Whoever knowingly executes, or attempts to execute, a scheme or artifice— (1) to defraud a financial institution; or (2) to obtain any of the moneys, funds, credits, assets, securities, or other property owned by, or under the custody or control of, a financial institution, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises; shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1344
Whoever knowingly executes, or attempts to execute, a scheme or artifice— (1) to defraud a financial institution; or (2) to obtain any of the moneys, funds, credits, assets, securities, or other property owned by, or under the custody or control of, a financial institution, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises; shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1344 ytwk 发表于 12/10/2018 10:14:12 AM [/url]
The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is responsible for creating, implementing and enforcing the United States’ sanctions. All parties under US jurisdiction must abide by OFAC sanctions and associated regulations. Exemptions to sanction orders can be granted by OFAC, but only under certain circumstances. If you or your company wishes to obtain an exemption license,, you must contact the Treasury Department. For certain exemption licenses, you can also apply online. OFAC considers non-compliance with sanctions to be a serious threat to national security and foreign relations. Consequently, those who breach OFAC sanctions without obtaining the proper license can face severe legal repercussions. Fines range up to $20 million, depending the offence, and prison sentences can be as long as 30 years. https://complyadvantage.com/knowledgebase/sanctions/ofac-sanctions-what-are-the-consequences-of-breaking-them/
The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is responsible for creating, implementing and enforcing the United States’ sanctions. All parties under US jurisdiction must abide by OFAC sanctions and associated regulations. Exemptions to sanction orders can be granted by OFAC, but only under certain circumstances. If you or your company wishes to obtain an exemption license,, you must contact the Treasury Department. For certain exemption licenses, you can also apply online. OFAC considers non-compliance with sanctions to be a serious threat to national security and foreign relations. Consequently, those who breach OFAC sanctions without obtaining the proper license can face severe legal repercussions. Fines range up to $20 million, depending the offence, and prison sentences can be as long as 30 years. https://complyadvantage.com/knowledgebase/sanctions/ofac-sanctions-what-are-the-consequences-of-breaking-them/
ytwk 发表于 12/10/2018 10:30:06 AM
“All party under us jurisdiction” 这个也说了是美国法律,不关中国人在香港做生意。
In the United States, the federal courts have recognized an important mechanism for acquiring jurisdiction over foreign defendants known as the effects doctrine. The effects doctrine is an offshoot of the territorial principle. Briefly, the effects doctrine says that if the effects of extraterritorial behavior or crimes adversely affect commerce or harm citizens within the United States, then jurisdiction in a U.S. court is permissible. The first case to establish the effects doctrine was United States v. Alcoa, 148 F.2d 416 (2d Cir. 1945) (Learned Hand, J.). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_jurisdiction_over_international_defendants_in_the_United_States
“All party under us jurisdiction” 这个也说了是美国法律,不关中国人在香港做生意。
睿 发表于 12/10/2018 10:42:23 AM [/url]
United States Jurisdiction Abroad However, it is important to note that there are certain circumstances in which the United States may apply domestic law abroad: For example, the United States may give extraterritorial effect to U.S. laws in cases involving: 1. U.S. citizens abroad. 2. Foreign citizens employed by U.S. companies abroad. 3. Violation of certain laws, such as: Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (Dealing with bribery) Export Administration Act of 1979 (Dealing with boycotts) Iranian Assets Control Regulations(Dealing with the response to the hostage crisis) Civil Rights Act, the National environmental Policy Act, and drug enforcement laws. http://www.corporatecompliance.org/Portals/1/691_0_us_jurisdictionabroad.pdf
In particular, they facilitated and protected the ability of Turkish Bank-1 customer, international gold trader Reza Zarrab, to supply currency and gold to, and facilitate international financial transactions for, the Government of Iran, Iranian entities, and SDNs using Turkish Bank-1. Many of those financial transactions involved unwitting U.S. financial institutions, in violation of U.S. sanctions against Iran.
In particular, they facilitated and protected the ability of Turkish Bank-1 customer, international gold trader Reza Zarrab, to supply currency and gold to, and facilitate international financial transactions for, the Government of Iran, Iranian entities, and SDNs using Turkish Bank-1. Many of those financial transactions involved unwitting U.S. financial institutions, in violation of U.S. sanctions against Iran.
