In navolging van Ziggo maakt ook provider Online nu de tarieven bekend per 1 juli 2024. Prijsvergelijker Breedbandwinkel meldt dat alle abonnementen simpelweg 4,50 euro per maand duurder worden. Dit geldt voor zowel de DSL abonnementen als de Online glasvezelabonnementen over het netwerk van KPN en DELTA Fiber.

In navolging van onder andere Ziggo en Online maakt vandaag ook KPN de prijsverhogingen bekend die per 1 juli 2024 gaan gelden. Prijsvergelijker Breedbandwinkel meldt dat de prijsverhoging neerkomt op maximaal 2,00 euro per maand voor internet, afhankelijk van het abonnement. Er wordt gerekend met een inflatiecorrectie van 3,8%.

Ziggo past per 1 juli 2024 een inflatiecorrectie toe op de tarieven voor internet, tv en vast bellen. Internet en tv vergelijker Breedbandwinkel meldt dat internet 1,00 euro duurder wordt per maand. Voor tv en vast bellen geldt elk een prijsverhoging van 0,50 euro per maand. De prijsverhoging geldt voor alle ruim 3 miljoen Ziggo klanten.

A well-crafted collection of songs that proves two heads can be better than one.

New thinking in online fulfilment order picking that combines long established warehouse ‘wave’ picking techniques with state-of-the-art sorting robots is delivering eye-catching improvements in picking rates, says Frazer Watson, Global Vice President of Rainbow Dynamics.

The lineup is intended to spotlight party moderates while underlining a central theme of the Republican gathering: President Bush's response to the Sept. 11 attacks.

The Tulsa Law Review will host a special symposium issue of the law review as part of a commemoration of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre with a one-day live/hybrid event on May 21 and publication of the papers in September 2021.

During the Tulsa Race Massacre, which occurred May 31–June 1, 1921, a white mob attacked residents, homes and businesses in the predominantly Black Greenwood district of Tulsa, Oklahoma. The event remains one of the worst incidents of racial violence in U.S. history and one of the least-known; news reports were largely squelched, despite the fact that hundreds of people were believed to have been killed and thousands left homeless.

May 21 @ 9:00 am - 5:00 pm

Virtual Event Free: Register Here

This one-day conference will feature the work of law professors, artists, poets, Black Wall Street business owners and historians.

Suzette Malveaux, provost professor of civil rights law at the University of Colorado School of Law, will provide the keynote address. For six years, Malveaux served as pro bono counsel to the plaintiffs in Alexander v. State of Oklahoma, a suit filed against Tulsa by victims of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre. As part of a team of attorneys, she represented the victims before the federal courts, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (Organization of American States) and the U.S. House of Representatives.

Other featured law professors will include Keeva Terry of Howard University School of Law; andre cummings of the Bowen School of Law at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock; Amos Jones, executive director of the African American Trust for Historic Preservation; Angela Addae of the University of Oregon School of Law; and many others. Confirmed participants include Dwight Eaton, a descendant and owner of Black Wall Street Liquid Lounge; TU Professor Kristen Oertel, who will present a talk titled Black Indians, Red Dirt: A Brief History of African Americans in Indian and Oklahoma Territories, 1840–1907; and Professor DeWayne Dickens, who will present a talk titled Learning from Greenwood: When Voices Are Silenced.

 The United States invented the Rule of Law through the fragmentation of sovereignty among 51 sovereign authorities each with three branches of government. It further protects individual rights from state and federal infringement. This effectively created a legal system that could all state actors to account before law. While still imperfect in many important ways, Donald Trump took a sledgehammer to the Rule of Law particularly since January 6, 2021.

Today in America the rule of law faces severe challenges and may well face a total sunset. If so, the Supreme Court of the United States played a central role as accomplice. Most notably, today granted review (certiorari) on the following question: Whether and if so to what extent does a former President enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office. That question in the abstract may hold academic interest, but the answer lies in many disputes in the future over decades or even centuries. 

Prof. Laurence Tribe, a legendary Constitutional Law scholar, explains the effect of this action:

The Supreme Court effectively gives Trump the potential to now escape any accountability for his role in the insurrection of January 6, 2021. This order puts partisan politics above the Rule of Law. A very dark day for America.

