Category: FTC-Federal Trade Commission

Biden’s FTC Sues Largest Christian University in the U.S.

CATHERINE SALGADO | 10:25 AM ON DECEMBER 29, 2023
SEE: https://pjmedia.com/catherinesalgado/2023/12/29/bidens-ftc-sues-biggest-us-christian-university-n4925082; republished below in full, unedited, for informational, educational, & research purposes:
AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File
The Biden administration’s Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has piled on Grand Canyon University in Phoenix, Arizona. 

Fox Business reported on Dec. 27 that the FTC had sued Grand Canyon University (GCU). Biden’s Department of Education (DOE) had already fined GCU a staggering amount, almost $40 million, claiming the school practiced false advertising. The university is accusing the feds of a coordinated attack. An FTC press release announced the lawsuit against not only GCU but also “its marketer Grand Canyon Education, Inc. and its president and CEO Brian Mueller, claiming the defendants used deceptive advertising and engaged in illegal telemarketing.”

The federal agency is accusing the Christian university of misleading potential doctoral students about the time required for completing the GCU accelerated program. GCU is also accused of deceptively marketing itself to students as a nonprofit and “illegally call[ing] prospective students who submitted their contact information on the school's website but requested not to be contacted.”

The FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection director pretended to take a high moral tone in a statement. “Grand Canyon deceived students by holding itself out as a non-profit institution and misrepresenting the costs and number of courses required to earn doctoral degrees,” Samuel Levine pontificated. “We will continue to aggressively pursue those who seek to take advantage of students.”

GCU allegedly violated the FTC Act and Telemarketing Sale Rules. The feds are now aiming to force GCU to compensate individuals through a U.S. District Court in Arizona. GCU spokesman Brian Mueller previously told Fox he believes the Biden administration is unfairly attacking GCU.

Mueller has argued the federal investigations are tied to the DOE denying GCU's effort to convert into a nonprofit institution in 2018. The department denied GCU’s nonprofit status for purposes of federal student financial aid, which continues to classify the school as a for-profit entity.

In a press conference last month, Mueller vowed GCU would appeal the DOE's fine — the largest the agency has ever issued — and said the school does not mislead or deceive students in any way.

Is the Biden administration deliberately targeting a Christian institution of higher learning? Even if GCU is guilty of some or all of the charges, it is interesting that it is being targeted at a time when multiple famous leftist universities like Harvard are being exposed as hotbeds of pro-terrorist, antisemitic insanity. The Biden administration is suddenly excessively zealous about upholding laws when it comes to targeting Christian GCU. Does it care equally about students who marched in support of attempted genocide against Jews and university presidents who supported them?

Of course, pro-terrorist propaganda is outside of the FTC’s province. But the Biden administration in general seems to have its priorities out of whack.

FTC Sues Amazon For Illegally Maintaining Monopoly Power

FTC Sues Amazon For Illegally Maintaining Monopoly Power

This picture shows the Amazon logo at one of the company's centre in Bretigny-sur-Orge on November 28, 2019. (Photo by Thomas SAMSON / AFP) (Photo by THOMAS SAMSON/AFP via Getty Images)
This picture shows the Amazon logo at one of the company’s centre in Bretigny-sur-Orge on November 28, 2019. (Photo by Thomas SAMSON / AFP) (Photo by THOMAS SAMSON/AFP via Getty Images)

OAN’s Sophia Flores
12:07 PM – Tuesday, September 26, 2023

SEE: https://www.oann.com/newsroom/ftc-sues-amazon-for-illegally-maintaining-monopoly-power/;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and 17 state attorneys general have filed an antitrust lawsuit against the E-commerce company, Amazon.

On Tuesday, the FTC and the 17 state attorneys general accused Amazon of illegally maintaining its monopoly power to “inflate prices, degrade quality, and stifle innovation for consumers and business.”

The states that joined the FTC lawsuit were Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin.

“Our complaint lays out how Amazon has used a set of punitive and coercive tactics to unlawfully maintain its monopolies,” FTC Chair Lina Khan said in a statement. “The complaint sets forth detailed allegations noting how Amazon is now exploiting its monopoly power to enrich itself while raising prices and degrading service for the tens of millions of American families who shop on its platform and the hundreds of thousands of businesses that rely on Amazon to reach them.”

