Be wary of reporters that write “glowing” articles about Musk and ignore these facts:
REPORT: SHILL REPORTERS WHO TAKE BRIBES FROM THE ELON MUSK PR TEAM

TO FIX THE SYSTEM; DO THE MATH:

## Bribes paid to politicians, including search engine rigging, shadow-bans, covert stock trades, etc;  to maintain their MONOPOLIES, and avoid regulation, paid by Musk, Google, Netflix, Facebook, YouTube, Sony Pictures = $22 Billion+

## Offshore tax evasion and money laundering by Musk, Google, Netflix, Facebook, YouTube, Sony Pictures = $2 Trillion+

## Lobbying money, including placing their own executives in control of the main government office, to control the United States Patent Office for the exclusive protection benefit of Musk, Google, Netflix, Facebook, YouTube, Sony Pictures = $42 Billion+

## Exclusive ‘favored nations’ cash and contracts from the government in exchange for bribes and stock manipulations for Musk, Google, Netflix, Facebook, YouTube, Sony Pictures = $120 Billion+

## Percentage of Congress that covertly owns the business of Musk, Google, Netflix, Facebook, YouTube, Sony Pictures = 98%

## Number of lobbyists and political manipulation operatives working for Musk, Google, Netflix, Facebook, YouTube, Sony Pictures = 520+

## Number of Cyber-Assassination services like Fusion GPS, Black Cube, The Agency, etc, working for Musk, Google, Netflix, Facebook, YouTube, Sony Pictures = 1280+

## Number of times Musk, Google, Netflix, Facebook, YouTube, Sony Pictures have violated the privacy and data rights of Americans = Hundreds of Millions of Times

## Amount of money Musk, Google, Netflix, Facebook, YouTube, Sony Pictures has cost the government/taxpayers in failed efforts and losses = $600 Million+
## Amount of money Scott has SAVED the government/taxpayers = $700 million+

Details, and proof, on the numbers, above, always available in live, televised, Congressional hearings…

Scott says that law firms willing to sue the ‘bad guys’ in jury trials, on a contingency fee basis, are always welcome to reach out and propose an arrangement!

Who has hasn’t dreamed of an electric car that can solve all of America’s energy problems, gets all of it’s fuel from clean sources INSIDE of America, is the safest car ever made, is affordable to the average person and relies on no foreign sourcing? The United States Patent Office and public records say one of Scott’s company’s did it first! …To further verify the assertion: Scott was awarded nearly a billion dollars of issued patents in commendation for his role as the seminal inventor by the United States Patent Office …Congress awarded Scott a Congressional award for his energy technology in The Iraq War Bill …AND The United States Government contracted Scott’s company to build it….. BUT then the Government officials sabotaged the whole thing, including all the patents and the rest of Scott’s funding because it was about to obsolete their insider trading car: The Tesla. The deadly, stock market pump-and-dumped, exploding, very defective: “Tesla”. Law enforcement and news investigators then informed Scott he had been defrauded by a government scam and insider crony slush-fund. Scott’s patented electric car technology solved the biggest problems with electric cars. Anybody who has ever rented an electric car for a four day trip knows that you have to spend more time charging it than you do sleeping. Nobody that lives in apartments can get one because they have no home charging. Scott’s 5 second hot swap cassettes eliminates those issues for hundreds of millions of people. Competing industries, and politicians that own Tesla, hate that reality.

… AND THEN ELON MUSK, AND POLITICIANS THAT HE BRIBES, SENT ACTUAL MEDIA HIT-MEN AFTER SCOTT BECAUSE SCOTT’S ELECTRIC CAR WAS OBSOLETING MUSK’S DEFECTIVE CAR THAT 1/3 OF CONGRESS OWNED THE STOCK IN:

THEN READ THE CHARGES AGAINST MUSK IN THESE LAWSUITS:

