"The Liberals, separatists, and socialists are conspiring..."

[bunsen_h]

Thank you, Pierre Poilievre.

Oh, by the way:

Criminal Code

            PART VI: INVASION OF PRIVACY

               Interception of Communications

Interception

184. (1) Every one who, by means of any electro-magnetic, acoustic, mechanical or other device, wilfully intercepts a private communication is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

Saving provision

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to (a) a person who has the consent to intercept, express or implied, of the originator of the private communication or of the person intended by the originator thereof to receive it; (b) a person who intercepts a private communication in accordance with an authorization or pursuant to section 184.4 or any person who in good faith aids in any way another person who the aiding person believes on reasonable grounds is acting with an authorization or pursuant to section 184.4;

Comments

[bunsen-h.livejournal.com]

Conference calls are a grey area, I suppose. But unless the person who recorded the conversation was known to be "present" by the other participants, or was authorized to record it by someone who was known by the others to be "present", the recording sure looks like a violation of the criminal code to me. The code refers to the originator and the recipient, only two participants in the communication, but the intention seems clear: that the persons involved in the discussion may record it, and so may persons that they authorize to do so, but not others.

[dewline.livejournal.com]

Yep. Busted by their own admission, then.

So...upon whom does the arrest warrant get served?