根据检方指控书Financial Institution 1在美国有业务(必须遵守美国法律),由于犯罪嫌疑人欺骗这个银行致使该银行因违反了美国对伊朗制裁条约而面临“serious harm”。再根据我在21层列出的“effects doctrine“, “if the effects of extraterritorial behavior or crimes adversely affect commerce or harm citizens within the United States, then jurisdiction in a U.S. court is permissible.“
The investigation by U.S. authorities has revealed a conspiracy between and among Meng and other Huawei representatives to misrepresent to numerous multinational financial institutions, including a global financial institution which conducts business in the United States (“Financial Institution 1”),
In essence, these misrepresentations exposed the financial institutions to serious harm and denied the institutions the opportunity to make decisions based on the true risk of processing certain transaction and the reputations risk associated with banking high-risk clients such as Huawei.
根据检方指控书Financial Institution 1在美国有业务,由于犯罪嫌疑人欺骗这个银行致使该银行因违反了美国对伊朗制裁条约而面临“serious harm”。再根据我在21层列出的“effects doctrine“, “if the effects of extraterritorial behavior or crimes adversely affect commerce or harm citizens within the United States, then jurisdiction in a U.S. court is permissible.“
The investigation by U.S. authorities has revealed a conspiracy between and among Meng and other Huawei representatives to misrepresent to numerous multinational financial institutions, including a global financial institution which conducts business in the United States (“Financial Institution 1”),
In essence, these misrepresentations exposed the financial institutions to serious harm and denied the institutions the opportunity to make decisions based on the true risk of processing certain transaction and the reputations risk associated with banking high-risk clients such as Huawei. ytwk 发表于 12/10/2018 12:02:57 PM
根据检方指控书Financial Institution 1在美国有业务,由于犯罪嫌疑人欺骗这个银行致使该银行因违反了美国对伊朗制裁条约而面临“serious harm”。再根据我在21层列出的“effects doctrine“, “if the effects of extraterritorial behavior or crimes adversely affect commerce or harm citizens within the United States, then jurisdiction in a U.S. court is permissible.“
The investigation by U.S. authorities has revealed a conspiracy between and among Meng and other Huawei representatives to misrepresent to numerous multinational financial institutions, including a global financial institution which conducts business in the United States (“Financial Institution 1”),
In essence, these misrepresentations exposed the financial institutions to serious harm and denied the institutions the opportunity to make decisions based on the true risk of processing certain transaction and the reputations risk associated with banking high-risk clients such as Huawei. ytwk 发表于 12/10/2018 12:02:57 PM
法国巴黎银行被罚近90亿美元 新华网华盛顿6月30日电(记者郑启航 高攀)美国司法部30日宣布,法国巴黎银行已经同意认罪,承认违反美国法律为美国实施制裁的国家转移资金,为此法国巴黎银行将支付89.7亿美元罚款。 美国司法部部长埃里克·霍尔德说,法国巴黎银行的行为严重违反美国法律。制裁是保证美国国家安全利益的核心工具,制裁要取得效果,违反制裁的行为必须严惩。银行机构在考虑要进行违反美国制裁相关法律的交易时应当三思,因为司法部将会严厉打击。 除了支付罚金,该银行的13名高管将离职,涉嫌违法业务的纽约分行及其他分支机构将暂停美元清算业务一年,2013年美国政府实施的针对该银行的监管举措将延长两年。 法国巴黎银行是法国最大的银行,该行被指控从2004年到2012年利用美国金融系统为苏丹、伊朗和古巴三国转移资金。根据美国司法部的数据,法国巴黎银行为一家伊朗能源公司转移资金超过5亿美元,为古巴转移的资金则超过17亿美元。
楼主,照这速度大国被制裁的可能性非常高,你先给你自己扫盲,照照镜子,是罚款呢,还是收监。美帝对付流氓从没手软过。
想借着收监再收集点证据吧
要不是这样早就发难了等不到现在
我猜的
18 U.S. Code § 1344 - Bank fraud
Whoever knowingly executes, or attempts to execute, a scheme or artifice—
(1) to defraud a financial institution; or
(2) to obtain any of the moneys, funds, credits, assets, securities, or other property owned by, or under the custody or control of, a financial institution, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises; shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1344
这个要看当时犯法的国家地区和国籍,她是是在美国做的吗,那时候她是美国人吗?她是在香港的美国分行做的交易,关美国法律什么事情,美国法律是对美国人,或者在美国住的外国人,对境外的外国人没有任何约束力。美国在国外开的公司是要遵守当地国家的法律,不是反过来。用这个来约束全世界人,你是来搞笑的吧。
据报道,她只有香港和中国护照。
是跟汇丰银行做的交易啊,汇丰银行是欧洲银行。
OFAC considers non-compliance with sanctions to be a serious threat to national security and foreign relations. Consequently, those who breach OFAC sanctions without obtaining the proper license can face severe legal repercussions. Fines range up to $20 million, depending the offence, and prison sentences can be as long as 30 years.