Musk, Elon CASE #: 0:2019pr01577 Derrick Galvin v. Wendy Kelley, et al U.S. Court Of Appeals, Eighth Circuit 03/20/2019 07/25/2019
Musk, Elon CASE #: 0:2014cv17501 Kazim Acar, et al v. Tesla Motors, Inc., et al U.S. Court Of Appeals, Ninth Circuit 12/22/2014 12/21/2016
Musk, Elon CASE #: 0:2019op70031 Bridgestone Investment Corp. v. USDC-CASF U.S. Court Of Appeals, Ninth Circuit 01/04/2019 10/08/2019
Musk, Elon CASE #: 0:2019cv15672 Gregory Wochos, et al v. Tesla, Inc., et al U.S. Court Of Appeals, Ninth Circuit 04/08/2019 01/26/2021
Musk, Elon CASE #: 0:2019cv16735 John Olagues, et al v. Elon Musk, et al U.S. Court Of Appeals, Ninth Circuit 09/05/2019 12/05/2019
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 5:2018cv00316 Galvin v. Kelley et al Arkansas Eastern District Court 12/19/2018 02/20/2019
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 2:2015cv01620 Gabriella Lukas v. Elon Musk California Central District Court 03/05/2015 03/12/2015
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 2:2018cv08048 Vernon Unsworth v. Elon Musk California Central District Court 09/17/2018 12/06/2019
Musk, Elon R. (dft) CASE #: 2:2018cv07575 Shahram Sodeifi v. Tesla Inc et al California Central District Court 08/30/2018 09/24/2018
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 2:2020cv02353 Robert Lee Manning Jr. v. Space Explorations Technologies Corporation et al California Central District Court 03/11/2020 03/23/2020
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 2:2020cv06448 Lisa Douglass v. United States of America et al California Central District Court 07/20/2020 09/10/2020
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 8:2020cv01376 Edwin R. Moran v. Face Book et al California Central District Court 07/28/2020 08/06/2020
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 2:2021cv08561 Curtis Adler v. Elon Musk et al California Central District Court 10/29/2021 04/15/2022
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2013cv05216 In Re Tesla Motors, Inc. Securities Litigation California Northern District Court 11/08/2013 12/05/2014
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2013cv05438 Magnisalias v. Tesla Motors, Inc et al California Northern District Court 11/22/2013 01/30/2014
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 5:2014cv01435 Bao v. SolarCity Corporation et al California Northern District Court 03/28/2014 08/09/2016
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2014cv02817 Ross Weintraub v. Elon Musk et al California Northern District Court 06/18/2014 10/10/2014
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2014cv02820 Stastny v. Rive et al California Northern District Court 06/18/2014 07/03/2014
Musk, Elon R. (dft) CASE #: 3:2017cv05828 Wochos v. Tesla, Inc. et al California Northern District Court 10/10/2017 03/25/2019
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2018cv04865 In re Tesla Inc. Securities Litigation California Northern District Court 08/10/2018
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2018cv04876 Chamberlain v. Tesla, Inc., et al California Northern District Court 08/10/2018
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2018cv04912 Yeager v. Tesla, Inc. et al California Northern District Court 08/13/2018
Musk, Elon R. (dft) CASE #: 3:2018cv04939 Maia v. Musk et al California Northern District Court 08/14/2018
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2018cv04948 Dua v. Tesla Inc. et al California Northern District Court 08/15/2018
Musk, Elon R. (dft) CASE #: 3:2018cv05258 Horwitz v. Tesla, Inc. et al California Northern District Court 08/28/2018
Musk, Elon R. (dft) CASE #: 3:2018cv05463 Left v. Tesla, Inc. et al California Northern District Court 09/06/2018
Musk, Elon R. (dft) CASE #: 3:2018cv05470 Fan v. Tesla, Inc. et al California Northern District Court 09/06/2018
Musk, Elon R. (dft) CASE #: 3:2018cv05899 Shahram Sodeifi v. Tesla Inc et al California Northern District Court 09/26/2018
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 5:2018cv07110 Olagues et al v. Musk et al California Northern District Court 11/21/2018 07/31/2019
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2018cv07325 Inter-Local Pension Fund GCC/IBT v. Tesla, Inc. et al California Northern District Court 12/04/2018 04/15/2021
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2019mc80224 Unsworth v. Musk California Northern District Court 09/13/2019 07/19/2021
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2020cv03426 Greenspan v. Qazi et al California Northern District Court 05/20/2020
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 4:2020cv08055 Eberwein v. Villarnos et al California Northern District Court 11/16/2020 01/20/2021
Musk, Elon (pla) CASE #: 3:2021mc80277 Tesla Motors, Inc. et al v. Balan California Northern District Court 11/24/2021 12/02/2021
Musk, Elon (pet) CASE #: 4:2021cv09325 Tesla Motors, Inc. et al v. Balan California Northern District Court 12/02/2021
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2019cv02407 Parsa et al v. Google L.L.C. et al California Southern District Court 12/16/2019 06/01/2020
MUSK, ELON (dft) CASE #: 1:2022cv00906 ADESHINA v. BUSH et al District Of Columbia District Court 04/01/2022
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 1:2017cv00317 In re: Tesla, Inc. Stockholder Litigation Delaware District Court 03/24/2017
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 1:2017cv00461 Arkansas Teacher Retirement System et al v. Musk et al Delaware District Court 04/21/2017
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 1:2018cv01669 In re Tesla, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation Delaware District Court 10/25/2018
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 1:2019cv00298 Klein v. Musk et al Delaware District Court 02/11/2019
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 5:2021cv00296 Bennett v. Brown et al Florida Middle District Court 05/28/2021 06/07/2021
MUSK, ELON (dft) CASE #: 4:2021cv00403 ADESHINA v. MUSK et al Florida Northern District Court 10/04/2021 01/05/2022
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 0:2020cv61520 Smith v Garcia et al Florida Southern District Court 07/27/2020 07/30/2020
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 0:2020cv61545 Smith v. Rodriguez et al Florida Southern District Court 07/30/2020 07/31/2020
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 1:2020cv23303 Smith v. Musk et al Florida Southern District Court 08/07/2020 07/22/2021
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 0:2020cv61606 Smith v. Garcia et al Florida Southern District Court 08/07/2020 08/11/2020
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 4:2020cv10097 Smith v. Musk et al Florida Southern District Court 08/17/2020 08/28/2020
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 0:2020cv62387 Smith v. Musk et al Florida Southern District Court 11/23/2020 11/24/2020
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE # 1:2021cv02263 Williams v. Musk Georgia Northern District Court 06/02/2021 07/15/2021
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 1:2021cv04260 Nakamoto et al v. The United States et al Georgia Northern District Court 10/08/2021
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2022cv03003 Nyama v. Musk Iowa Northern District Court 01/14/2022 02/25/2022
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 2:2021cv10149 Smith v. Monroe Engineering Products, LLC et al Michigan Eastern District Court 01/21/2021 01/25/2021
MUSK, ELON (dft) CASE #: 1:2017cv00635 MOHAMMAD v. JOINES, et al North Carolina Middle District Court 07/07/2017 08/30/2017
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2019cv00413 Hansen v. Musk et al Nevada District Court 07/19/2019
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 2:2021cv01710 Young et al v. Zuckerberg et al Nevada District Court 09/16/2021 11/09/2021
Musk, Elon Reeve (dft) CASE #: 1:2015cv06756 Adams v. Musk et al New York Eastern District Court 11/24/2015 05/11/2016
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 1:2018cv08865 United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Musk New York Southern District Court 09/27/2018 10/16/2018
Musk, Elon R. (dft) CASE #: 1:2022cv03026 Rasella v. Musk New York Southern District Court 04/12/2022
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 3:2021cv00139 Boileau et al v. Berkshire Hathaway, Inc. et al Tennessee Middle District Court 02/19/2021 08/26/2021
Musk, Elon (dft) CASE #: 1:2020cv01176 Saturn v. Austin Bergstrom International Airport et al Texas Western District Court
THE_CRIMES_AND_LIES_OF_ELON_MUSK (LINK)

