Staff Writer, DL Mullan
Monopolies / Asset Forfeiture
Why not go after the financials of entities and their personages who have betrayed our founding principles and sold out America to Communist China?
The Sherman Act outlaws "every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade," and any "monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize." Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are "per se" violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed
The Federal Trade Commission Act bans "unfair methods of competition" and "unfair or deceptive acts or practices." The Supreme Court has said that all violations of the Sherman Act also violate the FTC Act. Thus, although the FTC does not technically enforce the Sherman Act, it can bring cases under the FTC Act against the same kinds of activities that violate the Sherman Act. The FTC Act also reaches other practices that harm competition, but that may not fit neatly into categories of conduct formally prohibited by the Sherman Act. Only the FTC brings cases under the FTC Act.
The Clayton Act addresses specific practices that the Sherman Act does not clearly prohibit, such as mergers and interlocking directorates (that is, the same person making business decisions for competing companies). Section 7 of the Clayton Act prohibits mergers and acquisitions where the effect "may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly." As amended by the Robinson-Patman Act of 1936, the Clayton Act also bans certain discriminatory prices, services, and allowances in dealings between merchants. The Clayton Act was amended again in 1976 by the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act to require companies planning large mergers or acquisitions to notify the government of their plans in advance. The Clayton Act also authorizes private parties to sue for triple damages when they have been harmed by conduct that violates either the Sherman or Clayton Act and to obtain a court order prohibiting the anticompetitive practice in the future.
The United States of America through its governance, agencies, and courts has allowed the propagation of monopolies that now seek to stifle freedoms, liberties, and commerce. Some like Apple and Google have interjoined their management with a foreign power, Communist China.
- Apple moves to store iCloud keys in China, raising human rights fears
- Google moves into Shenzhen in latest China
The boards of directors, CEOs, and other top management divisions collude together in private meetings to create The Network of Global Corporate Control.
The structure of the control network of transnational corporations affects global market competition and financial stability. So far, only small national samples were studied and there was no appropriate methodology to assess control globally. We present the first investigation of the architecture of the international ownership network, along with the computation of the control held by each global player. We find that transnational corporations form a giant bow-tie structure and that a large portion of control flows to a small tightly-knit core of financial institutions. This core can be seen as an economic “super-entity” that raises new important issues both for researchers and policy makers.
Therefore the super-entity of a massive monopoly, which also answers to Communist China through Google and Apple's moves, prompts National Security concerns at the very least. This super-entity now commands a complete umbrella and oversight to change the outcome of future elections under the guise of social justice causes not supported by current US laws such as: censorship, shadow banning, community guideline strikes, and expulsion. .
- Bill Maher Slams Big Tech Censorship, Goes To Bat For Alex Jones
- Facebook slammed for 'censorship' of country group's ...
- Truth is treason in empire of lies’: Ron Paul on Big Tech censorship
The Conspiracy of Dunces is readily admitted: Facebook, Twitter, Google and others to meet about midterm elections, report says. Which begs the question: Is communist China behind Big Tech’s sweeping censorship?
If so, then the USA has traitors in the government who need to be investigated:
While the VDP Gazette is no fan of asset forfeiture as the act is unconstitutional thanks to the 5th Amendment, a strike against the Globalists running the unelected administrative state (shadow government/deep state institutions) would be nice.
"...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
Yet after the punitive damages the Sherman Act allows for, the taking's clause is all but moot after a jury trial of ten or more victories of injured parties.
Still corporations feel the need to circumvent our Bill of Rights as entities defined as individuals instead of the nonperson governing monopolies this super-entity seeks to become. Perhaps it is time to redefine the greed ridden cancers of our society and hand the halls of power back over to the People by taking away the power of the corporation in our society.