Today, the United States Supreme Court obliterated the Fourteenth Amendment, section 3, in Trump v. Anderson. The language of this section appears simple enough:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

The Court held that: "the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the States, responsible for enforcing Section 3." More specifically, the Court held that only Congress may enforce the disqualification of section 3 and that states could only enforce the provision against state candidates for office and state officeholders. Otherwise the nation would face a risk of a patchwork of state outcomes. This, despite the fact that in 1868, shortly after the provision became law, the Governor of the State of Georgia disqualified a federal candidate for office. (See fn 3).

Further, if "only" Congress holds power to enforce section 3 then why did the drafters of the Amendment just insert an "only" in the section granting Congress power. The Court needs that "only" and it simply does not exist. Rather than apply the plain meaning the Court instead pretends there is an only when there is no such word. Section 5 plainly states: "The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article." The Court did violence to the statute to protect Donald Trump.

Former Fourth Circuit Judge J. Michael Luttig, a prominent conservative jurist explains:

The Supreme Court did leave one last avenue for accountability under law that the Biden Administration or DOJ Special Counsel Jack Smith could use to disqualify Trump. 18 U.S.C. section 2383 provides:

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

The Court cited this section with approval. It would provide a uniform federal solution. And, it arises from an exercise of Congressional power. Even this Court (which works overtime to protect Trump) would uphold such an action. 

Why did Jack Smith (or Attorney General Merrick Garland before him) fail to use this section against the obvious insurrectionist Donald Trump? Or, alternatively, why not bring such an action tomorrow morning? Colorado would provide a form indictment and a trial map, complete with comprehensive evidence?

So, the Court today shifted the spotlight to DOJ with today's SCOTUS ruling. Agreement or disagreement with the Court's opinion no longer matters. Many excellent arguments support the use of section 3 in precisely the manner of Colorado. All moot.

Why did DOJ fail (and continue to fail) to seek disqualification through a criminal action a criminal action? 

The most disturbing and vivid reality of all of this: law failed to hold Trump to account as an oath breaking insurrectionist despite many available pathways.

 

 

Currently, the nation and perhaps the world struggles with the recent jury verdict against Donald Trump finding him guilty of 34 felony counts. Trump claims that the verdict proves Joe Biden uses the criminal justice system as a political tool intended to defeat his political opponents, in this case him. On the other hand, many take the position that the case demonstrates the triumph of the rule of law because it proves that even the most privileged and powerful of citizens must ultimately reckon with legal accountability. I opt for the conclusion that the case exemplifies a healthy rule of law operating to impose reasonable and predictable accountability and consequences for even the most powerful governing elites in American today for the following six reasons.

First, and foremost, the guilty verdict reflects the unanimous conclusion of 12 jurors, after careful deliberation and judicial instruction, empaneled pursuant to pre-announced New York Law. Donald Trump, like all criminal defendants, held the power to refuse a limited number of jurors without cause and to move to strike jurors for cause. The jurors hailed from Trump's former home state and the headquarters of the Trump Organization—New York. It is noteworthy that not a single juror dissented from the verdict and that they reached the verdict without any judicial cajoling through, for example, an Allen charge. The jury questioned the evidence and the instructions to assure they acted properly. They deliberated about 12 hours after spending five weeks listening to witness testimony and reviewing other evidence including extensive documents. Trump's high-powered legal team exercised their right to cross-examine witnesses, explain away evidence and submit their own exculpatory evidence. Despite these rights, the best legal team money could buy failed to raise any reasonable doubt with even one juror, on even one count, regarding Trump’s guilt.

Second, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg holds a well-earned reputation as a professional prosecutor who gets the job done and gets it done professionally. Recall that Bragg endured severe criticism for declining to prosecute Trump for tax fraud in 2022, prompting two prosecutors to resign. Bragg apparently found the case against Trump too risky to warrant pursuit. Instead, he meticulously built this case which proved bullet-proof. Bragg won his office through an election of local voters and does not work for Joe Biden or even the federal government. The man holds total legal independence from the Biden Administration and proved himself as a non-partisan prosecutor by letting Trump walk on other fraud charges in 2022. The fact that he sought a Grand Jury indictment against Trump on this case suggests that there was probable cause that Trump committed the crimes—a fact that the jury's verdict fully vindicates.

