https://globalnews.ca/news/11080371/canadian-woman-detained-ice-example-immigration-border/

It doesn’t outright say she was doing something illegal. But it does state she was working on her own business, another article mentioned it as well, that she was investing, feel free to use your non-american search engine of choice to find more. And that’s not what TN visa is for. I can imagine it would be easily abused (and likely is) by investing in your own business and sponsoring yourself, if the amount you invested isn’t enough to get you through the threshold for investor visa - which has been increased recently.

Multiple lawyers are quoted suggesting it was not a good idea to do what she did, one of them directly advising her, and hat she wouldn’t have had the same issue at Canada border, that just screams arrogance to me.

I’m not defending what US did here, but it’s like with boycotting US products…oh suddenly shopping in all those big corporation shops in Canada is fine as long as they fuck us over with Canadian products? It’s gotten real quiet about that real quick. Assholes can be on both sides, just different sizes, doesn’t mean you must support either.

I wouldn’t want that to happen to anyone it’s bullshit, and this is getting overzealous, making an example of someone. If you read all the details in the articles about this though, it appears that she was doing something borderline or outright illegal to begin with, and I’m finding it difficult to feel sorry for her in this instance.

She was advised by a lawyer not to cross the border the way she did and at the place where she did it, and she ignored that advice. She was on TN visa which was revoked back in November, yet she was supposedly investing in a startup? Wouldn’t that mean you should seek E2 or similar visa, what could have flagged her for the cancellation her original TN one?

I feel more sorry for the hiker from Germany, even if she may have been trying to stay with her boyfriend or whatever, as far as evidence suggests, at least she did more or less everything by the book and had appropriate visa and documents that wouldn’t have otherwise caused her any issues.

All this investment…down the drain

Surely it depends on the definition of “close/near”, have they given detailed specifics or is that not public info?

I mean you could argue that since these aren’t some intercontinental missiles, whatever is in their range, should be considered close?
Alternatively you could say, anything that can hit Kharkiv is fair game which opens it up a bit and not limiting the launchers to be “near” Kharkiv to retaliate.

Edit: seems like most of these articles are just reiterating the vague “close/near” and at most mention that US stance on long-range strikes has not changed.

You can also pierce your ear drum with that thing (if something hits your elbow at the wrong moment) …about 12 years later and it’s almost as good as it was before it happened 😎😵

You’d think that’s the insurance companies would be greedy enough to sue oil companies for damages, you could probably try to make that case, but alas it’s easier to drain regular people dry and then fuck off.