you could have an issue. Of course, this is the fragility of the human condition, we all make mistakes, so it doesn't take into account the length of time that you're in Canada…, nor does it take into account the nature of the offense, whether it's violent or whether it's non-violent. It's a blunt instrument unfortunately, Section 36 in particularly. Mark Holthe: If you have an individual that's committed a crime in Canada it's pretty clear we know what the offense is, we know what the conviction was, there's not a lot of debate about it, but what happens if someone wants to enter Canada or comes to Canada and has a conviction that occurred over seas or in another country, how does Canada treat those? Raj Sharma:  Those things get complicated really quickly because different countries have different legal systems and different countries have different standards in terms of the ... You could have a situation [if] you're from China. Now, China has a 99.9% conviction rate. Mark Holthe:  Wow, maybe I won't ask too many questions as to how that justice system plays out for those people accused, but ... Raj Sharma:  I mean, so when we start making equivalent, or making offenses, or acts that individuals have done outside of Canada, and we have to somehow try and make them equivalent to offenses in Canada, those things get tricky really, really quickly. That's one subset of what we do.[But] I just keep getting reminded, even this morning, had a client applied on the Alberta Immigrant Nominee Program, skilled individual, excellent English, everything's fantastic, no criminal record whatsoever, applied on the ANP, got the nomination, applied for the PR forms to [CPC] Sydney. We got the passport request two days ago, three days ago, problem. Last week after a birthday party or someone's party, one in the morning, [he’s] charged with impaired driving. Those are the sort of simple, understandable criminality because I think some politicians paint criminals as this broad brush, but criminals are no different than [you or I], it's just there's one incorrect decision. I think impaired driving is like that, this is impaired driving, could result in no jail time whatsoever, probably will result in a fine if he ever gets convicted, and a driving suspension. Won't spend a day in jail, but that's a hybrid offense and that [a conviction] makes him [as a foreign national] inadmissible. That's where I feel a lot of sympathy because you're seeing literally in front of you the end of a dream and you're seeing a person that for all other purposes would be an ideal addition to Canada's multicultural fabric. It's not really the media, it's not my cases that hit the news or the front pages that really give a proper idea of my practice. It really is those guys that are within an inch of permanent residency and we wouldn't consider them to be criminals, but of course they've made a grievous and horrendous error by drinking and getting behind the wheel of a car. Mark Holthe:   Let's carry that through, I think that would be interesting. An individual who is in that type of a situation, this happens to them. What can they expect? Raj Sharma:  Number one, if they come to me my first response to them, and there may be some sort of false hope, or some sort of strange fever dream that they're existing under, or they may get some sort of strange advice from someone, or a friend, or a cousin, and there may be a suggestion as to just somehow let it ride out and CIC may not figure this out. My first advice to them is that if they want my assistance, that we will be disclosing the charge and the encounter with the police immediately. That's the first thing that should happen and once they agree to these sort of terms, then we can start figuring out a solution. Now, the solution of course, and I kind of outlined that earlier today in my speech here, which is now start looking into conviction options or post conviction options. These conviction options, number one, beat out the charge in trial, because the system is binary, because it's a zero sum game, we can't now ... I think criminal lawyers and immigration lawyers that dabble in criminal law, there's no options now. You actually have to go and try to beat this out, you got to find, even if your client is factually guilty, you got to find a way to make him legally not guilty because if he's not guilty, that doesn't lead to any criminal consequences. If it's an offense, a domestic violence type of situation, and a peace bond is in the offering, take a peace bond. A peace bond doesn't have any criminal consequences either. There may be possibilities for some offenses for absolute or conditional discharges, take it, take it. That bird in the hand, we can safeguard that immigration at that point. In terms of a DUI, we're really looking to these curative discharges now and that's