Skip to content

Trump

Getting Bad Things Done – On Trump, FCC, Net Neutrality, ….

Simply put, Team Trump didn’t want the average American to have good information about what is fast becoming the defining feature of our 45th presidency: It doesn’t want the public to have good information. …The cloud of chaos emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue these days makes it easy to lose the big picture. ..

But behind the smoke and mirrors, Trump World is getting stuff done — bad stuff, like the gutting of many major regulations that once protected our environment, or the toxic police-state culture created by “taking the gloves off” ICE enforcement agents or your local cops, or installing regressive judges across the land. But the defining feature of Donald Trump’s presidency is its all-encompassing war on the truth. The tactic is the stream of lies that the president spews — sometimes dozens in a week. But the broader strategy is equally alarming: Trump hopes to extend and expand his reign of dishonesty by remaking the media landscape with fewer. diminished sources of valid facts, elevating the handful of outlets that worship our Dear Leader (Sinclair, Fox) while seeking to destroy the credibility and reputation of everyone else.

Trump’s big, bad idea is so universal it can embrace ideas that seem to be contradictions — until you look a little closer. How else to explain the fact that the FCC — controlled by a majority of pro-Trump commissioners — is, with its all-but-a-done-deal rollback of net neutrality, giving the gift of a lifetime to monster communication companies like Philadelphia-based Comcast, Verizon and AT&T. Yet at the same time Trump’s Justice Department seems to be taking an anti-big-business stance in opposing the planned merger of AT&T and Time-Warner without the spin-off of key assets like Time-Warner’s CNN, the bete noir of Trump’s rabid fan base.

But a thousand Alabamas and a thousand Roy Moores will blossom across America’s political landscape in an era when the flow of information is even more tightly controlled by a handful of powerful corporations who can and will be bullied and intimidated by the White House. It’s critical for the future of American free speech and democracy that the net neutrality rollback be stopped, but with the rubber-stamp FCC preparing to vote on Dec. 14, there are few good options and virtually no time to stop this dictator move. The war on factual information and the truth is repulsive, but it’s not the most outrageous thing about the Trump presidency. The most outrageous thing is that Trump is winning.

But there’s been widespread (and seemingly informed) speculation that the government’s merger move has little to do with its usually pro-business ideology and everything to do with old-fashioned revenge against the news outlet that Trump has called “the Fake News Network” and accused of treating him so unfairly (despite considerable evidence of the exact opposite). There’s no smoking gun, but pro-Trump news outlets like the Daily Caller and the New York Post have quoted sources that Trump would love to oust CNN chief Jeff Zucker, and other journalists have labored to find a reason for trying to block the merger other than presidential spite. So basically Team Trump wants fewer outlets controlling the news — and it wants those that survive to, in the immortal words of Omarosa Manigault, “bow down to President Trump.”

Hatred for, and the stifling of, a free press and free flow of information is the glue that holds the Trump presidency — and the 36 percent who support him — together. Consider these droplets:

In addition to its net neutrality push, the FCC has also adopted a series of rules that will dramatically expand the reach of Sinclair Broadcasting into a coast-to-coast behemoth (including, at least for now, Philadelphia’s Channel 17) and allow it to reshape your local TV news away from community journalism and toward its relentlessly pro-Trump political agenda, with one-size-fits-all Trumpian commentary and inane “terrorism alert desk.”
Trump’s Justice Department seems to be sending a chilling message to rank-and-file journalists — and especially alternative journalists on the left more likely to be critical of the president — by its shocking decision to pursue felony “rioting” charges that could lead to a 10-year prison sentence for a Texas photojournalist named Alexei Wood. Wood covered a destructive melee on Trump’s inauguration day and his apparent “crime” was going “wooo” as he filmed an act of vandalism, not very smart but not anywhere near the ballpark of criminality.
These official acts come against a constant drumbeat from Trump seeking to delegitimatize journalism and the First Amendment at least in the eyes of his own supporters, calling hard-working reporters “the enemy of the American people,” threatening to relax libel laws amid the dream of forcing more outlets to go out of business like Gawker, and disrupting the news cycle with increasingly off-his-meds 6 a.m. tweets.

But the end of net neutrality would mean Trump and his allies are going nuclear in their war on information. Without the controls adopted by past incarnations of the FCC, your internet carrier would be free to charge you more for certain content; imagine if Comcast or Verizon started charging you for packages of accelerated and accessible websites — a “news” package with CNN.com and Philly.com or a “sports” package with league websites or Deadspin. (That’s how they do it now in countries like Portugal that don’t have net neutrality.)

There’s more. An internet provider would have the power to slow down the delivery of sites (presumably ones that don’t pay or offer other perks in return for high speed) and it could block some altogether — like, for example, that sites that are dedicated to complaints from customers of Comcast or other telecoms. To civil liberties groups like the ALCU, ending net neutrality isn’t just a way for billion-dollar companies to squeeze a few extra bucks from consumers, but “also one of the foremost free speech issues of our time.” In explaining its opposition, the ACLU writes: “After all, freedom of expression isn’t worth much if the forums where people actually make use of it are not themselves free.”

Vice Motherboard’s Sam Gustin recently reported on why net neutrality is shaping up as the free speech issue of the Trump era, quoting Steven Renderos, an organizer for the Center for Media Justice: “Net neutrality is not simply about technology. It’s about the everyday people who use it and whether they will have the right to be heard online.”

The stifling of good information creates a world in which citizens decide which version of “the truth” they want to believe, often with disastrous consequences — the fantasy world that Trump and his true believers covet. If you want to go to Ground Zero for the war on information, go to Alabama, where as much as half or more of the electorate won’t believe Senate candidate Roy Moore is a sexual predator because the allegations were reported in the Washington Post, one of the news outlets that our Oval Office authoritarian has decreed as “fake.”

But a thousand Alabamas and a thousand Roy Moores will blossom across America’s political landscape in an era when the flow of information is even more tightly controlled by a handful of powerful corporations who can and will be bullied and intimidated by the White House. It’s critical for the future of American free speech and democracy that the net neutrality rollback be stopped, but with the rubber-stamp FCC preparing to vote on Dec. 14, there are few good options and virtually no time to stop this dictator move. The war on factual information and the truth is repulsive, but it’s not the most outrageous thing about the Trump presidency. The most outrageous thing is that Trump is winning.

She flipped off President Trump — and got fired from her government contracting job

She should of been given a hero’s welcome, but instead she got the boot from here job at Akima.

In about Akima

Akima ensures non-discrimination in all programs and activities in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

More Bullshit. This company which is now essentially another I.T. Beltway Bandit is a disgrace. They stood up for money over common sense, money over fair employee treatment and justice, and money over decency. Too bad my tax dollars funds their ilk.

And hypocrisy and favoritism do not escape them either.

She identifies herself as an Akima employee on her LinkedIn account but makes no mention of the middle-finger photo there.

Wait. It gets even more obscene.

Because Briskman was in charge of the firm’s social-media presence during her six-month tenure there, she recently flagged something that did link her company to some pretty ugly stuff.

As she was monitoring Facebook this summer, she found a public comment by a senior director at the company in an otherwise civil discussion by one of his employees about the Black Lives Matter movement.

“You’re a f—— Libtard a——,” the director injected, using his profile that clearly and repeatedly identifies himself as an employee of the firm.

In fact, the person he aimed that comment at was so offended by the intrusion into the conversation and the coarse nature of it that he challenged the director on representing Akima that way.

So Briskman flagged the exchange to senior management.

Did the man, a middle-aged executive who had been with the company for seven years, get the old “Section 4.3” boot?

Nope. He cleaned up the comment, spit-shined his public profile and kept on trucking at work.

But the single mother of two teens who made an impulsive gesture while on her bike on her day off?

Adios, amiga.

Source: WP Article

According to their code of conduct

While using social media sites and other social networking tools we must keep the best interests of the Company in mind. Employees are prohibited from posting illegal or prohibited materials on Company social media sites, including but not limited to materials that are harassing or discriminatory. Confidential information must be protected and never disclosed in an unauthorized manner, including posted to any unauthorized site.

Well she was not at work and not using company’ assets. She was on her day off. She was exercising her 1st amendment rights. Or does one surrender their 1st amendment rights to work for Akima?

Trump Scandal? Ooops..Hackers target The Donald’s businesses

Quote

The FBI and CIA are investigating an attempted hack on the Trump Organization.

According to a report from ABC citing unnamed officials with the intelligence agencies, it is believed someone overseas attempted to breach the President’s international real estate holding company.

The report claims that officials and cybersecurity specialists with both the FBI and CIA met earlier this month with Eric and Donald Trump Jr, who have been running the Trump Organization since their father assumed the Presidency of the United States in January.

The report did not suggest where the hackers may have originated. The Trump Organization has denied any of its data was compromised.

“We absolutely weren’t hacked,” Eric Trump said. “That’s crazy. We weren’t hacked, I can tell you that.”

According to ABC, the meeting took place on May 9th, one day before Trump caused a political firestorm by firing FBI director James Comey in the midst of his investigation into Russian government-backed hackers meddling in the 2016 US election, which saw Trump score a surprise win.

In the months following the election, the FBI and Congress have launched investigations into just how much (if anything) the Trump campaign knew of the Russian meddling.

This is not the first time the Trump Organization has been targeted for cybercrime. First in 2015 and again in 2016, hackers managed to get malware onto the point of sale systems at several Trump hotels.

Those incidents were entirely financial, however, as the attackers were looking to steal the payment card numbers of restaurant customers and hotel guests. This latest incident, given the interest taken by the FBI and CIA, could well have involved a more serious target

Democrats draft laws in futile attempt to protect US internet privacy

At a the the present, I agree that this has a snowball’s chance in hell. But if more states take it seriously, just maybe it will negate the disgusting screwing of Internet users privacy by big corporate ISPs with their bidding done by their lackies in the congress, chief FCC lackie Pai and signed by the poorest excuse for a leader in years, Trump.

Hah Hah – Drain the swamp. What a joke. Just filled it with swine dung and does it wreak worse than it ever did. Hey maybe I show start a new category “swine swamp.”

Oh, do I sound angry? God damn right I am.

Less than a week after President Trump signed the law allowing ISPs to sell customers’ browsing habits to advertisers, Democratic politicians are introducing bills to stop the practice.

On Thursday, Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) submitted a bill [PDF] that would enshrine the FCC privacy rules proposed during the Obama administration into law – the rules just shot down by the Trump administration. Americans would have to opt in to allowing ISPs to sell their browsing data under the proposed legislation, and ISPs would have to take greater care to protect their servers from hacking attacks.

“Thanks to Congressional Republicans, corporations, not consumers, are in control of sensitive information about Americans’ health, finances, and children. The Republican roll-back of strong broadband privacy rules means ISP no longer stands for Internet Service Provider, it stands for ‘Information Sold for Profit’,” said Senator Markey.

“This legislation will put the rules back on the books to protect consumers from abusive invasions of their privacy. Americans should not have to forgo their fundamental right to privacy just because their homes and phones are connected to the internet.”

The bill has been cosponsored by ten senators, all Democrats except for the independent Bernie Sanders. No Republicans have added their name to the legislation – nor shown any support for it – which probably means it’s doomed to failure given the GOP-dominated composition of the Senate.

The new bill echoes similar legislation introduced in the House of Representatives earlier in the week. Representative Jacky Rosen, who was a software developer before she got into politics, has introduced the Restoring American Privacy Act of 2017.

“As someone who has first-hand experience as a computer programmer, I know that keeping privacy protections in place is essential for safeguarding vulnerable and sensitive data from hackers,” said Representative Rosen (D-NV).

“I will not stand by and let corporations get access to the most intimate parts of people’s lives without them knowing and without consent. It is appalling that Republicans and President Trump would be in favor of taking Americans’ most personal information to sell it to the highest bidder.”

The FCC rules would have required internet users to sign up to allow their browsing histories to be sold, and put an increased onus on ISPs to protect their private data. One of the first acts of the new administration was to drop the FCC rules and legislate against them, with President Trump signing off on the legislation on Monday.

Facing a public backlash, the major ISPs have promised that they won’t sell off an individual’s browsing history – but left the door open for selling the data as part of a group. Customers will also have the choice to opt out, but you can bet the form to do so will be in the internet equivalent of a locked filing cabinet carrying a sign reading “Beware of the leopard.”

The bills will be welcomed by many but, realistically, have no chance of passing unless a sizable number of Republicans cross the floor. That’s not going to happen, so individual states have been taking action of their own.

Last week, Minnesota and Illinois legislatures began enacting legislation to provide privacy protections for internet users, and now New York has done the same. Senator Tim Kennedy (D-Buffalo) has introduced legislation to stop ISPs selling off their customers’ browsing histories.

“When voters across the country elected this House and US Senate last November, I doubt they were voting with the hope that their ISP would be allowed to sell their browsing history,” said Senator Kennedy.

“This kind of anti-consumer, anti-privacy action doesn’t benefit anyone except large corporations. This is not an abstract threat to regular folks – this is bad policy with real-world consequences.”

It’s possible the ISPs could have bitten off more than they can chew on this one by seriously underestimating quite how angry this issue has made people. Despite frantic PR moves, more and more states are now taking matters into their own hands – which is just as the Founding Fathers designed the system.

SOURCE: HERE

Corrupt Politician Signs Bill Recinding America’s digital privacy protections while Grunting

Oh and of course he said he was “for the little guy right.” Bullshit. Oink Oink Grunt Grunt.

So let’s do some work via the Register

Ajit Pai, the chief lackie…eerhh, chairman of the FCC, said

“resident Trump and Congress have appropriately invalidated one part of the Obama-era plan for regulating the Internet. Those flawed privacy rules, which never went into effect, were designed to benefit one group of favored companies, not online consumers.”

BULLSHIT on the last part of that sentence, that the rules were “designed to benefit one group of favored companies, not online consumers.”

The rules were developed entirely and absolutely to protect online consumers. They required ISPs to get an opt-in from customers for sensitive information, to offer an opt-out for other uses of that data, and to ensure that they appropriately protected that data.


The other Republican commissioner on the FCC, Mike O’Rielly, had his own statement that, unfortunately, layered bullshit upon bullshit.

“I applaud President Trump and Congress for utilizing the CRA to undo the FCC’s detrimental privacy rules,” he said. “The parade of horribles trotted out to scare the American people about its passage are completely fictitious, especially since parts of the rules never even went into effect. Hopefully, we will soon return to a universe where thoughtful privacy protections are not overrun by shameful FCC power grabs and blatant misrepresentations.”

What O’Rielly does, however, is pinpoint the beating heart of the bullshit: the claim that since something hasn’t happened yet, it means that it won’t happen.

For someone who is a commissioner at a federal regulator, this willful blindness over how the real world works is borderline obnoxious.

Here is the absolute solid reality of what this decision to scrap the FCC rules means:

ISPs were previously able to do what they can do now, ie, sell their customers’ private data.
But they were previously at risk of being investigated by the FTC and then, later, the FCC.
If they had been found to have broken data privacy rules, they faced huge fines and most likely the requirement to get prior approval from the FTC/FCC before doing anything similar in future.
Now, however, there is no backstop. The FTC does not have jurisdiction. And nor does the FCC. The ISPs currently exist in a regulatory-free world.

What this means is significant and it is the source of (Democrat) claims that ISPs will soon be selling your private data and the counter-claims (by Republicans) that people are fear-mongering and inventing problems. Source: Here

Swine — oh wait, that is unfair…to the the swine I mean.