Third, Justice Juan Merchan presided over the entire Trump matter with appropriate judicial restraint. Given Trump’s contemptuous misconduct and constant threats of violence against the judge, his family, his staff and the jury, Merchan certainly held the power to imprison Trump for contempt. He held his fire and allowed the jury to do its job. Despite Fox “News” reports to the contrary, the evidence suggests the Judge ruled on objections and other procedural matters with judicious wisdom. He righteously rejected Trump’s efforts to dismiss the charges, as proven by the unanimous jury verdict on all counts. Again, Merchan, a New York state judge, holds total legal independence from the Biden Administration and, Trump and his team produced zero evidence that Biden even attempted to influence Merchan.

Fourth, Trump himself knew he faced an uphill battle once he decided not to testify and take the stand to declare his innocence. Due to Trump’s decision the jury never heard Trump deny the charges, claim innocence or explain the mountain of evidence against him in the form of witnesses, key documents, or the tape-recording directing Cohen to pay Daniels by check. In fact, there was no defense theory of the case. Trump would not exude credibility as a witness due to his history of fraud, and he would risk a finding of perjury if he claimed innocence under oath or if he simply made-up stories on the stand. In any event, many defendants face challenges testifying on their own behalf, but Trump made that call, not Joe Biden.

Fifth, after reviewing the jury instructions, I saw no error, in that the instructions fairly reflect governing law in New York. While some complain reasonably that the jury was not required to identify the precise crime that transforms misdemeanor falsification of records into a felony, there is Supreme Court authority in support of this. Juries typically do not need to identify with particularity (nor even agree upon a particular predicate crime) a predicate crime to a felony charge; here the crime Trump intended to further with false business records. The US Supreme Court might well make up some means of saving Donald Trump (see Trump v. United States and Trump v. Anderson). Justice Merchan, however, cannot read the minds of the conservative Court majority and it is not his job to predict ways the Supreme Court can throw lifelines to former President Trump. Merchan’s instructions reflect the law today and that is the goal of jury instructions, not to craft new innovations to save Trump.

Sixth, all the cries of conspiracy theory and a rigged justice system from Trump and his minions lack any evidentiary foundation. They produced zero evidence that Joe Biden masterminded this entire prosecution. The claim is facially absurd. Biden did not set up Trumps illicit and adulterous liaisons, Trump did. Biden did not meet with David Pecker to set up a scheme to hide Trump’s prior bad acts in the run-up to election 2016. Trump signed the checks reimbursing Cohen the hush money paid to Trump’s co-adulterers. Trump can only blame Trump for his 34 felony convictions.

In light of the above, I conclude that Donald Trump enjoyed all the due process the US Constitution accords criminal defendants. Of course, with his billions, Trump can afford the very best lawyers which most defendants cannot. As former President, Trump enjoys the right to argue before many justices he appointed which most defendants do not. From a rule of law perspective the case proves that even the richest and most politically powerful must answer for their crimes.

 Donald Trump promises to sign an Executive Order on day one of his new term abolishing Birthright Citizenship. This will trigger litigation thar promises to land in Trump's Supreme Court for final adjudication, Assuming Trump prevails there, the GOP already introduced a Bill to abolish Birthright Citizenship legislatively. JD Vance co-sponsored that Bill. This amounts to an historically unprecedented assault on virtually every American's Citizenship. 

Amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify that no child is eligible for birthright citizenship if their parents are unlawfully present in the United States, present in the U.S. for diplomatic purposes, or engaged in a hostile operation against the U.S.

Notably, the Act proposed by Vance includes no limitation on this "clarification" of who enjoys citizenship and who does not. The Act includes no limitation on retroactive effect and lacks any express limitation providing for prospective impact only. The Constitution only proscribes retroactive criminal sanctions The intent of the Act is to correct errors in prior interpretations of the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment. 

More broadly, the GOP assault on virtually everyone's citizenship seeks to maximize the power of the next Trump Administration to round-up citizens, as discussed in my prior blog post. As such, this amounts to the greatest power-grab of rights over American citizens in history.

 

A MULTI — STOREY development planned for western Sydney has been approved despite years of resistance from council and residents.