https://complyadvantage.com/knowledgebase/sanctions/ofac-sanctions-what-are-the-consequences-of-breaking-them/
只要汇丰还要在美国做生意 它就必须遵守美国的法规 不管它是哪国银行
任何公司在国外开的公司是要遵守当地国家的法律,不是反过来。你在中国去苹果店偷东西,还要用美国法律起诉你?你在中国和美国在中国的分公司做生意,是按照中国法律还是美国法律?
你问问看汇丰香港分行敢不敢不遵守美国法规?
法国巴黎银行不是没有遵守吗?也只是罚款和高管辞职而已。顶楼看来马上就忘啦?
文盲,使用美元的结算系统,要签协议,不论国籍。这个叫金融霸权,除非用人民币交易。玩到大国被制裁的时候,就知道厉害了。
那别买美国的产品,买了产品签了禁售协议,你觉得应该按照哪国法律执行。
“All party under us jurisdiction” 这个也说了是美国法律,不关中国人在香港做生意。
1)华为用了美国对伊朗禁运的技术和产品签了export control文件之后通过自己的Shell company skycom在香港继续和伊朗交易 (违反美国sAnction)
2)华为和skycom都用汇丰美国做correspondent bank清算美元交易,汇丰发现伊朗交易以后调查华为和这家公司的connection, 他们提供misleading info说俩家公司无关,华为已经出售股份给其他公司(该公司依然为华为所有),这在调查sanction的时候就是伪证和欺诈。所以hsbc美国在无法确认关系的情况下根据US patriot act给law enforcement 报告了可疑交易,如果不报告银行自己就违反了sanction
3)司法机构根据可疑交易调查sanction,调查到了华为。
至于美国为什么可以有sanction,原因就是自己研发的技术和产品有权利选择不卖给自己的敌人用来对付自己。华为扮演什么角色一目了然
如果对方的生意不是在你的国家,可以罚钱,或者拒绝做生意,没有存在违法,只是跨国公司的协议而已。国对国没有对方法律的牵制不知道吗?如果孟在美国做这些事,那她会有麻烦,不过这些是在中国做的,只受协议制裁,不受法律制裁。
In the United States, the federal courts have recognized an important mechanism for acquiring jurisdiction over foreign defendants known as the effects doctrine. The effects doctrine is an offshoot of the territorial principle. Briefly, the effects doctrine says that if the effects of extraterritorial behavior or crimes adversely affect commerce or harm citizens within the United States, then jurisdiction in a U.S. court is permissible. The first case to establish the effects doctrine was United States v. Alcoa, 148 F.2d 416 (2d Cir. 1945) (Learned Hand, J.). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_jurisdiction_over_international_defendants_in_the_United_States
长臂管辖了解一下?
这个违法sanction只是公司和公司的协议,我的其他贴说的很明白了,跨国生意没有对方国家的法律约束,只有生意的条约约束。
sanction是美国的国家法律,什么叫公司和公司的协议?这种知识水平出来科普真是误国误民…在美国汇丰调查sanction violation期间的提供虚假信息行为就是欺诈。都是违法。如果执法部门调查期间就是伪证。
楼主不是来科普的是来出洋相的
那是当然,看它出洋相不是很好嘛?!
跨国公司之间的协议??? 美国啥时成公司了。
United States Jurisdiction Abroad
However, it is important to note that there are certain circumstances in which the United States may apply domestic law abroad: For example, the United States may give extraterritorial effect to U.S. laws in cases involving: 1. U.S. citizens abroad. 2. Foreign citizens employed by U.S. companies abroad. 3. Violation of certain laws, such as: Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (Dealing with bribery) Export Administration Act of 1979 (Dealing with boycotts) Iranian Assets Control Regulations(Dealing with the response to the hostage crisis) Civil Rights Act, the National environmental Policy Act, and drug enforcement laws. http://www.corporatecompliance.org/Portals/1/691_0_us_jurisdictionabroad.pdf
那你倒是举一些反例子啊,那个公司因为sanction而非美国公民或者绿卡的高管在美国坐牢的?