one option as well. Mark Holthe:  Maybe you can explain what that is. What is a curative discharge? Raj Sharma: Curative discharge involves a process by which there is a guilt or there is factual guilt and there's again…. A curative discharge we've used where there's indication of alcoholism [as a] medical condition. If we can establish that, then the judge may see fit to grant a curative discharge. If that happens, then there is no criminal record that could waylay an immigration application or application for permanent residence. That's not to say, by the way, that that won't lead to other issues, i.e., you may still need a waiver to get into the US, but the curative discharge is something that we explore for impaired driving, and conditional, and absolute where ever possible [for other offences]. Now, bear in mind there's a whole host of offenses that result in mandatory minimum sentences and so we can't do any number of these things for those types of offenses, but those are some of the arrows in our quiver in terms of post conviction. Where ever possible, if you are facing a charge, either you're a permanent resident or a foreign national, try to get immigration lawyer involved alongside your criminal lawyer. There may be options to get positive sentencing remarks or positive remarks that are spoken into the record. Those transcripts can come in handy. If you are convicted, if you are sentenced, it's important that the client demonstrate remorse, and rehabilitation, engage in programming, and try to turn that life around. If we can demonstrate that, there are some options, which is that that initiating document to establish criminal inadmissibility, the Section 44 report, there is a scope for the officer not to write that report. Again, when I started down this journey I didn't realize the scope of discretion that's in the act. There is significant discretion. An officer may choose not to write a report against a permanent resident or foreign national and that may be the first, and maybe the last, real line of defense for a lot of these individuals. We've seen that happen, we've seen permanent residents, I've represented permanent residents, young guys, a technical armed robbery, four years plus sentence ... Mark Holthe: A technical armed robbery. Raj Sharma: A technical armed robbery... Mark Holthe:  I love this terminology, technical versus a real, is there any distinction there? Raj Sharma:  Let me tell you and you tell me whether that terminology or that splitting of hairs is appropriate. A guy got fired from a job at a liquor store, was angry, young guy, and decides to rob the liquor store as some sort of payback, buys a gun that is not operational, just this old, rusted out gun. There's no bullets in it, it's inoperable. Goes into the store, people see the gun, so they flee, so he goes to the cashier, he tries to open the cash box, is unable to do so, and runs out without stealing anything. Misfortune added to his idiocy, there's an off duty police officer who immediately arrests him outside the liquor store, so this guy goes through this process and his criminal lawyer after wasting tens of thousands of dollars of his money, pleads him guilty to an offense that includes a mandatory minimum sentence. At that point, and I met the judge actually afterwards and the judge said, "Hey, I wonder why that lawyer did that because if the lawyer challenged that on a charter ground of cruel and unusual punishment, that that mandatory minimum sentence in this case offends the Charter, I would have granted it to him." This lawyer tells this guy and his family, "That's it, game over, you will be deported," but of course that's not actually the end of it. [So] I do stand by my characterization of that as a technical armed robbery because this guy, he's more of an idiot than he was a criminal. This family went through a lot, this family, his sister in fact, who lived with was married, [her] husband had some mental issues, and she was attacked actually. The police attended and in fact that man was actually brought down by the CPS, so the family went through a lot. We put all this together, put the sentencing transcripts in, the judge, they got a really compassionate judge who said a lot of things into that record. [The client] was out on bail for four years, and upgraded himself, and it really was an ill advised decision. Ultimately, we had an understanding officer. She ended up interviewing him over the telephone, I think, at the Remand institution, and [she ultimately] decided not to write the report. Mark Holthe:   I guess that's the beauty of this is the discretion that's laced into the immigration process. Raj Sharma:    They won't lightly do it, but if you've got the goods .. it can be done. We had another case, we had another individual originally from Hong Kong, came over as a