Newly arrived refugees will get the chance to highlight the culinary cultures of their homeland at a MasterChef-inspired event to celebrate refugee week.

WESTS Tigers CEO Justin Pascoe says he doesn’t want to rock the boat with the $27m plans for Concord Oval, and that Shute Shield side West Harbour won’t lose their home.

PLANS to build a commuter car park at the old bus depot in Carlingford could be scrapped in favour of developing seniors housing or residential flats.

The Central Coast Mariners have come crashing back down to earth after a 10-man Western Sydney outfit registered a 4-1 win over the yellow and navy in Gosford on Saturday.

Meet the 22-year-old who has been named the top lifesaver on the northern beaches - and she is putting the call out for more women and young people to pursue leadership roles within the movement.

Elissa Tennant’s competitive spirit has propelled her into football’s most elite levels, with the 11-year-old joining Sydney Olympic FC this year.

a 1% change in several swing states...

LLM-powered multiagent persona simulation for imagination enhancement and business insights. - microsoft/TinyTroupe

Don't panic! Here's how to tactfully answer salary expectations questions without costing yourself a ton of money (updated for 2020)

date -u # Current time in UTC networkQuality # Internet speedtest caffeinate # Prevent macOS from sleeping, until CTRL+C

El centro invita a “desaprender” los tópicos sobre la región en una sorprendente exposición en la que participan pensadores, activistas y artistas indígenas Ni el Aguirre de Klaus Kinski, ni el coronel Fawcett, ni el explorador Ridgewell de La oreja rota de Tintín, ni el Indiana Jones del via Pocket

El gobierno del alcalde Jaume Collboni está trazando un muy complicado plan para blindar el distrito de Ciutat Vella contra los monocultivos comerciales. via Pocket

BarcelonaRelleu a la Taula d'Entitats del Tercer Sector. L'activista Enric Morist és el nou president de la gran plataforma d'associacions socials i federacions en substitució de Francina Alsina, que ha esgotat els dos mandats màxims. via Pocket

A l'Arxiu Històric de Barcelona acaba d'ingressar tota la documentació del Projecte d'un Ferrocarril Metropolità Circular per a Barcelona, que proposava una xarxa a partir d'anelles que s'entrellacen, amb un abast descomunal. via Pocket

EVE-NG PRO platform is ready for today’s IT-world requirements. It allows enterprises, e-learning providers/centers, individuals and group collaborators to create virtual proof of concepts, solutions and training environments. EVE-NG PRO is the first clientless multivendor network emulation software that empowers network and security professionals with huge opportunities in the networking world. Clientless management options will allow EVE-NG PRO to be as the best choice for Enterprise engineers without influence of corporate security policies as it can be run in a completely isolated environment.

YouTuber Jake Paul and boxing heavyweight legend Mike Tyson are finally set to battle in their much-anticipated match at AT&T Stadium in Dallas on Friday night.

The post ‘I’m a Natural-Born Killer’: Mike Tyson Highlights the Difference Between Him and YouTuber Jake Paul appeared first on Breitbart.

We listen to new roots music from 3 Pairs of Boots, Teni Rane, Mystic Twangers and an awesome various artists tribute to Bob Seger, "Silver Bullet Bluegrass."

Maria Muldaur brought her Way Past Midnight tour to the music theater at the Musical Instrument Museum in Phoenix

Mick covers a broad swath of the Blues this week including new music from Tracy Nelson and J.W. Jones, plus appearances by Duke Robillard, John Mayall with Eric Clapton and some new bonus tracks just released from the expanded “24 Nights” album Clapt

Albert Lee is playing at the Sofia Saturday (tonight) and Mick has brought a sample of his amazing guitar work, plus more from Tracy Nelson, The Nick Moss Band and Monster Mike Welch. Then, hear more never- released tracks from Eric Clapton’s Albert

There’s plenty of new music to hear this weekend on the Blues Party from Monster Mike Welch, Samantha Fish, Nick Moss, Duke Robillard and Joanna Connor. Plus, you’ll wanna hear a great set by Eddie Taylor and his family and a cool string of English

Phishing scammers need a little help scamming you!

Mrs Sulak is dying, but she will always stay alive, long enough for someone to reply. That's 419 scam law!