脸都肿了还要嘴硬,除了sanction碗粥还有欺诈欺诈欺诈,别装瞎。
给你扫个盲,如果是不知道禁运,或者违反了禁运,但没撒谎没做伪证,基本上罚款就能过去。但如果故意通过规避手段来欺骗政府,是可能会有刑责的。土耳其的一个银行家今年刚被判了32个月监禁。
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/world/turkish-iran-sanctions-trial.html
下面是最新鲜的反例。16年检察官指控,今年刚判下来。满足您要求的所有条件。
1,因为违反sanction法案
2,非美国公民或绿卡(土耳其籍)
3,高管(deputy GM,Halkbank)
4,美国坐牢(32个月)
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/world/turkish-iran-sanctions-trial.html
当然,提供这个案例不代表我认为孟晚舟会被定罪。违反法律而脱罪的多了去了。
美国的法律系统的设计就是很可能放过违法者,但错判无罪者概率极低。毕竟大陪审团是庭审当天临时选出来的,且所有人都同意定罪。没有铁证要想定罪概率极低。
从目前检方公布的证据来看,没看到铁证。
梦被起诉不是说她领导的公司违反sanction(这个会和违法公司另算)
而是说她欺诈银行
好比说打劫是违法的,但把打劫来的钱通过一家公司洗白,并告诉银行这是合法收入,也是违法行为
梦的罪名是后一种
他是在美国做案在迈阿密给抓的。
她在香港欺诈一家伦敦的分银行,应该是香港起诉,香港法律制裁吧?什么时候轮到美国在境外抓人了?禁华为有点desperate啊
笑死了 所以香港做案加拿大被抓不算违法不能定罪?
作为被科普对象。我只反问你一句
高通作为一家美国公司 并购一个荷兰恩智浦 为什么还轮到中国来同意?
你能回答这个问题,你自己的问题就回答了
订哪国法律的罪?孟一个中国公民在中国如果犯罪了由加拿大和美国来判刑和坐牢?你在美国去沙滩比基尼游泳,然后去其他国家,那个国家抓了你,引渡到中东因为暴露身体判刑?
真是嘴硬啊。这么多条件,要不一次性说完啊,再加个中国公民,那应该还真没案例了....
另外,这个可怜的娃不是在美国作案。而是给伊朗提供服务的时候,利用了美国的银行体系。而且通过给交易加外包装的方式欺骗了美国的银行。被美国检察官指控,然后来美国时就被抓了。
In particular, they facilitated and protected the ability of Turkish Bank-1 customer, international gold trader Reza Zarrab, to supply currency and gold to, and facilitate international financial transactions for, the Government of Iran, Iranian entities, and SDNs using Turkish Bank-1. Many of those financial transactions involved unwitting U.S. financial institutions, in violation of U.S. sanctions against Iran.
事实上长臂法也是国力公正的象征 中东国家要求引渡有多少国家会答应呢 想想赖昌星引渡回中国拖了多少年吧
因为他们要在中国做生意,所以需要中国同意通过这个反垄断法的步骤。即使中国不同意,他们也可以合并,不过在中国就不能做生意了。
以为自己的逻辑就是法律。法盲。鉴定完毕。
再说一点,汇丰银行是伦敦银行,不是美国银行。
动不动就拿爱国来绑架。不说入美籍的那些,和中国已经没啥关系了。就算拿中国护照,这个烂政府值得爱?这些腐败的机构恶心的公司值得维护?
对不起,睿大妈的脸被大伙儿啪啪啪煽得太肿,目前眼睛是肿脸上的两条细缝,看不清你的问题
汇丰银行在美国也有生意,如果汇丰银行认为梦不是欺诈,那汇丰就是违反sanction
所以汇丰必须检举梦欺诈,然后政府接过案子提起公诉
在这个案子里汇丰是受害者。但起诉人是联邦
跟强东案里女孩是受害者 但起诉人是地方检察官一个道理
还刘强东呢,什么时候在中国的强奸犯在美国地方检察官起诉啊?地区搞清楚没?