kid, got into some gambling issues, and then got into selling drugs to pay off some of those debts. Served his time, was a model prisoner, and his entire family was here, we set out everything. In this case we asked the Report not to be written, it was written. We challenged the Report at the Federal Court, we received approval or leave on one, it went back, and ultimately a Minister’s Delegate decided to issue a warning letter. That's drug trafficking [involving a “hard” drug] and that was again significant, so these things can be done for the right individual. You will have people that have turned their lives around and you can see, you can tell. There's no faking this because it's a year's long journey. If you've got it, you've got it, and thankfully our officers, what I've seen is that we have fair individuals, open minded individuals, and that's not to say that I haven't lost on something that I think I should have won, I have, but even that decision, at least that individual had an open mind. I think our [CBSA/CIC] officers by and large are open minded individuals. Again, this may be the last line of defense for a lot of these individuals because there may not be an appeal to the ID anymore because the atrociously entitled Fast Removal of Foreign Criminals Act has amended the IRPA, so permanent residents that have been sentenced to more than six months, including conditional sentences, don't have an appeal to the IAD anymore. Whatever they've got, they've got to address that Section 44 report, that procedural fairness process, maybe Federal Court, maybe a TRP, maybe an H&C, a humanitarian and compassion application, but without that IAD backup, options are limited. Mark Holthe:   That's really interesting because like I said, from my perspective, someone who does not do a lot of that type of work, very little in fact, I see walls, absolute walls sometimes for people that I can't see past, whereas individuals such as yourself who have a little bit of a broader perspective, and have actually gone and looked behind the wall have realized that sometimes there's ways through. The message that I got, especially, and just to clarify for the listeners, Raj and I are just meeting at the Canadian Bar Association Office here in Calgary after Raj gave a presentation [to the CBA Immigration Subsection] on this similar topic. One of the messages that came through loud and clear is that maybe people give up too easy, especially counsel, us. I put us under the bus in many circumstances because sometimes we're just too willing to roll over. We need to take a serious look at what the possibilities, are and not be afraid to question and challenge an allegation that's being made against our clients. Even in circumstances where based on a clear reading of the law there's a certain outcome that's supposed to flow doesn't necessarily mean there isn't discretion to go around that and that there isn't some compassion laced into the system. Raj Sharma:  I learned this relatively recently. I went to visit my eighty-five, ninety years old grandmother in Edmonton. I didn't learn until much later -- my grandfather died, so my grandmother came over with my youngest uncle to Canada to her children here. None of us kids actually knew that our uncle was actually her sister's son. Her sister had died, so she had taken my uncle in. I guess his dad wasn't interested in caring for him, so I learned this later that Uncle is not actually our uncle, he's actually my mom's cousin. …I knew that there was some immigration issues that he was going through early on when he came, so my grandmother explained it to me, because there was no adoption papers and because my grandmother I think is incapable of lying, she's very straight out that we have no adoption papers, but he has nowhere else to be other than with me. They battled for like three or four years to try and get my uncle to be here. Ultimately CIC indicated, "Well, he can't be here, there's no adoption papers, we have no consent from his guardian, or his biological father, or whatever the case may be." We're from this small mining town in BC and the family was helped by an immigration lawyer out of Vancouver. Ultimately my uncle got what was then called a minister's permit, which is now we call a TRP, a temporary resident permit. When I learned that I was, "Well, I guess that's what I do." So I [do] think people minimize or perhaps don't understand the scope of discretion that's available. There are roadblocks, there's hurdles, [but] there's very few problems without an absolute solution. That being said, if you are unmitigated, incorrigible criminal, no officer's going to give you the benefit of whatever doubt there may be, but there are these avenues that can be pursued and there is a sort of system. You got to work through that system, work with the criminal