Additionally, the lawsuit alleges that the world’s largest online retailer is operating without competition in two markets, which in turn is allowing the company to conduct “monopolistic practices.”

However, Amazon released a counterstatement after the suit was announced, calling the legal action wrong and accusing the FTC of losing focus of its original mission.

“Today’s suit makes clear the FTC’s focus has radically departed from its mission of protecting consumers and competition,” Amazon said. “The practices the FTC is challenging have helped to spur competition and innovation across the retail industry, and have produced greater selection, lower prices, and faster delivery speeds for Amazon customers and greater opportunity for the many businesses that sell in Amazon’s store.”

The announcement follows a separate legal action taken against Amazon by the FTC earlier this year.

In June, the E-commerce company was accused of utilizing deceitful tactics in order to trick millions of customers into enrolling in its Prime subscription service.

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts

For the “crime” of promoting vitamin D during covid, a Missouri doctor faces $500 billion in FTC fines

Image: For the “crime” of promoting vitamin D during covid, a Missouri doctor faces $500 billion in FTC fines

St. Louis County chiropractor first in US charged under new COVID-19 act

BY ETHAN HUFF

SEE: https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-11-22-missouri-doctor-500-billion-fines-vitamind-covid.html;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

(Natural News) The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) wants half a trillion dollars from Dr. Eric Nepute, a Missouri doctor and chiropractor who allegedly violated the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act by telling people they could take vitamin D and zinc in order to stay healthy throughout the plandemic.

Because Nepute also sold vitamin D and zinc – many chiropractors sell vitamins and dietary supplements to patients who want them – the FTC is accusing him of committing fraud.

“The federal government is suing me for half a trillion dollars … for telling people to take vitamins,” Nepute says about this latest political circus and abuse of taxpayer dollars by the feds.

Nepute’s case is scheduled to go to trial in Missouri federal court next March. A jury will decide if the FTC’s 27-page complaint against him, which was issued in April 2021, holds any merit.

The 41-year-old licensed chiropractor owns and operates the Nepute Wellness Center in St. Louis. He also owns Quickwork, a limited liability company that does business under the name of “Wellness Warrior.”

That Wellness Warrior entity advertised, promoted, and sold a product called “Wellness Warrior Vita D,” along with other products, that contain anti-covid ingredients such as vitamin D and zinc.

“Starting no later than June 2020, [Nepute] began advertising a protocol that customers should follow to protect against, prevent, or treat COVID-19,” the FTC complaint states. “This protocol, which has varied over time, advises consumers to take [daily] substantial quantities of emulsified Vitamin D3 and zinc.”

According to the FTC, there are “no published studies” that “prove Vitamin D protects against, treats, or prevents COVID-19.”

Like the FDA, the FTC doesn’t want Americans to stay healthy with natural vitamins and minerals

Truth be told, there are no published studies that suggest covid “vaccines” protect against, treat, or prevent the Fauci Flu either. In fact, a bulk of available evidence suggests that the jabs make things worse for a person’s immune system.

There is, however, plenty of evidence that points to vitamin D is effective against colds and the flu, which is basically all the Chinese Virus ever was (with a few bio-engineered modifications).

Even so, the FTC says Nepute’s “lack of factual or scientific bases for these claims [are] frequently accompanied by equally unsupported assertions regarding applicable science.”

“In short,” the FTC adds in its complaint, “defendants are selling their products by disseminating information, exploiting fears [amid] a pandemic, and posting a significant risk to public health and safety.”

Once again, these are all the very same things that Rochelle Walensky at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Tony Fauci at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) did concerning face masks, stay-at-home orders, the jabs, and more.

None of those interventions bear anything scientific to support them, and all of them were propagated to the masses to stoke fear and panic. And yet the FTC is not going after any of them, nor is it going after the likes of Pfizer and Moderna for lying about the safety and efficacy of their covid injections.

The reason is that the federal deep state and its Big Pharma partners are a protected class that owns the “science” on all matters. Only they are allowed to produce “cures,” in other words.