真浪舞啊?你以为是大国,官员干涉法院,自己都会进去。老床骂了一法官,被仗无数脸,不许他干就是不许他干。
根据检方指控书Financial Institution 1在美国有业务(必须遵守美国法律),由于犯罪嫌疑人欺骗这个银行致使该银行因违反了美国对伊朗制裁条约而面临“serious harm”。再根据我在21层列出的“effects doctrine“, “if the effects of extraterritorial behavior or crimes adversely affect commerce or harm citizens within the United States, then jurisdiction in a U.S. court is permissible.“
The investigation by U.S. authorities has revealed a conspiracy between and among Meng and other Huawei representatives to misrepresent to numerous multinational financial institutions, including a global financial institution which conducts business in the United States (“Financial Institution 1”),
In essence, these misrepresentations exposed the financial institutions to serious harm and denied the institutions the opportunity to make decisions based on the true risk of processing certain transaction and the reputations risk associated with banking high-risk clients such as Huawei.
是的,智商不高的,最爱在网上瞎逼逼,哈哈!难得你对自己有如此深刻的认识! ---发自Huaren 官方 iOS APP
噗嗤,瞧挑这例子。这案子明明事为了搞Erdogan。违反SANCTION的一大把,西门子,爱立信,Samsung,好巧不巧就是有仇的拎出来搞一搞。
法盲,汇丰银行当然可以自己背这口锅,但是人家不愿意背啊,要不汇丰也不会主动找华为澄清跟伊朗的关系,孟晚舟也不会被卷进来了。
如果离开美国银行体系,汇丰基本就可以结束运营了。你说汇丰在“帮华为做伊朗业务挣点手续费”和“关门大吉”之间,会如何选择呢?
当然,我个人支持”关门大吉“,要有点骨气啊。全国银行几十家,华为就一个,为了中国崛起,汇丰要有点牺牲精神!
你这人思路也奇怪,马路上你跟别人都speeding,警察就不能单抓你么?抓了你你能怎样还不是摸摸鼻子交罚款?
违法你还有理了?好好的谁能把你怎么样?抓违法倒是别人的错了?
我只是类比受害者和起诉人不同的例子,但并没有类比案子本身。
强奸抢劫这种,在无关美国政府利益的情况下,属于人身伤害案,跟长臂管辖的法律没有关联,所以强奸在别国犯法,不会被起诉。
作为投资人,对法律的理解到楼主这种程度我也是醉了。
事实上,这个案子对于华为来说,并不是没有解套的可能,它只要搞定汇丰银行即可。只要汇丰银行背了违反sanction的罪名,多半就是罚款,不会有人坐牢。这就是楼主所说的政府对公司的案例了。
但是汇丰显然不会主动背上这个罪名,而对于华为来说,对于一间普通银行,他只要对这个银行进行溢价收购就可以了。但是汇丰实在是太大,今年市值大概在2000亿美元左右,然而华为并不是没有这个实力,华为2017营收就是1000亿美元,还不论它的流动资产,固定资产和无形资产。如果华为以这些资产作为抵押向国家贷款,然后再对汇丰发起200%溢价收购,汇丰的股东一定举双手赞成,唯一需要搞定的是英国政府的外国公司收购银行的法规。
尼玛人家直接动手了,你还要人家说啥?
支持外交部不要打嘴仗,赶紧动手。违反中国反分裂法的波音公司,向台湾提供军售设备,按照中国法律,检察官可以对波音所有高管先提起指控,等高管来了就抓。
法律 vs 法律。用文明的方式打赢这一仗。哈哈。
好搞笑啊,我去一家当地银行转账还要知道这个银行和世界上其他所有国家的法律条文和约定?
你给大家普法。大家就是论事,证明你对法律并不熟悉。做为一个法盲,还是不要普法了。
你目前的水平,可以多发观点,这个是没问题的。观点不需要法律依据支撑,你可以尽量抒发。
你去转账是合法的。你去欺骗银行是非法的。你干违法的事之前比较明智的做法是了解一下你违反的是哪个国家的法。
这么啥也不懂,就出来瞎科普。
难道你不需要吗不了解清楚,被抓就是活该吧
你干脆说你在美国开车 不需要了解交规更直白一些
被抓的是没了解清楚的
了解清楚了的公司,全都不是找汇丰转的帐 而是昆仑银行
你找昆仑银行百分百不会被抓
和你比思路奇特我一点不吃亏。
哈哈哈,你不需要知道所有法律。你只要知道,成心骗银行,不管按哪个国家法律,多半都是有麻烦的。
且不说华为这么大公司对银行业务法律法规该有的熟悉程度。
你明明是转账跟制裁国业务,银行问你你说我没有,银行汇报可疑transaction给政府,政府查到你这就是你的问题了。你明知故犯欺诈怪谁?