lawyers, put your client in the best possible light, take advantage of any little nook, cranny, any little shaft of light, and you might be able to widen that crack a little bit for your client to step through, but yes, very few things are foregone conclusions and it's our job as counsel to put the best possible foot forward for the client. Again, in my twelve years of practicing immigration law there's very few actual incorrigible [criminals]. I said this before … that hard cases make bad law and outliers shouldn't make the world a harder place for the vast majority of people that simply want to come to Canada and give their families a better life. These outliers don't reflect the vast majority of cases that we deal with. The vast majority of cases we deal with are human fragility, human error, understandable mistakes. Mark Holthe:   You mentioned this concept of a TRP, a temporary resident permit, which is now the new version of a Minister’s Permit. Raj Sharma:    That's right. Mark Holthe:    In some circumstances, individuals will have appeal rights when there is criminality involved and they're facing some harsh consequences, they have appeal rights and other times they don't. You had talked a little bit about the discretion that an officer has to write that report to refer it or not. Can you maybe clarify that just a little bit for counsel who maybe have individuals that are at the stage where the consequences could be pretty nasty? Maybe there is no appeal right and you indicated that sometimes an officer does have some discretion whether or not to write it. Raj Sharma:    That's right. That Section 44 report, so let's say there's a conviction in Canada. Establishing that would be pretty straightforward, pretty easy. What counsel can do is respond to a procedural fairness letter, say, "Please don't write the Section 44 report and here's why," and these are going to be [modeled on] the typical Section 25 type of application or submission, so time in Canada, establishment in Canada, those ties here, the family ties here, hardship, or adverse conditions, or challenges upon return, children that are affected by the decision, the circumstances leading to the events, any indicia of remorse, rehabilitation, insight. All those should be placed squarely before the officer and you say to the officer, "Don't write this report, please. The guy's been here for a long time, this is a singular mistake, the criminal record is limited or none other than this lapse in judgment." If the officer writes the report, its then has to be referred under Section 44 sub 2 by a Minister’s Delegate. If it's referred, for a permanent resident that means it goes to the immigration division. If it's criminality or serious criminality in Canada, that's Section 44 sub 2, that becomes a removal order for a foreign national. Again, there's less options for foreign nationals here. If it's referred to the immigration division, not much you can do if it's a conviction in Canada. The ID is not going to look beyond the certificate of conviction. If it's a conviction outside of Canada or an allegation that some offense has occurred outside of Canada, that would be equivalent to serious offenses inside of Canada. Then the immigration proceeding becomes a substantive proceeding. That's when it takes on some degree of significance. You are then going to start talking about foreign legal laws, standard of proof, burden of proof, and at that point you probably should be retaining a foreign legal expert. It gets complicated really quickly at that point. After a removal order is issued, post removal order options are limited. A TRP can overcome or allow you to remain in Canada notwithstanding a removal order. An H&C can do the same. One option might be to get a TRP pending record suspension for a conviction inside Canada, for example, if there's eligibility. Mark Holthe:  If an officer chooses to write the report when you've made your submissions, can you challenge that part before it gets to the immigration division? Raj Sharma:   Yes, you can challenge both the writing of a Report to the Federal Court and the referral of the report to the Federal Court. You probably won't do that if the person concerned is a permanent resident and has an appeal right to the IAD, there's no sense in that, but if you don't have that appeal, you're left with these limited options, so you're going to buy some more time. By going to the Federal Court either you buy some more time, it goes back, a different officer might come to a different conclusion, or you simply might need time for record suspension. Mark Holthe:    Just buying the time, interesting. Raj Sharma:    Might be one because you need strategic depth, so strategic depth is usually time, more time in Canada gives you more options. Mark Holthe:    Define strategic depth for those who are not