“The only reason they’re coming after me – and they said this – is because I’m the first doctor they went after, and they want to set a precedent,” Nepute says. “They said they wouldn’t stop until they had ‘blood on their sword.’ That’s literally from the FTC’s mouth.”

The latest news about the federal government’s crusade against vitamins and dietary supplements can be found at Tyranny.news.

Sources for this article include:

TheEpochTimes.com

NaturalNews.com

 

Two Federal Agencies DOJ & FTC Investigating Musk’s Purchase of Twitter Shares~MUSK PUTS ABRUPT HOLD ON PURCHASE

UPDATE:

Elon Musk drops Twitter deal bombshell; PUTS HOLD ON PURCHASE

Two Federal Agencies Investigating Musk’s Purchase of Twitter Shares

BY BOB ADELMANN

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/two-federal-agencies-investigating-musks-purchase-of-twitter-shares/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Just when he thought he might escape a federal investigation into his purchase of shares of Twitter, Elon Musk now has two government agencies looking into his initial purchase of shares of the social-media company back in March.

Open Markets Institute (OMI), a George Soros-backed liberal think tank, released a statement in April asking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to look into Musk’s takeover of Twitter. OMI said “it believes the deal poses a number of immediate and direct threats to American democracy and free speech. Open Markets believes the deal violates existing law, and that the [FCC], the [DOJ], and the [FTC] have ample authority to block it.”

FCC commissioner Brendan Carr rejected the request:

The FCC has no authority to block Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter, and to suggest otherwise is absurd.… We will not entertain these types of frivolous argument[s].

In an interview with Fox News on Tuesday, Carr supported Musk’s purchase:

I’m hopeful that Elon Musk is going to bend Twitter’s content moderation toward a greater embrace of free speech.

No such support was forthcoming from the other two agencies. Instead, the FTC and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) each have launched their own investigations into Musk’s initial purchases of shares that were later followed by his offer to buy the entire company.

 

According to the Wall Street Journal, Musk violated an SEC rule requiring timely disclosure of more than five percent of the company’s outstanding shares. He had until March 24 to file that disclosure.

 

He didn’t file it until April 4.

Daniel Taylor, an accounting professor at the University of Pennsylvania, thinks the SEC has a strong case against Musk but doubts that they will pursue it:

The case is easy. It’s straightforward.

But whether they’re going to pick that battle with Elon is another question.

Musk got sideways with the SEC earlier when he Tweeted that he had arranged enough financing to take Tesla private. The SEC fined him $20 million and requires him not to Tweet about Tesla without first getting his attorney’s approval. Musk says the SEC pressured him into pleading guilty, threatening to bombard him and his company with endless lawsuits unless he complied.

Jill Fisch, a securities and law professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Law School, said that it’s unlikely the SEC would attempt to derail the agreement at this late date. The board has already endorsed and approved the purchase, and the SEC lacks the power to stop such “take-private” transactions, according to Fisch.

Aron Solomon, the chief legal analyst for Esquire Digital, a lead-generating company for attorneys, agrees: “There is no way that the SEC, the DOJ, or any other similarly-situated body will even consider laying a finger on this deal.” It is simply “too big to fail,” said Solomon, adding that intervention “at this point would [hurt] the existing shareholders whose shares Musk is acquiring.”

The Federal Trade Commission is also investigating Musk for failing to file certain reports to various anti-trust agencies that he was taking a substantial stake in Twitter. Those rules don’t apply to passive investors, but when Musk filed that he was seeking to take over the company, the rules kicked in.

Related article:

Who’s Afraid of Elon Musk?

Now the FTC Is Going After Musk Over Twitter

Elon Musk To FIRE 1000 WOKE Twitter Employees!!!

It’s being widely reported that Elon Musk is poised to fire upwards of a thousand woke Twitter employees! We’re going to look at those reports, we’re going to see how they’re being complimented by a massive surge in new applicants to Twitter, and stick with me to the very end of this video when I’ll reveal what this all means for the future of wokeism in America; you are NOT going to want to miss this!

Musk Puts Twitter Staff on Notice

FCC Commissioner on Musk/Twitter: The FCC Has No Authority to Step in and Block This Transaction

Elon Musk Exposes the puppet masters behind the Twitter censorship

BY ROBERT SPENCER

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/robert-spencer/2022/05/08/now-the-ftc-is-going-after-musk-over-twitter-n1596125;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

How much do the political elites hate the freedom of speech? Enough to pull out all the stops to prevent self-professed “free speech absolutist” Elon Musk from taking over Twitter. Now the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is stepping in to “review” Musk’s purchase of Twitter, looking into whether or not the takeover violates antitrust laws.

Yes, you read that right. Fox News reported Thursday that the FTC is “setting up a deadline for a possible antitrust review.” According to the FTC itself, “for over 100 years, the antitrust laws have had the same basic objective: to protect the process of competition for the benefit of consumers, making sure there are strong incentives for businesses to operate efficiently, keep prices down, and keep quality up.” By that standard, the FTC should be thrilled at the prospect of Musk taking over Twitter, as his commitment to the freedom of speech is a sharp departure from the monochrome Leftism of Google, Facebook, and Twitter as we have known it up to now. Musk doesn’t threaten competition; he represents competition.

If the FTC is genuinely worried about protecting “the process of competition for the benefit of consumers,” it should be investigating the other social media giants for their lockstep enforcement of policies that restrict the speech of those who dissent from the Left’s agenda. That’s the real monopoly here, and it is Elon Musk who has broken it.

If Musk owned a number of other social media companies, the FTC might have some cause for concern. But Tesla makes electric cars. SpaceX is all about space exploration. Neuralink is a neuroscience company. The Boring Company is devoted to developing high-speed travel methods. Musk’s purchase of Twitter will bring the number of social media companies he owns to one.

So why is the FTC even considering an antitrust review of Twitter? The answer is obvious: the FTC is part of today’s political establishment, which is dominated by Leftists who don’t believe in the freedom of speech and are trying to destroy it in the name of stamping out “hate speech” and disinformation. The FTC today is full of people who believe that Old Joe Biden’s Disinformation Governance Board is a grand idea and that their friends, colleagues, and allies ought to have the power to silence anyone who says things they believe are false, hateful, or damaging in whatever way.

Also part of this establishment is the Open Markets Institute, which claims to “address threats to our democracy, individual liberties, and our national security from today’s unprecedented levels of corporate concentration and monopoly power.” Yet instead of fighting against the social media giants’ monopoly of Leftist speech restrictions, OMI Director Barry Lynn is going after Musk’s acquisition of Twitter. Lynn stated, “The Open Markets Institute believes the deal poses a number of immediate and direct threats to American democracy and free speech. Open Markets also believes the deal violates existing law, and that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) have ample authority to block it.”

Related: Twitter Employee Is ‘Broken’ Over Elon Musk

This is a rancid pile of hooey, and Lynn likely knows that. The FTC may well block the deal, but if it does, it will be because the establishment determines that such a block would be the most effective way it can deal with the problem Musk presents, not because it actually has the authority to do so or because there is any actual justification for not allowing the deal to go through.

Even worse is Lynn’s claim that Musk’s purchase of Twitter “poses a number of immediate and direct threats to American democracy and free speech.” This is straight-up Orwellian “War Is Peace” territory. Twitter right now is a far-Left propaganda platform on which saying that a man can’t be a woman (although that has relaxed somewhat since news of Musk’s acquisition) and that there was chicanery involved in the 2020 presidential election can get you banned. Innumerable people who have spoken out in various ways against the Left’s fantasies and delusions have been banned; others remain but are heavily shadowbanned, which means that they might as well be gone, as hardly anyone ever sees what they say aside from a few people of like mind.

If Barry Lynn had an ounce of genuine concern for “democracy and free speech,” he would long ago have gone on record denouncing Twitter. But no, he waited until the “free speech absolutist” was poised to take control of Twitter to claim that the free speech defender himself was a threat to free speech. This shows how much contempt Leftists have for their followers: will they believe that the defender of free speech is a threat to free speech? Sure they will. They’ll swallow anything.

And so we have the free speech defenders warning about the free speech absolutist, and the FTC contemplating a move against the man who is breaking up a monopoly. That’s the world we live in today.