Tag Archives: Chris Hansen

A predatorial rental company?

Almost everywhere you go, there is a rental company just waiting to give you some product at an “affordable” price. But are these prices actually affordable or are these companies preying off of their customers? While in most instances, we expect there to be a specific percentage of interest, it seems that Aaron’s has taken this to an extreme. Thanks to a current customer of “Aaron’s,” we will get to see just how extreme they are.

According to the individual, who we will identify as J., he was in the process of buying two items: a computer and an Xbox one. According to this individual, they had already placed over $700 into the Xbox alone, that got the expected reaction from us: This person was trying to get some clout, or were they? We decided to humor this and we looked for ourselves, this is what we found from Aaron’s own website:

The first payment for all of their Xboxes are $25.00, okay, there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, that’s pretty low. But that’s not where they nail you. The trick comes in the other payments. Let’s break it down by Xbox type as they have various versions.

XBox One X:

12 monthly payments of $129.99

At the end of the payment period, you would had spent a total of $1,559.88 for an Xbox.

The lowest payment available is for the XBox One S

12 monthly payments of 79.99 Sounds affordable?

The grand total for this console is: $959.88

The question at hand is can they legally charge these outlandish prices? Well, the simple answer that we have found in our research is: Yes. They can. I know, some of you guys are calling it price gouging, believe me, our own team went that direction. The problem is in the definition of price gouging. It reads:

Price gouging refers to when retailers and others take advantage of spikes in demand by charging exorbitant prices for necessities, often after a natural disaster or other state of emergency. In most states, price gouging is set as a violation of unfair or deceptive trade practices law.

The keywords in this are “often after a natural disaster.” and “necessities.” Which would bring the question down to this: Is an Xbox One a necessity or a luxury? This is a very important concept to have in mind when determining rather or not the company is price gouging. However, there is a second definition for the term. This to must be mentioned. The other definition reads as follows:

Price gouging occurs when a seller increases the prices of goods, services or commodities to a level much higher than is considered reasonable or fair. Usually, this event occurs after a demand or supply shock. Common examples include price increases of basic necessities after natural disaster

If this definition were to be used, than we can establish that Aaron’s is price gouging its own customers. But this shouldn’t be to shocking. Holding a consumer rating of 1.27 and ranking at 147 among home appliance stores, it’s safe to presume that most of their customers are anything but satisfied with their service. According to the Better Business Bureau (BBB,) Aaron’s, as of the time of this article, has 1,107 complaints against it, and that’s just for one store. Though it states “usually after a natural disaster,” the phrasing implies that this isn’t always the case.

To find out the estimated rating for the company itself, we had to only look at their Facebook page. Holding at a 2.2/5 stars, it appears that their low scoring trend continued. So, we began looking at the reviews to find out why. One complaint stood out specifically to us. Though the complaint is alleging some very questionable things, it’s the fact that the rental store ignored this complaint, while responding to a reply of the review.

In another review, an Aaron’s employee is accused of being belligerent toward a customer. Something this extreme would normally have me raising an eyebrow, except for one thing: this all happened on video, which we are linking here. It’s not surprising that the company had no response to this video.

The bottom line is this: There are many options for renting an item to own. However, you have to do your research. Getting yourself into a trap, or predatorial contract, because you failed to conduct research isn’t the company’s fault. When looking into a company, you want to look at specific things: reviews, ratings, complaints, and if possible, check the BBB site; find out how many problems they’ve had in a short time. Every major company will have something negative, but when it’s a constant theme, it’s no longer a situation of a few unhappy customers. It’s a habitual environment within the company itself.

 

Inside CPS: A story of survival

We've all seen the claims on Facebook. The claims of wrongfully taken children who are placed into foster care, and how the system violated the rights of the parents. This isn't one of those articles. This article is from the perspective of one of those children, now grown. In this article, we are giving the raw details, the only omission will be to their name, as per request. The reasons behind this will be clarified by the end. We also want to state, that the actual story being told is word-for-word what they sent us. Though we've separated the story into categories, this is 100% their experience within the system. 

This content is for Gold Status and Basic members only.
Login Join Now

Are retailers violating the HIPAA ACT?