following. What are you talking about when you use that terminology? Raj Sharma:  Strategic depth I was thinking more in terms of war. If you've got a country like Russia and you want to invade Russia, and Napoleon and Hitler both tried that. One of the problems is that Russia has a lot of depth, so you can invade, and invade, and keep invading, and the Russians will have time to mount a response. You can contrast that with, for example, Pakistan, which is thin wasted [country] geographically speaking, there's not a lot of strategic depth there. If we were to apply that terminology to immigration in Canada, then I would say strategic depth would be time. A lot of time, we don't have time, and so give me some time, give me enough time and I can do quite a bit. You need time to marshal resources, to file Federal Court obligations, to file TRP applications, to file H&C applications, to maybe get a rehabilitation application in, so time is our strategic depth and most of the time we don't have it. Mark Holthe:     Yes, that is abundantly clear within our practice. I really appreciate that overview and the insight, it was awesome. Let's talk about some practice tips maybe. If counsel finds themselves in these types of positions dealing with an issue, a potential criminal inadmissibility, what are some of the things that go through your mind right away that you'd give in terms of advice, things that people want to make sure they do every single time, or little tips or strategies? You've already indicated here that you want to try to buy as much time as you can, that's obviously really important, but are there any specific things or pieces of advice that we haven't maybe talked about yet that you'd like to share with the listeners? Raj Sharma:    I think definitely take a look at the IRCC or CIC policy manuals, Enforcement Manual 5, Enforcement Manual 6, take a look at the loose leaf publication by Mario Bellissimo and Genova, Immigration and Admissibility, they've got a handbook as well. You need to get an understanding of the facts and understand the law in a relatively quick fashion. Once you understand the context that you're in, so if the context is a permanent resident, and there's an offense, and you're looking at the loss of appeal rights, and you've got a procedural fairness letter, and the sentence has been served, what I would do immediately is probably do ATIP requests, access to information requests, and I would try to get and reconstruct the client's immigration history as much as possible. That's probably the first thing I would do is do an ATIP request. I would do FOIP requests for the correctional service documents, the institution documents, and see what's been going on over there and try to get access to those parole documents, take a look at their recidivism rankings. I would probably get the sentencing transcripts right away, I would get any pre-sentence reports that were filed or that were before the sentencing judge right away. After I looked at that I would see if I could update that pre-sentence report by a qualified forensic expert and reassess recidivism. Then I would probably put together these substantive submissions. Again, relying on maybe the IRB, IAD, Removal Order Appeals publication. Having regard to the sort of H&C factors and Ribic and Chieu factors. I would put all that together and get it into that officer probably as soon as possible.  That's probably what I would do and that's probably what anyone should probably do with a PR facing removal where there's been a length of sentence greater than six months. If it was less than six months, then obviously maybe I'd just keep my powder dry to some degree, I'd still put in something, but I'd probably just keep my powder dry for the IAD. Mark Holthe:  It's pretty much they're going to send it that way and choose not to make a decision at that stage. Raj Sharma:   I would think as an officer, this is not in the manuals at all, but ... Mark Holthe:  This is what we want, Raj, yes. Raj Sharma:     As an officer, and I used to be an officer, but as an officer if I saw that a PR had a right of appeal, then really I would probably give short shrift to any sort of request for exercising my discretion at the 44 stage. I'd be like, "Look, let me just do my job, let me write this 44 report, and refer it, and let them make whatever submissions he needs to the IAD." I think the relationship to discretion and the loss of appeal rights is inverse, so if there's an appeal right, then I would narrow my own discretion. Then if there's no appeal rights, then I would probably take and expand my scope of discretion within, of course, the ambit of the law. Mark Holthe: That's awesome and it makes perfect sense. Officers, despite how some people feel, are human beings. When they feel like someone is trying to screw the system