And that’s not even a tiny bit of the charges against Musk….

There are a vast volume of other similar examples of “Firsts” created and placed on the market by Scott  and then spied-on, stolen and copied By The NVCA Tech Cartel who then launched harms against Scott’s team because Scott refused to participate in their protection rackets and reported them to the FBI, SEC, FEC, FTC, FINCEN and The DOJ..

Then read the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF NEWS REPORTS ABOUT ELON AND HIS LIES AND ATTACKS ON COMPETITORS…

THE_CRIMES_AND_LIES_OF_ELON_MUSK

SpaceX employees draft open letter to company executives denouncing Elon Musk’s constant violation of the Company ‘No Asshole’ policy

‘Every Tweet that Elon sends is a de facto public statement by the company’

By Loren Grush@lorengrush

An open letter to SpaceX decrying CEO Elon Musk’s recent behavior has sparked open discussion among thecompany’s employees in an internal chat system. Employees are being encouraged to sign onto the letter’s suggestions, either publiclyor anonymously, with a signed version of the letter to be delivered to the desk of SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell.

The letter, reviewed by The Verge, describes how Musk’s actions and the recent allegations of sexualharassment against him are negatively affecting SpaceX’s reputation. The document claims that employees “across the spectraof gender, ethnicity, seniority, and technical roles have collaborated on” writing the letter. It’s not known which SpaceXemployees wrote the letter; the employees who posted the letter in the internal chat system have not responded to requests for comment.

“Elon’s behavior in the public sphere is a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment”

“Elon’s behavior in the public sphere is a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment for us,particularly in recent weeks,” the letter states. “As our CEO and most prominent spokesperson, Elon is seen as the face of SpaceX —every Tweet that Elon sends is a de facto public statement by the company. It is critical to make clear to our teams and to ourpotential talent pool that his messaging does not reflect our work, our mission, or our values.”

Musk has been doing a lot recently, and his presence on Twitter can be particularly crass. In April, he shared an image of Bill Gates and anemoji of a pregnant man, captioned with “in case u need to lose a boner fast.” Last year, he also responded to a tweet about JeffBezos’ aerospace company Blue Origin, saying “Can’t get it up (to orbit) lol.” Musk is also currently attempting to buy Twitter.

Shared on Wednesday in an internal SpaceX Microsoft Teams channel with more than 2,600 employees, the letterargues that the company is not living up to its oft-stated “No Asshole” policy and its zero-tolerance sexual harassment policy.The document goes on to suggest three different “action items” to address the situation: SpaceX should “publicly address and condemnElon’s harmful Twitter behavior”; the company should “hold all leadership equally accountable” for bad behavior; and SpaceX needsto “clearly define what exactly is intended by SpaceX’s ‘no-asshole’ and ‘zero tolerance’ policies and enforce themconsistently.”

“Every Tweet that Elon sends is a de facto public statement by the company”

The number of signatures was not immediately available, but employees were asked to sign onto the letter byfilling out a survey or scanning a QR code. The letter generated more than a hundred comments in the Teams channel, with many employeesagreeing to the spirit of the missive, according to screenshots of the chat shared by two sources who spoke with The Verge and asked to remain anonymous. Some commenters also claimed to beembarrassed by Musk’s behavior. Others expressed a desire for the company to better address executive leadershipbehavior as well as sexual harassment complaints.

The letter comes nearly a month after a report from Insider alleged that SpaceX paid a former company flight attendant a $250,000 settlement after she accused Musk of exposing himself to her and propositioning her during a massage, an allegation thatinvolved Musk offering to buy her a horse. Musk denied the allegations, telling Insider there is “a lot more to this story.”

“If I were inclined to engage in sexual harassment, this is unlikely to be the first time in my entire30-year career that it comes to light,” he told the outlet. On Twitter, Musk joked about the story in a tweet reply: “Hi Chad, long time no see! Fine, if you touch mywiener, you can have a horse.”

After the story came out, Shotwell sent a company-wide email to SpaceX employees defending Musk. “Personally, I believe the allegations to be false; not because Iwork for Elon, but because I have worked closely with him for 20 years and never seen nor heard anything resembling theseallegations,” Shotwell wrote. “Anyone who knows Elon like I do, knows he would never conduct or condone this alleged inappropriatebehavior.”

This isn’t the first time that the topic of sexual harassment at SpaceX has surfaced. In December, a formerSpaceX employee wrote an essay on the platform Lioness detailing her experience with what she described as pervasive sexual harassment at the company. Shealso criticized SpaceX’s HR response to her complaints. The Verge spoke with four additional former SpaceX employees at the time, all of whom argued that the company’s HR department improperly handled harassment complaints. Before the story came out,Shotwell emailed the company reiterating the “No Asshole” policy.

“We also know we can always do better,” Shotwell wrote in December. “That is why HR has been solicitingfeedback from groups across the company to ensure the process is effective. HR will also conduct an internal audit, followed by athird-party audit.”

A copy of the letter can be read below:

An open letter to the Executives of SpaceX,

In light of recent allegations against our CEO and his public disparagement of the situation, we would like to deliver feedback onhow these events affect our company’s reputation, and through it, our mission. Employees across the spectra of gender, ethnicity,seniority, and technical roles have collaborated on this letter. We feel it is imperative to maintain honest and open dialogue with eachother to effectively reach our company’s primary goals together: making SpaceX a great place to work for all, and making humans amultiplanetary species.

As SpaceX employees we are expected to challenge established processes, rapidly innovate to solve complex problems as a team, anduse failures as learning opportunities. Commitment to these ideals is fundamental to our identity and is core to how we have redefined ourindustry. But for all our technical achievements, SpaceX fails to apply these principles to the promotion of diversity, equity, andinclusion with equal priority across the company, resulting in a workplace culture that remains firmly rooted in the status quo.

Individuals and groups of employees at SpaceX have spent significant effort beyond their technical scope to make the company amore inclusive space via conference recruiting, open forums, feedback to leadership, outreach, and more. However, we feel an unequal burdento carry this effort as the company has not applied appropriate urgency and resources to the problem in a manner consistent with ourapproach to critical path technical projects. To be clear: recent events are not isolated incidents; they are emblematic of a widerculture that underserves many of the people who enable SpaceX’s extraordinary accomplishments. As industry leaders, we bear uniqueresponsibility to address this.

Elon’s behavior in the public sphere is a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment for us, particularly in recent weeks.As our CEO and most prominent spokesperson, Elon is seen as the face of SpaceX—every Tweet that Elon sends is a de facto publicstatement by the company. It is critical to make clear to our teams and to our potential talent pool that his messaging does not reflectour work, our mission, or our values.

SpaceX’s current systems and culture do not live up to its stated values, as many employees continue to experience unequalenforcement of our oft-repeated “No Asshole” and “Zero Tolerance” policies. This must change. As a starting point, we areputting forth the following categories of action items, the specifics of which we would like to discuss in person with the executive teamwithin a month:

Publicly address and condemn Elon’s harmful Twitter behavior. SpaceX must swiftly and explicitly separate itself from Elon’s personal brand.

Hold all leadership equally accountable to making SpaceX a great place to work for everyone. Apply a critical eye to issues that prevent employees from fully performing their jobs andmeeting their potential, pursuing specific and enduring actions that are well resourced, transparent, and treated with the same rigor andurgency as establishing flight rationale after a hardware anomaly.

Define and uniformly respond to all forms of unacceptable behavior. Clearly define what exactly is intended by SpaceX’s “no-asshole” and “zero tolerance” policies andenforce them consistently. SpaceX must establish safe avenues for reporting and uphold clear repercussions for all unacceptablebehavior, whether from the CEO or an employee starting their first day.

 

Elon Musk’s Electric Car Batteries Made By Forced Labor Overseas

Increasing ties have been found between the origin of the batteries needed to power the technology and forced labor in Chinese work camps.

Jarryd Jaeger Vancouver, BC

 

As many environmentalists push for a quick transition to electric vehicles and clean energy, increasing ties have been found between the origin of the batteries needed to power the technology and forced labor in Chinese work camps.

One province in particular, Xinjiang, is facing mounting criticism as more details emerge surrounding working conditions for members of the Uyghur Muslim minority.According to the New York Times, while China produces 75 percent of the world’s lithium ion batteries, much of the raw material is mined elsewhere. In recent years, however, the Chinese government has set their sights on controlling all aspects of the supply chain.

In order to compete with other countries, China has ramped up production in the western province of Xinjiang, home to the nation’s Uyghur Muslim minority. 

As the Times reports, companies such as Xinjiang Nonferrous Metal Industry Group have partnered with the Chinese government to move  hundreds of Uyghurs from the south to the industrialized north where they are put to work in mines, smelters, and factories producing lithium, nickel, manganese, beryllium, copper and gold.

While such companies deny that their workers are mistreated, reports show that Uyghurs are subject to what could easily be deemed to be forced labor. 

Uyghurs who refuse to work in accordance with Chinese government policies are often sent to internment camps, and in May it was revealed that many of those camps have a “shoot-to-kill” policy for those who attempt to escape.

Thus, the official claim that “all employment is voluntary” is not supported.

In addition to forced labor, Uyghurs are also subjected to re-education, wherein government-appointed “teachers” attempt to create loyal subjects to the nation and communist regime.

On June 21, a new law will go into effect in the United States called the “Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.” As NPR reports, it gives the US authority to seize goods produced in Xinjiang unless companies can prove they did not engage in forced labor practices.

It’s true that doing so will be resisted by Democrats who don’t want to slow the deployment of solar panels and electric cars in the US, and be resisted by free market Republicans, but the evidence is clear and this is becoming a moral and national security imperative.

— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) June 20, 2022

Environmental realist, author, and California gubernatorial candidate Michael Shellenberger is one of many calling on the Biden administration to go one step further and ban the importation of all goods from Xinjiang. He says the US should instead focus on manufacturing green technology at home. 

As he points out, however, the decision would face pushback from both Democrats “who don’t want to slow the deployment of solar panels and electric cars in the US,” and “free market Republicans.” 

The world has shone a spotlight on the Chinese government’s treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang, but it remains to be seen whether the Communist Party and the companies to which it is so closely tied will change their practices.

Electric car batteries tied to forced labor in China: report

thepostmillennial.com/electric-car-batteries-tied-to-forced-labor-in-china-report

Jarryd Jaeger Vancouver, BC June 20, 2022 7:16 PM 2 mins reading As many environmentalists push for a quick transition to electric vehicles and clean energy, increasing ties have been found between the origin of the batteries needed to power the technology and forced labor in Chinese work camps.

Red Flags for Forced Labor Found in China’s Car Battery Supply Chain

worldnewsera.com/news/entrepreneurs/red-flags-for-forced-labor-found-in-chinas…

The apparel, food and solar industries have already been upended by reports linking their supply chains in Xinjiang to forced labor. Solar companies last year were forced to halt billions of dollars of projects as they investigated their supply chains.

Red Flags for Forced Labor Found in China’s Car Battery Supply Chain

news-universe.com/2022/06/20/red-flags-for-forced-labor-found-in-chinas-car…

China produces three-quarters of the world’s lithium ion batteries, and virtually all of the metals wanted to make them are processed there. Much of the fabric, although, is definitely mined elsewhere, in locations like Argentina, Australia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. … “Forced labor goods are making their way into a really …

Red Flags for Forced Labor Found in China’s Car Battery Supply Chain

nytimes.com/2022/06/20/business/economy/forced-labor-china-supply-chain.html

“No one has been forced to become ‘transferred labor’ in Xinjiang,” Wang Wenbin, a spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry, told reporters in Beijing this month. It is difficult to ascertain the…

Red Flags for Forced Labor Found in China’s Car Battery Supply Chain

dnyuz.com/2022/06/20/red-flags-for-forced-labor-found-in-chinas-car-battery…

“No one has been forced to become ‘transferred labor’ in Xinjiang,” Wang Wenbin, a spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry, told reporters in Beijing this month. It is difficult to ascertain the level of coercion any individual worker has faced given the limited access to Xinjiang for journalists and research firms.

Images lithium batteries forced labor

721 x 420

654 x 368

640 x 359

1169 x 658

550 x 360

1280 x 720

1180 x 663

900 x 600

780 x 439

1200 x 800

736 x 488

1200 x 800

720 x 720

250 x 250

1667 x 810

1100 x 564

900 x 506

600 x 400

1050 x 550

580 x 818

Show all

See more images of lithium batteries forced labor.

Red Flags for Forced Labor Found in China’s Car Battery Supply Chain

newsinsideera.com/business/red-flags-for-forced-labor-found-in-chinas-car…

In principle, the brand new U.S. legislation ought to block all items made with any uncooked supplies which might be related to Xinjiang till they’re confirmed to be freed from slavery or coercive labor practices. But it stays to be seen if the U.S. authorities is keen or in a position to flip away such an array of international items.

Red flags for forced labor found in China’s car battery supply chain

japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/06/21/asia-pacific/forced-labor-china-car-battery

Red flags for forced labor found in China’s car battery supply chain. The entrance to an indoctrination center in Hotan, China on Aug. 4, 2019. In 2017, the regional government announced plans …

The Hidden Risks of Batteries: Child Labor, Modern Slavery, and …

greentechmedia.com/articles/read/green-battery-revolution-powering-social…

Stefan Sabo-Walsh March 29, 2017 The Hidden Risks of Batteries: Child Labor, Modern Slavery, and Weakened Land and Water Rights 18 The meteoric rise of lithium-ion batteries in the transport and IT…

Electric car batteries tied to forced labor in China | O-T Lounge

tigerdroppings.com/rant/o-t-lounge/electric-car-batteries-tied-to-forced…

As many environmentalists push for a quick transition to electric vehicles and clean energy, increasing ties have been found between the origin of the batteries needed to power the technology and forced labor in Chinese work camps. quote: According to the New York Times, while China produces 75 percent of the world’s lithium ion batteries, much …

Child labour behind smart phone and electric car batteries

amnesty.org/…/01/Child-labour-behind-smart-phone-and-electric-car-batteries

Amnesty International and Afrewatch are calling on multinational companies who use lithium-ion batteries in their products to conduct human rights due

These are the steps that the The Public must demand in order to strengthen public integrity by eliminating corrupt financial conflicts in Congress. These “Big Tech Gorilla” abusers steal technology because they can steal technology. They buy politicians, lobbyists and shill reporters to help them get away with it.

Congress must be ordered, by the voters, to eliminate both the appearance and the potential for financial conflicts of interest. Americans must be confident that actions taken by public officials are intended to serve the public, and not those officials. These actions counter-act the corrupt actions taken by tech oligarchs officials in illicit coordination with U.S. Senators.

Small business has experienced all of the damages from each of the abuse-of-power issues listed below. Your public officials are being paid BRIBES through their family stock market holdings. We asked every office of Congress what the worst of the problems are and this is what they told us, below.

CUT THEM OFF – Demand that Congress make it a felony for any politician, judge or regulator to own stocks, or to let their family own stocks. If they want to get rich, they can go into another line of work.