With the COVID situation running rampant, it shouldn’t be a surprise that your medical information is now being forced to be presented to employers. Failing to do so is met with consequences, loss of employment, or even suspension without pay. However, some employers, such as Dollar Tree, have taken this a step further. They not only ask for your medical information, they are accused of asking for information pertaining to related to the employee. With this accusation, a member of our team applied, got the job, and tested this theory out. This article is going to present information provided to us by a former employee and the results of what we learned first hand.

HIPAA

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability (HIPAA) Act was designed in 1996 with the purpose of protecting sensitive medical information. With this act, doctors are forbidden from divulging information of any patient without having prior written consent. However, the act expands beyond that aspect. With the HIPAA Act, patients have control of their medical information, they can choose who to provide this information to, and it limits what medical information an employer can obtain; this last portion is where our article is primarily focused.

While this act doesn’t necessarily pertain to employers, there are aspects of it that do. For instance, under the HIPPA Act, an employee is not required to divulge their medical files, or even diagnosis and treatment. While we are currently in a pandemic, this changes nothing as the HIPPA Act simply does not address situations such as this. An employer asking an employee the results of a Covid test could be taken as a violation as, once again, a patient is not required to give the employee their diagnosis or treatment information. This brings us to the retail industry, who seem to ask their employees for this very piece of vital information.

Retails intrusive questions

With the information we had obtained from a source, our platform decided to go “inside” and find out for ourselves. For this, a member of our team applied at a local “Dollar Tree.” This location was selected because it was the company that we had gotten the complaint about. Like magic, the application was approved and we had our feet in the door. At this point, the investigation commenced.

The first night was uneventful. No questions were asked, just the typical “pre-opening” work. Shelves were stocked, boxes were stored, that sort of thing. Our new insider had begun to question rather or not the accusations were, in fact, even true. After working for hours, we had initially thought the investigation was a fluke. This conclusion didn’t last long, however. Prior to the insider’s employment, we had already established that if they did ask any of the questions, they were to answer at least one of them with “yes.”

The reason behind this was simply to see what the store would do in this situation. We already had established that answering “no” gave you the “right” to work, we wanted the other end of the spectrum. On night two, our insider reports that they arrived at the store. Upon entering, they were immediately stopped and asked some questions. Because this was being recorded, we are providing the very questions that were asked. We are also providing the response given by our insider.

The questions

Q: Have you been around anybody who has tested positive for Covid?

A: If I had been, there is no way that I could possibly know, so I’m going to say no. It is important to note that the employer is marked with (Q) while our insider is marked with (A.)

Q: In the past 24 hours, have you been around anybody who has been tested for Covid?

A: Yes.

Q: Wait, you’ve been around somebody who got tested for Covid?

A: Yeah.

Q: Do you know the results of their tests? (Highlighted as this question potentially violates HIPPA.)

A: No, I don’t know their tests results. Why?

Q: Because that means you can’t come into work.

A: What do you mean I can’t come to work, why not?

Q: Because you’re putting the entire store at risk.

A: Uh, okay, that makes no sense but whatever.

It’s important to note a few things within these questions. The first is the redundancy of the first question. If this had not been our insider, but another employee, they would already be at a high risk of exposure, they’re working retail. The second thing to note is what HIPAA says about asking for test results: they aren’t permitted to know what a diagnosis or treatment is. If the test were to be a positive, the employer is not permitted to know this as the patient would be diagnosed with Covid. Branching beyond that, the employer is also not permitted to know what the treatment plan for the said diagnosis is. Essentially, asking this question is a legal situation in the making. With a good attorney, this company could face a rather hefty penalty.

While all of the questions are intrusive, the specific question asking for test results, especially regarding those not employed with the company, is the smoking gun for any “litigation-happy” disgruntled employee. Expanding beyond the questions, we are left with one unanswered question: why the inconsistency?  On the first night of employment, our insider received no questions prior to their shift. However, on the second night, they were questioned. If the employers policy regarding “safety” was so serious, wouldn’t they be asking these intrusive questions prior to every shift?

While this subject, especially now, remains highly controversial, it is one that should be discussed. The question asking, “how far is to far?” is simply not asked enough. In this year alone, we have seen some of the worst violations to our rights than at any point in America’s history. Our right to religious freedom being a primary example. During this time, we saw ministers being arrested simply for refusing to cease with the practice of their religious freedoms, in the way that their religions required. But the violations didn’t start, nor did they end, there. For now, we will simply ask this one question: Will Americans ever say “enough is enough?”

 

Editorial Statement

Due to the backlash on Twitter, we are clarifying that this article is purely opinion. We are asking a question, noted by the title, and are simply responding with our thoughts. While the companies may not be violating HIPAA, by requesting information of people, who are not employed with them, we can at least establish that the privacy of those individuals have been violated.

Another Facebook purge?

This article is very different from anything we’ve written in the past. While our normal policy is to not write anything to which we are directly related, we have been forced to make an exception. Over the past month, I have uploaded three YouTube videos. The videos not only explain the apparent attack on the “War on Corruption” platform, it goes to detail the progressive censorship of my own account. Though I had hoped for a resolution, Facebook has adamantly refused to address any message I’ve sent to them. In fact, they’ve only increased the various forms of censorship to my account and my platform.

Censorship: Phase I

In the beginning, what Facebook had done was nothing more than a slight annoyance. With no explanation, not even a noted policy violation, I had found that my account had been blocked from commenting or replying to political pages. This means that I could not interact with any political figure, this immediately caught my attention. At this point and time, I was still able to comment, reply, and even post to other pages, groups, etc. At this time, I was oblivious to just how far Facebook would take this censorship.

Censorship: Phase II

After about a week of dealing with the original block, Facebook apparently decided that it was time to do additional blocks. Upon trying to post a comment to a group, which I had been able to do the previous day, I found that I had been restricted from doing so. As with the original block, no reason was given explaining why my account had been restricted. The censorship wouldn’t end here. If it did, this article wouldn’t exist. Within twenty-four hours of this new restriction, I was restricted from commenting and replying to all pages and groups. However, at this point and time, I was still able to post on the “WoC” page, though commenting and replying had now been restricted.

Censorship: Phase III

For the next few weeks, I progressively became agitated over the restriction. On top of running this media platform, I compose and sell music online. At this point and time, this had remained untouched by the nefarious goons of Facebook. However, War on Corruption had now been completely restricted from me. I could no longer post, comment, reply, or even send private messages from the platform’s page. It was, at this point that we decided to begin the process of removing WoC from Facebook completely. During this period, Facebook added yet another new restriction. Not only was I unable to post, comment, reply, or send PM’s, I now could no longer join or leave groups. Worst yet, Facebook wasn’t even finished playing this illegal form of censorship.

Censorship: Phase IV

With this, we are now up to date with the current situation. At this point, Facebook has removed my ability to post, comment, and reply from my personal profile. Furthermore, the page I have, to which I promote my side gig of music, has also been slammed by the social media giant. This means that, on two different platforms, Facebook has not only censored me, but they’ve even cut a form of my income: music. But it doesn’t end there. Out of our team of seven, five of us have been targeted in this exact same manner, all without reason or explanation. Though all of us have tried to appeal it, the results are the same. The appeal process itself has been restricted from all of us.

This means that while we have the option to appeal, should we attempt to do so it will fail to go through; Facebook will never even know that we’ve tried to fight it. As of now, our platform is being operated by two individuals of our team, the only two who have not been targeted with this illegal act. Meanwhile, I continue my search for a civil rights attorney. Not only for our team, but for the various other platforms, and individuals, targeted by Facebook.

Conclusion

With much discussion, we do have a lead into what instigated the censorship: I was critical of a specific political figure, one that Facebook supports. With their censorship, they’ve not only shown how far they will go to stop anybody who opposes their political views, they have demonstrated how far they will go to silence any journalist who speaks against those to which they support.

We aren’t writing this article to bring awareness to what is happening to our platform, we are writing this to warn other journalists, and truth seekers, of what Facebook is willing to do to silence them. We have full expectation that Facebook will shut us down. Since the time of the initial restriction, we have watched as our platform stats spiraled into oblivion. With this, we have absolutely no doubt that, much like our team, our platform is being shadow banned by the site.

During what many call the “purge,” Facebook wiped out over a dozen media platforms from their site. Among them: “Freedom Though Project,” who had well over a million followers. The habitual pattern of Facebook is to target independent media, why not? They can’t buy us off unlike the corporate giants of the media world. While Facebook continues to hold its position of being a “private” company, this is factually untrue. Facebook had ceased being a private company when they entered the public domain, the Stock Market. While this has many financial benefits for the site, it has a lot of legal disadvantages. Among them, violating constitutional rights.

Though we have no expectation of the platform surviving this, on Facebook at least, we have begun moving to other sites. Below, are links to our new locations. We hope to see you there just as we hope that Facebook will cease this unjust activity.

MeWe

Rumble

Flote

Minds

Parler

 

Shoot first, ask later: Linden Cameron shooting review

You have most likely heard of the Linden Cameron situation. Cameron is a 13-yo child, living in Salt Lake City, UT., who was, back in September, shot by “highly” trained officers. This is an article that we had been sitting on for sometime now. While we enjoy critiquing law enforcement, we had decided that it...

This content is for Gold Status and Basic members only.
Login Join Now

Texas mother accused of rape

34-year old, Brittany Rouleau, is sitting behind bars tonight. While it is the job of a parent to protect their children, she is accused of raping her 12-year old son in 2018. The Wichita Falls resident allegedly shared a bed with the child at the time the crime was committed. According to the victim, she began questioning the now eighth grader about masturbation as she undressed.

At some point, during the already uncomfortable conversation, she instructed the boy to do the same. It was, at this point, that forced herself onto the child. Afterward, she instructed the boy to clean himself and to tell nobody of what just transpired. She further informed the child that he could also get into trouble since he “accepted” it. It would take two years before he finally revealed what had happened. Upon telling another adult, he was immediately brought to police.

Shortly after his confession, Brittany was arrested. Though she initially denied the accusation, she later confessed to the act. According to reports, she had even confessed the act to a neighbor. Though she’s currently a resident of the county jail, no court date has been assigned at the time of this article.

Shawnee apartment complex drive-by.

We would like to believe that the safest place to be is at our home. However, those living at an apartment complex in Shawnee, OK., learned just how quickly that safety can be violated.  While this is just a preliminary article, using statements from various witnesses, we are going to post what our platform currently...

This content is for Gold Status and Basic members only.
Login Join Now

Famous adult film star faces life

Famous adult star, Ron Jeremy (67), is currently sitting behind bars,  awaiting trial. Jeremy had become popular in the 1970’s and 80’s, however, he has always had a reputation of being the “grabby” sort when it came to women. Jeremy, who is accused of more than 20 crimes against 13 women, with his victims ranging between 15-54 years of age, has a bail set at  $6.6 million. If he’s convicted, he faces the possibility of life in prison.

Currently, the list of crimes he’s being charged with include: forcible oral copulation, forcible rape, sexual battery by restraint, and this list just goes on. Each of these convictions make mention that the victim would need to be tested for the virus, commonly known as, AIDS. While the document, which can be read below, doesn’t state that Jeremy has the disease, given the sort of testing required, it is presumed that he does. If his victims do test positive for the AIDS virus, this could actually bring fourth additional charges, should the state pursue that avenue.

While Jeremy has pled “not guilty” to all accounts,  it is the test results that will ultimately be the deciding factor into that. Prior to his arrest, Jeremy posted one final tweet, saying:

In the meantime, Jeremy resides at the Los Angeles county jail, awaiting his  next court appearance, which is on October 28, 2020. Rather or not Jeremy is acquitted of the charges will depend solely on what the forensic evidence reveals, if it reveals anything at all.

Injured employee mistreated?

Unless you’re completely out of your mind, the last thing in the world that you would want to do is injure yourself at work. With any sort of injury, there is a loss of income, dealing with legal things that you may not had expected, and the list goes on. This story is brought to...

This content is for Gold Status and Basic members only.
Login Join Now

serial criminal’s victim gets no justice

In a perfect world, the justice system would always triumph, taking the most dangerous and unstable people off the streets. However, because we do not live in a perfect world, victims are often left without any form of justice from their attackers. Our platform has been sitting on this case since 2019, waiting for the for the “okay” to finally write this article. Upon speaking to this victim, whom we will identify as “Jane Doe” for safety reasons, that “okay” finally arrived.  To understand the case we are going to be covering, we first must paint the picture of who her attacker is.

Extensive criminal background

Cade Taylor, an Oklahoma resident, is by no means unknown to the court system. With minor charges, such as speeding tickets, seven protective orders filed, stalking, and assault, Cade has had a rather colorful criminal past. To better understand how this man thinks, we’re going to breakdown some of the cases. In this, we are including public information. This include the case number, dates, and the charge. However, we are withholding the names of his victims. This is due to Cade’s obvious mental instability and willingness to be violent, especially toward women. It is also important to note that while three protection orders were dismissed, five were not. While we won’t be covering every case, we are going to cover enough to give you an idea of how potentially dangerous this man is.

Case: TR-2005-00216

Date:  02/07/2005

This case, in contrast to the rest, is a very simple one. It’s a speeding ticket to which he pled guilty and was fined $188.90. However, this isn’t about speeding tickets. Let’s move onto the next case.

Case: PO-2000-00046

Date: 05/05/2000

This is one of many protective orders filed against Cade. This case, was eventually merged with case: PO 2000-47, which is not shown on the court records site.

Case: PO-2008-00039

Date: 04/03/2008

As before, we have yet another Protection order, as identified with the case number starting with “PO.” This order was filed by one of his alleged victims, a woman who was granted the protection. In this instance, the case cost Cade $169.30. However, as we’re going to learn, he did not learn his lesson.

Case: PO-2009-00183

Date: 12/08/2009

Filed by a different woman, she too had filed an EPO against Cade Taylor. However, for reasons unknown, this order was denied. Case closed.

Though there are still other Protection order filings against Cade, these aren’t the only charges he’s had. A couple of his other charges include domestic abuse-assault and battery and a charge for malicious injury to property-over $1000. However, these aren’t the cases we’re going to be diving into. Now, we dive into the felony.

The criminal charges Cade has faced in the past.

Case: CF-2019-00079

Date: 02/11/2019

This case is one that is truly beyond mind blowing. What started out as a bad night of drinking, for Cade, ended with him abducting a young woman, holding her at knife point, and even going as far as to admitting to police his intention of murdering her. The victim was only able to escape after locking herself into the restroom and dialing 9-1-1. With his  confession and  abduction, began a process that would exceed a year. However, the court was anything but impartial in this. According to those who know Taylor’s family, the presiding judge, Michelle Roper, is actually friends with his parents.

Upon confessing that he intended to murder the young woman, the police decided to  arrest Taylor. With this confession, the local DA’s office began the process of pursuing charges. During the process of the trial, Cade made a point to harass his victim and her family, multiple times. In one confirmed instance, he drove more than 120 miles across the state just to stalk her. Upon learning of this, the police arrested Taylor, but this wouldn’t be the last arrest for behaviors of this nature. With every arrest, came a bond amount, something that his mother was more than happy to pay. Once released, Cade would once again seek out his victim, going as far as to locating her on a popular livestream app and leaving a comment. Our platform has obtained a screenshot of this event, it is posted below.

This comment was confirmed to be from Cade Taylor, a man with a notorious past of abuse, stalking, and so fourth.

By the time the above photograph occurred, for whatever reason the court dropped the Felony down to a misdemeanor. The man, who abducted his stalking victim, made bold statements of his intentions to murder her, just got away with it. Meanwhile, in another questionable move, the court forced the victim to attend counseling.  This ruling was made as a result of the victim having a mental breakdown in court. As a result of this breakdown, Judge Roper questioned the victim’s mental stability. Of course, I can’t help but question Judge Roper’s capability to perform her duties.

On the advice of Cade’s mother, the ultimate conclusion to this case was it being dropped. According to the mother, who has a confirmed history of bailing her son out of legal situations, Cade was simply to unstable to be held accountable. However, his mental capacity remains unconfirmed. In most instances, it is nearly impossible to get escape justice using the “insanity” plea. However, in some twist of magic, Cade has somehow managed to pull that very stunt off only to get “house arrest.” Meanwhile, the victim involved is left looking over her shoulder, not knowing when or where this deranged man may show up. If this case has demonstrated anything, it has only shown that having the right contacts is all it takes to evade the prison system.

Editorial update:

Since the time this article was initially released, it has been brought to our attention that the culprit, Cade Taylor, near the end of the trial, had made threats of not only murdering his initial victim, but her children as well. We stand by our belief that Judge Roper, knowing the culprit’s family, should be placed under investigation. Her inability to remain impartial, even with the evidence staring her in the face, only displays that the victim’s constitutional rights had to an unbias and impartial trial, may had been violated.