over, they're probably not going to give you a lot of help, but if they feel people are genuine and they've made a mistake, and there's a whole host of ... Raj Sharma:  The system, maybe the system has been narrowed against, for example, any further request for relief. I think that they'll substantively consider. Mark Holthe:  That's awesome. I really appreciate everything that you've shared here. Raj Sharma:  Any time. Mark Holthe: This is fantastic. Now, as always when I have guests on, people are going to listen to this and they're going to say, "Hey, I've got a friend," or, "I know someone who's in this exact situation," and their counsel that they have right now is telling them that they might as well start singing 'Happy Trails,' and packing their bags, and they're saying to themselves, "There must be something else that I can do." They're going to listen to this and they're going to say, "Raj Sharma, how do I get a hold of this guy?" How do people track you down? What's the best way of getting in contact with you and engaging your services? Raj Sharma:   For sure, Mark. Anyone can email us at info@sshlaw.ca, that's info@sshlaw.ca, number is 403-705-3398. I think we have a toll free number, but I'm not sure what it is. Mark Holthe:  You can go to the website, right, too. Raj Sharma:  Yes, you can definitely reach us and we'd be happy to help. It's something that we've developed for the last seven, eight years or so. Mark Holthe:   Awesome, thanks a lot. I appreciate your time. Take care. Raj Sharma:    Thanks a lot, Mark.  

Branglina's demise is the big water cooler talk of the day and it spawned a wave of Jennifer Aniston GIFs online but what about the political news. Brian covers the entertainment news but also Trudeau's trip to the UN, outrageous moving costs for Trudeau staffers and blasts Patrick Brown. Plus, Brian also breaks the news of potential political interference by PMO staff in the release of false information through ATIP.

Rosemary Barton states incorrect facts about Trudeau's refugee plan. Parliament Hill journos attempt to get into the ring with Cabinet Ministers but the Ministers are on another floor. CANADALAND gets NFLD's ATIP reform "spectacularly wrong." The National Post passes judgement on Furlong's accusers without actually speaking to the accusers. CANADALAND publishes their affidavits. Buzzfeed's Paul McLeod discusses. Paul McLeod's Twitter: @PDMcLeod Paul McLeod's Buzzfeed piece, "Someone Gave The Media A Bunch Of False Info About Canada's Syrian Refugee Plan" Power & Politics - Full Episode Nov 23rd 2015 Rosemary Barton's CBC News piece, "Canada's Syrian refugee plan limited to women, children and families" Justin Ling's Vice piece, "Inside the First Standoff Between Media and the Trudeau Government" Some Reactions to the standoff on Twitter Jacob Boon's CANADALAND piece about Newfoundland ATIP reform James McLeod's CANADALAND follow-up piece Cam Cole's National Post piece, "John Furlong on his long, dark battle against false abuse accusations"  John Furlong's event description for a speaking engagement for the Vancouver Board of Trade If you would like to assist with fact-checking for Canadaland, please email editor@canadalandshow.comSupport CANADALAND: https://canadaland.com/joinSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Changes in ATP-induced increase in {[}Ca2+], during collecting duct ontogeny were studied in primary monolayer cultures of mouse ureteric bud (UB) and cortical collecting duct (CCD) cells by Fura-PE3 fluorescence ratio imaging. In UB (embryonic day E14 and postnatal day P1) the ATIP-stimulated increase (EC50 approximate to 1 muM) in fluorescence ratio (DeltaR(ATP)) was independent of extracellular Ca2+ and insensitive to the P2 purinoceptor-antagonist suramin (1 mM). From day P7 onward when CCD morphogenesis had been completed DeltaR(ATP) increased and became dependent on extracellular Ca2+. This ATP-stimulated Ca2+ entry into CCD cells was non-capacitative and suramin (11 mM)insensitive, but sensitive to nifedipine (30 muM) and enhanced by Bay K8644 (15 muM), a blocker and an agonist of L-type Ca2+ channels, respectively. Quantitative RT-PCR demonstrated similar mRNA expression of L-type Ca2+ channel alpha1-subunit, P2Y(1), P2Y(2), and P2X(4b) purinoceptors in UB and CCD monolayers while the abundance of P2X(4) mRNA increased with CCD morphogenesis. In conclusion, both embryonic and postnatal cells express probably P2Y(2)-stimulated Ca2+ release from intracellular stores. With development, the CCD epithelium acquires ATP-stimulated Ca2+ entry via L-type Ca2+ channels. This pathway might by mediated by the increasing expression of P2X(4)-receptors resulting in an increasing ATP-dependent membrane depolarization and activation of L-type Ca2+ channels. Copyright (C) 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel.