This is so awesome ... Rebel News is grifting personal data from its gullible donors in the name of disqualified transplant candidate Annette Lewis WITHOUT EVEN FUNDRAISING FOR HER!!
Seriously, Rebel News is raking in and monetizing all of those imbecilic petition signers in the name of Lewis, and not even collecting for her now exorbitant legal expenses.
Now that is how you grift ... without even offering to help financially.
While, later this summer, there will be yet another application headed in the direction of Lloydminster's favourite trustee-less, undischarged bankrupt Patrick Ross (who owes me around $110,000, and growing):
I feel compelled to enlighten you all on the most entertaining discovery I made with the recent assistance of a senior analyst at the federal Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy (OSB), and to truly appreciate the fuckedupness of Patrick's situation, you will need to understand just the tiniest bit of bankruptcy law, so bear with me.
As we all know, when one files for bankruptcy, the typical outcome is that the bankrupt's debts will be erased, in exchange for handing over all assets and (often) being assigned a Conditional Discharge Order (CDO) that requires one to pay a fraction of the discharged debt to the set of approved creditors. In short, while the bankrupt gets the benefit of having the majority of debt wiped away, the creditors get somewhat hosed in terms of usually having to accept only a fraction of what they are owed but, hey, that's life. So far, I don't think I've said anything surprising.
However (and here's the surprise), it is open to any of the creditors to argue that they should not be bound by the bankruptcy's stay of proceedings; that is, any creditor is entitled to petition the Court and argue that the bankrupt's behaviour related specifically to them was so egregious and contemptuous, their debt should be removed from the protection of bankruptcy and should still be owed by the debtor in its entirety, which means the debtor still owes that individual creditor the original amount.
Put another way, if a creditor can convince the Court of the irresponsible behaviour of the bankrupt in running up that debt, the Court could eventually say, "You're right, he was an asshole, and your debt is restored and exists outside the context of bankruptcy," whereupon the case is now reduced to a simple matter of a creditor filing claims against a debtor, having nothing to do with the bankruptcy. In short, in a case like this, the creditor now doesn't give a rat's ass about the bankruptcy as it no longer has anything to do with him.
I think you see where I'm going with this, because that is precisely what happened in my case related to the bankruptcy of Patrick Ross. Back in 2020, I applied to the Court for exactly this relief and, as rationale, I documented several years of Patrick's weaselly evasion and tactics and refusal to obey court orders and so on and, well, to make a long story short, the judge saw things entirely my way and issued a ruling, of which the relevant two paragraphs can be seen below:
Here, let me translate: "Given that Mr. Ross has been such an arrogant and contemptuous asshat for all these years, Mr. Day's judgment debt is restored in full and has nothing to do with Mr. Ross' ongoing bankruptcy." So at this point, it's safe to say that I no longer have the slightest interest in Patrick's bankruptcy, or when he gets out of it, or if he ever gets out of it, because it has nothing to do with me. Patrick owes me $110K, and I am arranging to collect it via the mundane route of how a normal creditor collects from a normal debtor, nothing more. But that's not the real reason we're here, because here's the wrinkle I was informed of recently.
(Side note: A small bit of this could be speculation, but it is what I was told by people who are in a position to know these things.)
At this point, the obvious question would be, well, if Patrick's debt to me now exists outside the context of his bankruptcy, how does he eventually get out of bankruptcy? The simple answer now is, I really don't care since it has nothing to do with me. But the question remains, and it was answered thusly by the senior analyst at the OSB:
Patrick can discharge his bankruptcy by paying off the balance of his CDO.
Holy shit.
I say "holy shit" because Patrick's original CDO involved him paying a total of $34,000 over 14 years and, given how little he's paid off, he still owes in the neighbourhood of $30,000 of that CDO. And now you start to see how screwed is Patrick since, according to senior OSB dude, Patrick not only owes me that $110,000 (now entirely unrelated to his bankruptcy), but he remains in bankruptcy until he also pays off his CDO.
Pause and reflect on this, if you will.
It would appear, based on the opinion of someone who should know this stuff, that Patrick is now some $140,000 in debt -- he owes me $110,000 completely independently of his bankruptcy, while he would still be required to pay off his CDO entirely ($30K?) to get out of bankruptcy, a payment which would not affect in the slightest what he owes me. (Oh, and if Patrick came up with the $30K to pay off his CDO, it's unclear who would get that money but it would not be me since, as I have already mentioned, I am no longer a creditor in the context of Patrick's bankruptcy and am not entitled to any assets Patrick turns over to ... whoever.)