嗯,汇丰如果不找人背锅,那自己就会比较惨。然而这个锅也不是那么好甩的,汇丰要证明孟晚舟欺诈,目前的材料看还不是铁证,如果孟晚舟否认汇丰提供的材料是自己提供,汇丰还是有自己背锅的可能性。
哪个需要电击的会觉得自己有问题呢。
Lz 你四不四撒? ---发自Huaren 官方 iOS APP
HSBC要做到自己的due diligence,做到就没问题了
孟自己去hsbc做ppt 演示交易绝无和伊朗有关系的 你说孟当时知不知道有美国这法律的?
哈哈。不能啊,就说是美国110V你们这些美国啥都香的也不能老自己电着耍着玩。你的爱好不需要介绍给我。不过劝解一下,虽然脑容量电击以后也不能增加了,但是小电怡情,大电毕竟伤身。
觉得美国啥都臭的的你电击的时候还是要请专业人士的,建议单程机票回你国,反正你国啥都香的。
对啊。
文盲扫盲,害人不用担心坐牢
LZ这发帖也应该是饭碗 ---发自Huaren 官方 iOS APP
哈哈,“电线”小美,由此得名。怪不得。
你这种人恰恰不懂的就是你秉持的“凡是X国都怎么样”是最愚蠢的。高歌着几个“凡是”追求民主自由是最让人忍俊不禁的。A mirror always has two faces.没有一个国家完全白也没有一个国家完全黑。
你不需要,但是银行问到你头上你和华为有没有关系你拿着一堆做了假的ppt去银行将给人家听的时候你至少知道你撒谎了。拿着白纸黑字去银行撒谎在任何一个国家都不会没事的
对,华为在欧美都有制裁法案合规律师,法律层面的合规华为应该是OK的,所以华为才敢明确说自己没有违反联合国及其他任何国家包括美国、欧盟的制裁法案了。
至于说孟晚舟个人有没有欺骗银行的行为,孟晚舟不需要证明自己没有欺骗银行,而是银行需要拿出证据来证明孟晚舟的欺诈行为。当然孟晚舟自己承认也行....
汇丰只要做到1)按规定冻结了伊朗的交易账户并上报可疑交易
2)在可疑报告中根据银行所有掌握的资料进行了invistigation
3)其中包括调查skycom股东(是或不是华为), skycom的现有股东如果不是汇丰客户,汇丰可以不负责提供股权结构资料交由执法部门调查
做到这三点汇丰就在此事件中无责。
但是根据之前的处罚汇丰肯定是开始没有冻结和伊朗的交易,所以进入到交罚款后的5年整改期。期间整改伊朗交易账户,把skycom给揪出来了
唉,难怪隔壁有人说大妈谈政治不行
中共大佬跳出来替孟说话?搞笑么,中共何时有这传统
你以为是湾湾啊,遇点屁事各门各派乌龟王八都要出来发表谈话挺还是踩
就这次挺华为和孟的程度和级别可以说是中共建政以来都是少有的
被你发现了嘛,作为专业人士,为你们患者服务是本职工作,不辛苦的。
没有完全黑或白这个道理我需要你教?你不会现在才知道吧。
但是“做错事需要承担责任”这个小学生都明白的道理好像很多人不懂,还试图避重就轻东拉西扯推卸责任说别人想要搞你,你没有把柄人家能奈你何?自己屁股不干净还有啥好说的,说到天边你也是没理。
楼主前因后果都没弄清楚。就跑出来扫盲
结果自己法盲。被网友扫了
还硬把强奸抢劫风化犯罪硬塞到长臂管辖法里面去
我很奇怪这种解释问题的帖子还有人踩,是不是提醒我们这里带任务的职业廊五人数?
二鬼子们也就高兴这么几天了。明天股市大涨,华尔街已经明白对这事反应过度了。
如果放过华为,老床根本就不要打贸易战。黑箱操作的华为,本身就是不公平贸易的产物。华为即使活下来也必须透明化,被监管。也许华为以后的员工要大大的感谢老床。