UK Gov’t Quietly Pass Law Allowing Them To Hack ANY Device Without a Warrant
The UK government have quietly passed a new law allowing them to hack any persons device without a warrant and without suspicion of any crime being committed. UK ministers rushed through the Orwellian new bill […]
The post UK Gov’t Quietly Pass Law Allowing Them To Hack ANY Device Without a Warrant appeared first on The People’s Voice.
Pedophiles Call for Lesbians To Be Removed From LGBTQ Over Their Opposition to MAPs
Pedophile activists in Germany are calling for lesbians to be removed from the LGBTQ movement due to their opposition of Minor Attracted People (MAPs). The group is demanding lesbians be banned from an exhibit at […]
The post Pedophiles Call for Lesbians To Be Removed From LGBTQ Over Their Opposition to MAPs appeared first on The People’s Voice.
Trump Vows To Release Evidence Proving CIA Assassinated JFK
Donald Trump has promised to release evidence proving that the JFK assassination was an inside job by the CIA if he is reelected President in 2024. In a new campaign video, Trump promises to obtain […]
The post Trump Vows To Release Evidence Proving CIA Assassinated JFK appeared first on The People’s Voice.
Jeffrey Epstein and the History of Sexual Blackmail
Jay Dyer of jaysanalysis.com guest hosts The Alex Jones Show to break down the history of sexual blackmail and the Jeffrey Epstein case.
The globalists are increasing their attacks on Infowars and the stakes have never been higher!
Please consider donating and visit InfowarsStore.com for merch, nutraceuticals and survival gear.
EU Steams Ahead With Controversial, Centrally-Controlled Digital Euro
The European Union (EU) has been known to waste a lot of money on wrong or even hopeless causes, and opponents of centralized digital money (CBDCs) must be hoping that the digital euro, which has just had €1.3 billion earmarked towards its development, will be one of those.
In fact, in announcing the move EU’s European Central Bank (ECB) made sure to add the disclaimer that it is “not making a commitment to launch any of the development work listed.”
But for the moment, ECB is pushing forward with its plans, and much earlier than observers expected – so much so that the announcement is viewed by some as a surprise. A total of five private sector partners will now receive huge contracts; in the past, Amazon was controversially involved in the e-commerce payments prototype.
How a company that flaunted EU’s own data protection rules and was fined $887 million as recently as in 2021 found its way to becoming an EU “partner” on projects of this importance upset some members of the European Parliament.
And they won’t be pleased to know that although not guaranteed to continue, Amazon might easily be selected this time as well.
According to the ECB statement, the recipients of the money will be tasked not only with prototyping the CBDC, but also with developing a relevant app, offline payment schemes, and, “risk and fraud management.”
This last “initiative” will receive €237 million, while the majority of the funds will go toward creating offline payments – €662 million.
Regardless of how much criticism CBDCs are receiving, particularly in relation to being a power grab, supporters appear convinced that the digital euro would improve the bloc’s financial infrastructure.
And it looks like the EU would like to keep the money “in the Big Money family”: Etonec COO and Digital Euro Association chairman Jonas Gross thinks those most likely to get the contracts are “established CBDC tech providers with offline capabilities,” Big Tech, global financial consultancies, and, “smaller” (but also, “larger”) software firms.
Privacy violations concerns, and general usefulness of CBDC in terms of becoming viable competition to other kinds of digital payments remain recurring arguments offered by opponents.
SpaceX Sues Federal Agency Over ‘Unconstitutional’ Structure
Elon Musk’s SpaceX has filed a lawsuit against a federal agency alleging that it’s out of control in violation of the constitution.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has a panel of judges which hear cases brought against companies over workers’ rights. One such complaint lodged in December against SpaceX is being sent there for adjudication – however SpaceX argues that they’re essentially a rogue agency.The U.S. Constitution requires the president to have “sufficient control” over the judges, and an appeals court concluded in 2022 that administrative law judges (ALJs) in the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) are unconstitutionally shielded from presidential oversight.
“The same reasoning applies to the ALJs of the NLRB, including the ALJ assigned to preside over the pending NLRB proceedings against SpaceX,” SpaceX said in the Jan. 4 suit.
The company is asking the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas to rule that the current makeup of the NLRB is unconstitutional. –The Epoch Times
“To prevent SpaceX from undergoing protracted administrative proceedings before an unconstitutionally structured agency—after which SpaceX is unlikely to have a chance to secure meaningful retrospective relief—the court should stay or enjoin the current agency proceedings, declare that the NLRB’s structure violates the separation of powers under Article II of the Constitution, and permanently enjoin the NLRB and its general counsel from pursuing unfair labor practice charges against SpaceX before agency officials that are unconstitutionally insulated from presidential oversight, ” reads the filing, which also claims that the NLRB’s five-member board is structured improperly, and is the “very definition of tyranny.”
US District Judge Rolando Olvera, an Obama appointee, was assigned to the case after the NLRB accused SpaceX of violating federal law by firing workers who spoke out against the company’s practices.
In a 2022 open letter to management, workers complained about Musk’s posts on Twitter, calling them “a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment for us,” and complained that it should be made clear that “his messaging does not reflect our work, our mission, or our values.”
According to NLRB officials, SpaceX, in a “wave of wrongful retaliatory terminations,” fired workers who signed the open letter, and others involved in activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act.
More via the Epoch Times;
Deborah Lawrence, one of the workers whom SpaceX fired, told news outlets in a statement through her lawyers that the company has a “toxic culture.”
“We wrote the open letter to leadership not out of malice, but because we cared about the mission and the people around us,” she said.
As of now, a hearing in the matter is scheduled to take place on March 5 in Los Angeles, California, before an administrative law judge.
Campaign Against Musk
The NLRB is one of several government agencies that have brought actions against Mr. Musk after he became a critic of President Joe Biden and the federal government.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in August 2023 sued SpaceX, saying the company illegally only hired U.S. citizens and permanent residents. A countersuit in the same federal court in which the new suit was brought said the company was complying with federal law that governs companies involved with sensitive technology.
Judge Olvera ruled in favor of SpaceX and paused the case, finding that the way the DOJ’s administrative law judges act does not adhere to the Constitution.
The proceedings before the judges “are unconstitutional because the attorney general is not allowed to review” their decisions, he said.
The Constitution says presidents must appoint federal “principal officers,” although Congress can authorize the head of departments to appoint “inferior officers.” Those inferior officers, though, must be “directed and supervised” by a principal officer. The judges are not inferior officers because they’re not supervised, according to the ruling.
If the proceedings were not paused, SpaceX “will likely suffer irreparable injury,” Judge Olvera added.
He also addressed how the judges cannot be directly removed by a president. Judges can only be removed by board members, who themselves can be removed by a president. That structure may be unconstitutional but the removal restrictions are severable by the courts, he said.
The appeals court in the SEC case, which is set to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, found that because presidents cannot directly remove the administrative law judges, they are unconstitutionally insulated from the chief executive.
A judge who dissented disagreed, creating a split decision that the nation’s top court will resolve.