In the end, it was Patrick's own arrogance that put him $140,000 in debt, both by refusing to honour the financial obligation of his CDO, as well as years of contemptuous behaviour that convinced a judge to lift the stay of proceedings with respect to me and restore Patrick's original debt to me. And I realize that all of this sounds like total madness, but it appears that Patrick's years of dodging, weaving and ignoring court orders have finally come back to bite him in his pasty, cheeseburger-padded ass.
To sum up, then, Patrick owes me a steadily-increasing $110,000, and whatever additional it costs him to get out of bankruptcy is of no concern to me as it has nothing to do with me.
Are you not entertained?
P.S. It is worth noting that, once upon a time, Patrick had the option of making all of this go away for around $10,000. Those days are long gone.
P.P.S. I am still open to anyone keeping tabs on the travels (and travails) of Patrick; specifically, if he is regularly in the vicinity of Lloydminster and especially if it appears he is once again living with his father. This will be useful information for me in upcoming developments.
BREAKING! I have just been informed that Patrick's father, Ken, passed away last month. It will be interesting to see how Patrick copes with being an undischarged bankrupt without the constant financial support and enablement of his father. All of the appropriate authorities have been informed.
Is anyone keeping track of which stark raving mad MAGA/neo-Nazi "media outlets" in the U.S. and Canada are suddenly going to be strapped for cash as Russia implodes like a cardboard deep-sea submersible?
What? Too Soon?
Predictably, having been kicked in both the original Manitoba decision and at the Manitoba Court of Appeal, the JCCF is not quite ready to give up on this particular cash cow. I predict another spate of fundraising for yet another doomed application to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Let's watch.
P.S. If you're bored, you can read the ruling from the MB Court of Appeal to appreciate that court gave the JCCF nothing. Literally, nothing. They did not identify a single error of law, which makes one wonder about the cost effectiveness of soldiering on to the Supreme Court of Canada, other than making various lawyers at JCCF obscenely rich.
Sure, I could have phrased that more selectively and diplomatically, but how else can you explain how you can take the most pampered, privileged, tax-exempt, immune-from-accountability demographic in the country -- Christians -- and persuade them to hand over an assload of money to Ezra Levant by convincing them that they're terribly, terribly hard done by?
I'm not even going to ask if those donations are eligible for tax receipts.
It was most remiss of me to overlook that infamous undischarged bankrupt Patrick Ross -- he of no fixed address and questionable employment, currently on the run from the Saskatchewan sheriffs -- turned 42 years old just two days ago.
I don't think I need to add anything to that.
So while I was suspended permanently (again), this time for a clearly facetious suggestion to feed hypocrites into a woodchipper, this person remains active:
Sure looks like a double standard to me.
It's aggravating to have just been suspended permanently from Twitter and read this:
Fuck you, Elon, you liar. Go stick your head in a bucket.
P.S. I just got this reply from my appeal submission of 8:00 a.m. this morning:
First, even though they warn about a 5-7 day backlog, let's see how quickly they actually respond with a rejection. More to the point, what is this "account reinstatement under our new criteria?" What new criteria? Where are these "new criteria" documented? Does anyone know?
"One gets the feeling that delicate hate-wingers report en masse."
Whatever.
P.S. It's most likely that Senator Denise Batters is behind this, but that's just speculation. If you have a Twitter account and could mention this on Twitter, that would be ducky, thanks.
Minutes ago, my "@canadiancynic" Twitter account was suspended because of:
That's right -- given the number of right-wing fascists openly espousing actual violence on Twitter, I was suspended for a parody of a famous scene from the move "Fargo."
I was not given the option of deleting that tweet to get my account back, so feel free to amplify this on Twitter so others know what is happening. I have already filed an appeal, and I will post here the reply I get.
AH, THE HYPOCRISY: Here is how fucked up Twitter is right now: while suspending my account for the publication of a tweet you can still see here - https://twitter.com/canadiancynic/status/1667436216688558080 - Twitter will not allow me to delete it.
Let that sink in.