If the public can get these laws made, it will end 90% of American corruption. Politicians won’t allow these laws to be made because it will cut off their corruption. Thus: You have to force the politicians to make these laws and leverage them with investigations and recall elections.

These are the actions needed to resolve this corruption:

• Ban individual stock ownership by Members of Congress, Cabinet Secretaries, senior congressional staff, federal judges, White House staff and other senior agency officials while in office. Prohibit all government officials from holding or trading stock where its value might be influenced by their agency, department, or actions.
• Apply conflict of interest laws to the President and Vice President through the Presidential Conflicts of Interest Act, which would require the President and the Vice President to place conflicted assets, including businesses, into a blind trust to be sold off
• Require senior Department of Energy government officials, employees, contractors and White House staff to divest from privately-owned assets that could present conflicts, including large companies like Tesla, Google, Facebook, Sony, Netflix, etc., and commercial real estate.
• Make it a felony to not respond to a filing by a citizen within 48 hours. Former White House and Energy Department staff use ‘stone-walling’ to intentionally delay responses for a decade, or more.
• Apply ethics rules to all government employees, including unpaid White House staff and advisors.
• Require most executive branch employees to recuse from all issues that might financially benefit themselves or a previous employer or client from the preceding 4 years.
• Create conflict-free investment opportunities for federal officials with new investment accounts managed by the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board and conflict-free mutual funds.
• Close and lock the Revolving Door between industry and government and stop tech companies from buying influence in the government or profiting off of the public service of any official.
• Lifetime ban on lobbying by Presidents, Vice Presidents, Members of Congress, federal judges, and Cabinet Secretaries; and, multi-year bans on all other federal employees from lobbying their former office, department, House of Congress, or agency after they leave government service until the end of the Administration, but at least for 2 years ( and at least 6 years for corporate lobbyists).
• Limit the ability of companies to buy influence through former government officials.
• Require income disclosures from former senior officials 4 years after federal employment.
• Prohibit companies from immediately hiring or paying any senior government official from an agency, department, or Congressional office recently lobbied by that company.
• Prohibit the world’s largest companies, banks, and monopolies (measured by annual revenue or market capitalization) from hiring or paying any former senior government official for 4 years after they leave government service.
• Limit the ability of companies to buy influence through current government employees.
• Prohibit current lobbyists from taking government jobs for 2 years after lobbying; 6 years for corporate lobbyists. Public, written waivers where such hiring is in the national interest are allowed for non-corporate lobbyists only.
• Prohibit corporate outlaws like Google, Tesla, Facebook, Linkedin, Netflix, Sony, etc., from working in government by banning the hiring of top corporate leaders whose companies were caught breaking federal law in the last 6 years.
• Prohibit contractor corruption by blocking federal contractor and licensee employees from working at the agency awarding the contract or license for 4 years.
• Ban “Golden Parachutes” that provide corporate bonuses to executives for federal service.
• Publicly expose all influence-peddling in Washington.
• Strengthen and expand the federal definition of a “lobbyist” to include all individuals paid to influence government.
• Create a new “corporate lobbyist” definition to identify individuals paid to influence government on behalf of for- profit entities and their front-groups.
• Radically expand disclosure of lobbyist activities and influence campaigns by requiring all lobbyists to disclose any specific bills, policies, and government actions they attempt to influence; any meetings with public officials; and any documents they provide to those officials.
• End Influence-Peddling by Foreign Actors such as that which occurred in the ENER1, Severstal, Solyndra and related scandals.
• Fire the Fed officials that own, trade and pump stocks using the Fed itself for profiteering.
• The most senior officials in the U.S. Government are the worshipers of Elon Musk, investor’s in Elon Musk’s companies and suppliers, deciders of the financing for Elon Musk, suppliers of staffing to Elon Musk, recipients of political campaign financing by Elon Musk and Musk’s covert Google And Facebook partnership, social friends of Elon Musk and the attackers of Elon Musk’s competitors. Make this a felony.
• Combat foreign influence in Washington by banning all foreign lobbying.
• End foreign lobbying by Americans by banning American lobbyists from accepting money from foreign governments, foreign individuals, and foreign  companies to influence United States public policy.
• Prohibit current lobbyists from taking government jobs for 2 years after lobbying; 6 years for corporate lobbyists. Public, written waivers where such hiring is in the national interest are allowed for non-corporate lobbyists only.
• End Legalized Lobbyist Bribery and stop lobbyists from trading money for government favors.
• Ban direct political donations from lobbyists to candidates or Members of Congress.
• End lobbyist contingency fees that allow lobbyists to be paid for a guaranteed policy outcome.
• End lobbyist gifts to the executive and legislative branch officials they lobby.
• Strengthen Congressional independence from lobbyists and end Washington’s dependence on
  lobbyists for “expertise” and information.
• Make congressional service sustainable by transitioning Congressional staff to competitive salaries that track other federal employees.
• Reinstate the nonpartisan Congressional Office of Technology Assessment to provide critical scientific and technological support to Members of Congress.
• Level the playing field between corporate lobbyists and government by taxing excessive lobbying beginning at $500,000 in annual lobbying expenditures, and use the proceeds to help finance Congressional mandated rule-making, fund the National Public Advocate, and finance Congressional support agencies.
• De-politicize the rulemaking process and increase transparency of industry efforts to influence federal agencies.
• Require individuals and corporations to disclose funding or editorial conflicts of interest in research submitted to agencies that is not publicly available in peer-reviewed publications.
• Prevent McKinsey-type sham research from undermining the public interest by requiring that studies that present conflicts of interest to undergo independent peer review to be considered in the rule-making process.
• Require agencies to justify withdrawn public interest rules via public, written explanations.
• Close loopholes exploited by powerful corporations like Google, Facebook, Tesla, Netflix, Sony, etc., to block public interest actions.
• Eliminate loopholes that allow corporations, like Tesla and Google, to tilt the rules in their favor and against the public interest.
• Restrict negotiated rule-making to stop industry from delaying or dominating the rule-making process by ending the practice of inviting industry to negotiate rules they have to follow.
• Restrict inter-agency review as a tool for corporate abuse by  banning informal review, establishing a maximum 45-day review period, and blocking closed -door industry lobbying at the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
• Limit abusive injunctions from rogue judges, like Jackson, et al, by ensuring that only Appeals Courts, not individual District Court judges , can temporarily block agencies from implementing final rules.
• Prevent hostile agencies from sham delays of implementation and enforcement by using the presence of litigation to postpone  the implementation of final rules.
• Empower the public to police agencies for corporate capture.
• Increase the ability of the public to make sure their interests are considered when agencies act.
• Create a new Office of the Public Advocate  empowered to assist the public in meaningfully engaging in the rule-making process across the federal government.
• Encourage enforcement by allowing private lawsuits from members of the public to hold agencies accountable for failing to complete rules or enforce the law, and to hold corporations accountable for breaking the rules.