While Twitter insists that that tweet incites or glorifies violence, it also insists that it must remain in my Twitter timeline.
Jesus.
AND THERE IT IS ... I have apparently been permanently banned from publishing any more tweets:
Nothing really new to report about Lloydminster's Patrick "Cabin in the Woods" Ross and my upcoming next move related to collection enforcement:
But it is worth noting once again that Patrick likes to claim that he is currently suing two people for defamation, one of them being me. Let me assure y'all: Patrick is not currently suing me for anything. As it stands, I have never been served legally and properly with a valid Statement of Claim, and it's unlikely that that is going to happen any time soon, for a simple reason.
Because Patrick loves to represent himself in these matters (and we all know how well that's worked out for him over the years), in order to serve me, he would have to provide a valid address for service so that I can respond in kind. He can no longer simply give his father's address in Lloydminster as I have more than enough evidence to show that any registered mail sent to that address is never picked up, establishing that Patrick does not reside there to the extent that he can be served there.
Again, as Patrick insists on representing himself, he is legally required to provide a valid address for service for the purposes of being served, and the instant he does that, I will happily pass on that address to the proper authorities for the purposes of collection enforcement.
I long ago provided Patrick with a valid address for service, so if he really and truly wants to get into this with me, he knows where to find me ... at which point I will know where to find him.
P.S. I am, of course, still interested in any sightings of Patrick, particularly in the vicinity of Lloydminster.
BONUS TRACK: It is perhaps worth pointing out that, last year, Patrick filed a Statement of Claim against me in Court of Queen's Bench, Alberta (not properly served on me, as I have already explained, and subsequently withdrawn by him as it was a steaming pile of nonsense). What is curious about that SoC is that Patrick is claiming defamation on my part for statements I allegedly made -- and I am reproducing this verbatim -- "Between 2021 and 2008, ..."
Pause.
And.
Reflect.
Patrick's (unserved) Statement of Claim against me for defamation refers to alleged events that occurred, at the very latest, in 2021, and as far back as 2008. Even if you are not a lawyer, you are probably aware of the concept of "statute of limitations," so it seems unlikely that, at this point, Patrick even has standing to start anything if his action relies on events that happened up to 15 years ago.
But, hey, I am not a lawyer.
AGAIN, I AM NOT A LAWYER ... but I did a quick check of the time limitations for defamation actions in Alberta, and you can read here:
I am willing to be corrected but it appears that Patrick had three months to properly file and serve on me a Notice of Libel, regarding allegations that he openly admits occurred at the absolute latest in 2021 and that he openly admits he has known about since then. So, honestly, I am unsure as to how he thinks this is going to work out for him.
For someone on the run from me, the Collections Department of the Saskatchewan Sheriffs and the federal Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy, undischarged bankrupt and man who owes me over $100,000 Patrick Ross is not hiding his tracks well, leaving a trail of cheeseburger wrappers that could be followed by a blind, retarded cocker spaniel or David Menzies:
In other words, you may resume your regular surveillance of Casa Ross in Lloydminster, and keep me apprised of any vehicles that seem to be taking up space on a regular basis.
Thank you kindly.
P.S. There is increasing evidence that Patrick does not have regular employment, given his recent sightings in Saskatoon, Lloydminster, Grande Prairie and Edmonton -- it's hard to imagine holding down a job and doing that much travelling at the same time. This is why it's so important to keep a watch for him, both in real life and on social media, so I can stay on top of his wanderings for the sake of collection enforcement.
There are more developments coming, and I will let you know.
I was recently informed by the Collections Department of the Courts and Community Justice Division of the Government of Saskatchewan (whew!) that Lloydminster's Patrick "Hyper Mullet Nexus Quintuple Threat Spandex Tights Street Fighting Man" Ross has closed the bank account he once had with Synergy Credit Union so there was nothing to seize at their last attempt at collection, implying that Patrick is having to go through the inconvenience of cancelling various financial accounts in order to protect them from collections enforcement.
As I understand it, this is not going to look good once he is tracked down, since closing accounts like that represents an unmistakable effort to conceal assets, and the courts really, really, really dislike that sort of behaviour, but I have confirmation from the appropriate authorities that Patrick did exactly that.
The noose is tightening, and when Patrick is inevitably brought to heel, there will be a very unpleasant reckoning for him and for anyone who has been assisting him.