• Inoculate government agencies against corporate capture such as Google undertook against the White House.
• Provide agencies with the tools and resources to implement strong rules that reflect the will of Congress and protect the public.
• Boost agency resources to level the playing field between corporate lobbyists and federal agencies by using the proceeds of the tax on excessive lobbying and the anti-corruption penalty fees to help finance Congress-mandated rule-making and facilitate decisions by agencies that are buried in an avalanche of lobbyist activity.
• Reform judicial review to prevent corporations from gaming the courts by requiring courts to presumptively defer to agency interpretations of laws and prohibiting courts from considering sham McKinsey studies and research excluded by agencies from the rule-making process.
• Reverse the Congressional Review Act provision banning related rules that prevent agencies from implementing the will of Congress based on Congress’ prior disapproval of a different, narrow rule on a similar topic.
• Improve judicial integrity and defend access to justice for all Americans.
• Strengthen Judicial Ethics Requirements.
• Enhance the integrity of the judicial branch by strengthening rules that prevent conflicts of interest.
• Ban individual stock ownership by federal judges.
• Expand rules prohibiting judges from accepting gifts or payments to attend private seminars from private individuals and corporations.
• Require ethical behavior by the Supreme Court by directing the Court to follow the Code of Conduct that binds all other federal judges.
• Boost the transparency of Federal Courts.
• Enhance public insight into the judicial process by increasing information about the process and reducing barriers to accessing information.
• Increase disclosure of non-judicial activity by federal judges by requiring the Judicial Conference to publicly post judges’ financial reports, recusal decisions, and speeches.
• Enhance public access to court activity by mandating that federal appellate courts live-stream, on the web, audio of their proceedings, making case information easily-accessible to the public free of charge, and requiring federal courts to share case assignment data in bulk.
• Eliminate barriers that restrict access to justice to all but the wealthiest individuals and companies.
• Reduce barriers that prevent individuals from having their case heard in court by restoring pleading standards that make it easier for individuals and businesses that have been harmed to make their case before a judge.
• Encourage diversity on the Federal Bench.
• Strengthen the integrity of the judicial branch by increasing the focus on personal and professional diversity of the federal bench.
• Create a single, new, and independent agency dedicated to enforcing federal ethics and anti-corruption laws.
• Support stronger ethics and public integrity laws with stronger enforcement.
• Establish the new, independent U.S. Office of Public Integrity, which will strengthen federal ethics enforcement with new investigative and disciplinary powers.
• Investigate potential violations by any individual or entity, including individuals and companies with new subpoena authority.
• Enforce the nation’s ethics laws by ordering corrective action, levying civil and administrative penalties, and referring egregious violations to the Justice Department for criminal arrest and enforcement.
• Receive and investigate ethics complaints from members of the public.
• Absorb the U.S. Office of Government Ethics as a new Government Ethics Division tasked with providing confidential advice to federal employees seeking ethics guidance.
• Consolidate anti-corruption and public integrity oversight over federal officials, including oversight of all agency Inspectors General, all ethics matters for White House staff and agency heads, and all waivers and recusals by senior government officials.
• Remain independent and protected from partisan politics through a single Director operating under strict selection, appointment, and removal criteria.
• Provide easy online access to key government ethics and transparency documents, including financial disclosures; lobbyist registrations; lobbyist disclosures of meetings and materials; and all ethics records, recusals, and waivers.
• Maintain a new government-wide Office of the Public Advocate, which would advocate for the public interest in executive branch rule-making.
• Enforce federal open records and FOIA requirements by maintaining the central FOIA website and working with the National Archives to require agencies to comply with FOIA.
• Strengthen legislative branch enforcement.
• Expand an independent and empowered ethics office insulated from congressional politics.
• Expand and empower the U.S. Office of Congressional Ethics, which will enforce the nation’s ethics laws in the Congress  and the entire Legislative Branch, including the U.S. Senate.
• Conduct investigations of potential violations of ethics laws and rules by Members of Congress and staff with new subpoena power.
• Refer criminal and civil violations to the Justice Department, the Office of Public Integrity, or other relevant state or federal law enforcement.
• Recommend disciplinary and corrective action to the House and Senate Ethics Committees.
• Boost transparency in government and fix Federal Open Records laws, public official and candidate tax disclosure.
• Disclose basic tax return information for candidates for federal elected office and current elected officials.
• Require the IRS to release tax returns for Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates from the previous 8 years and during each year in federal elected office.
• Require the IRS to release t ax returns for Congressional candidates from the previous 2 years and during each year in federal elected office.
• Require the IRS to release tax returns and other financial information of businesses owned by senior federal officials and candidates for federal office.
• Require the IRS to release tax filings for nonprofit organizations run by candidates for federal office.
• Disclose the Cash behind Washington Advocacy and Lobbying.
• Prevent special interests from using secret donations from corporations and billionaires to influence public policy  without disclosure.
• Require nonprofit organizations to list donors who bankrolled the production of any specific rule-making comment, congressional testimony, or lobbying material, and to reveal whether the donors reviewed or edited the document.
• Require individuals and corporations to disclose funding or editorial conflicts of interest in research submitted to agencies that is not publicly available in peer-reviewed publications.
• Prevent sham research, like that from DNC shill McKinsey Consulting, from undermining the public interest by requiring that studies that present conflicts of interest to independent peer review to be considered in the rule-making process.
• Improve the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
• Close the loopholes in our open records laws that allow federal officials to hide tech industry and Silicon Valley oligarch industry influence.
• Codify the default presumption of disclosure and affirmatively disclose records of public interest, including meeting agendas; government contracts; salaries; staff diversity; and reports to Congress.
• Require all agencies to use a central FOIA website that is searchable and has downloadable open records databases with  all open FOIA requests and all records disclosed through FOIA.
• Strengthen FOIA enforcement by limiting FOIA exemptions and loopholes, and by giving the National Archives the authority to overrule agency FOIA decisions and to compel disclosure.
• Extend FOIA to private-sector federal contractors, including private federal prisons and immigration detention centers, and require large federal contractors to disclose political spending.
• Make Congress more transparent by ending the corporate lobbyists leg up in the legislative process. The public deserves to know what Congress is up to and how lobbyists influence legislation.
• Require all congressional committees to immediately post online more information, including hearings and markup schedules, bill or amendments text, testimonies, documents entered into the hearing record, hearing transcripts, written witness answers, and hearing audio and video recordings.
• Require Members of Congress to post a link to their searchable voting record on their official websites.
• Require lobbyists to disclose when they lobby a specific congressional office; specific topics of visit; the official action being requested; and all documents provided to the office during the visit.

Do these seem like common-sense rules that should have already been in place? They are!

These anti-corruption rules have been blocked by your own public officials because they work for themselves and not you!

News And Reports:

Report: Over 131 Federal Judges Broke The Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had A Financial Interest

https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-stock-act-violations-senate-house-trading-2021-9

71 Members of Congress Caught Violating Law on Stock Trades

congressional stock report lobbying federal government 4×3 … $200 is the standard amount — or waived by House or Senate ethics officials.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/why-members-of-congress-should-not-trade-stocks

Why Members of Congress Should Not Trade Stocks – Bloomberg Law

Insider trading is a felony, but it is also difficult to prove. In 2012 Congress passed the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act (STOCK …

https://www.closeup.org/should-members-of-congress-be-banned-from-trading-stocks/

Should Members of Congress Be Banned from Trading Stocks?

They’re also the ones in charge of creating federal policy. The STOCK Act prohibits members of Congress from buying or selling stock on the …

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/04/members-of-congress-increasingly-receptive-to-stock-trading-ban/

Members of Congress increasingly receptive to stock trading ban

Members of Congress may soon be barred from trading stocks while in office as bipartisan support for a stock trading ban continues to grow.

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2022/01/21/lawmakers-stock-trading-ban-legislation-hawley-ossoff-pelosi

Lawmakers can trade stocks, but many push for change – NY1

The bill itself does not ban members of Congress from trading stocks, but requires certain government officials – like lawmakers, the president …

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/18/opinion/congress-stock-trading-ban.html

Members of Congress Should Not be Trading Stocks, Ever

It has been a decade since Congress last made a significant effort at policing itself in this area. The Stock Act of 2012, among other measures, …

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2022/01/congress-stock-trading-ban/621402/

The Bill That Congress Might Be Embarrassed Enough to Pass

Yet the supporters of a ban on lawmaker stock trading still have a ways to go. Public support for a bill can mask broader private opposition, …

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/09/congress-moves-towards-banning-members-from-trading-stocks.html

Congress moves to ban stock trading by members as Pelosi … – CNBC

After months of resistance, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has greenlighted a plan to ban members of Congress fromtrading stock, CNBC confirmed …

Places Where You Can Research Ant-Corruption Tools:

http://www.majestic111.com
http://vcracket.weebly.com
https://www.transparency.org

http://www.giaccentre.org/dealing_with_corruption.php
http://www.acfe.com/
https://www.oas.org/juridico/english/FightCur.html
https://www.opus.com/international-anti-corruption-day-businesses/
https://www.opengovpartnership.org/theme/anti-corruption
https://www.ethicalsystems.org/content/corruption
https://sunlightfoundation.com/
http://www.googletransparencyproject.org/
http://xyzcase.weebly.com
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelgate
https://www.opensecrets.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation
http://www.projectveritasaction.com