SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Tuesday July 31 2018, @11:55AM
from the just-publish-FCC-members'-real-time-location-data dept.
from the just-publish-FCC-members'-real-time-location-data dept.
Gizmodo reports:
In a letter this May, Senator Ron Wyden called on FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to recuse himself from an ongoing FCC investigation into companies gathering real-time location data on cellphones users. As an attorney six years ago, Pai represented one of the firms now central to the investigation.
The firm, Securus, a major provider of inmate call services to jails, is known to have provided location data on mobile customers to law enforcement officials without a court order. But despite his past work for Securus, Pai says he will not recuse himself.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
FCC Chairman Will Not Recuse Himself from Investigation into Former Client Securus Technologies
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 30 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
It's raisins that make Post Raisin Bran so raisiny ...
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @01:00PM (21 children)
Is this administration really the most corrupt one since the 13 states' union, or are they just flaunting their corruption the most openly?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @01:16PM
A little from column B, a little from column B.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @01:31PM (5 children)
Yes and yes.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @02:21PM (4 children)
You did not answer the question. Your bias is clear, and you also have every right to express your opinion.
But please accept that in courteous company it is considered impolite - bordering on rude - to simply blurt out your own opinion while the other people are talking about a completely different question.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @03:03PM (2 children)
I did answer the question, after removing your clear bias.
You must be new here?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @05:11PM
You most certainly did not!
Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @09:13PM
No you were clearly biased yourself. Its called being a hypocrite.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 31 2018, @06:59PM
The company is not courteous and hence, the observation is irrelevant. Let us recall the original question was obnoxious, a leading question, and flamebait. So what is the norm for responding to such and why wasn't Mr. AC far within those bounds of etiquette?
(Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday July 31 2018, @03:05PM (2 children)
You didn't study US History, did ya? Does Ulysses S. Grant ring any bells? Ya know, come to think of it, Grant and Trump may be more similar that I had thought. Grant was a fairly decent man, but naive and foolish. Helluva general, but a suckass president because he didn't understand people. Lemme try that on for a bit. Maybe Trump is a decent kinda guy, but just ignorant and naive?
Nahhh, it only goes so far. It's not a real good fit for Trump. Kinda like a short skirt that leaves his hairy legs and knobby knees showing.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday July 31 2018, @03:31PM (1 child)
In my experience, anyone who says a current president is the "most" anything in history, or "worst" anything in history, or "best" anything in history, is either someone who doesn't know history, or hopes their audience doesn't know history.
As far as US presidents that might have a better claim on being the "most corrupt ever", there are just so many to choose from:
- Andrew Jackson, who invented the "spoils system" which really cemented the idea that federal government jobs should go to political supporters and financial donors to the president rather than people who are highly qualified for the job in question. Effects of this practice include the assassination of William McKinley decades later, and having people with zero understanding of emergency management in charge of FEMA when major emergencies are going on today.
- Ulysses Grant, for reasons described above. Although some of the hatred for Grant has to do with political opposition to his efforts to enforce rights for newly freed black people.
- Woodrow Wilson, because there's never been a major war involving the US without plum contracts being handed out to politically-connected people.
- Warren Harding. The phrase "Teapot Dome" should still mean something.
- Herbert Hoover, mostly for doing everything in his power to save JP Morgan even if that meant screwing over America.
- Franklin Roosevelt, because of the major war effect just like Wilson had.
- Richard Nixon, because of just the stuff he was caught doing, like a cash slush fund.
- Ronald Reagan, because he was diverting $millions to actions not authorized by Congress.
- George W Bush, in case you forgot about all those cost-plus contracts to the vice-president's company, or the naked-body scanner contracts for a company owned by the cabinet secretary for the department that made the contract. And of course the decision to send the country to war mostly to benefit a company owned and managed in part by the president's father.
- Barack Obama, because of his constant protection of the largest banks, who are also his largest financial supporters.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by ilPapa on Tuesday July 31 2018, @09:26PM
See, here's the difference:
Some of those other administrations might have been corrupt (although some examples are weak), but at least there were some parts of their government that were actually doing a job besides feathering their nest and running interference for white supremacists and foreign governments.
There is not a single forgotten corner of the Trump administration that is not corrupt. I've tried, and I simply cannot find anyone at the cabinet level or assistant level that is not running some sort of scam. If I've missed one, please enlighten us.
This is important to me because if we can't find someone in the executive branch who isn't crooked as a fucking hairpin, then I will have to begrudgingly acknowledge that Donald Trump is an evil genius of comic book proportions. Think Lex Luther with golfing and porn stars.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @03:25PM (1 child)
Nixon was pretty bad. I think he's the closest in corruption to our current Orangutan-in-Chief.
(Apologies to orangutans for the comparison.)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @08:03PM
Dr. Zaius 2020!
Zaius! Zaius! Zaius!
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by khallow on Tuesday July 31 2018, @04:48PM (8 children)
This episode of Whataboutism brought to you by an AC who can't be bothered to remember the last five years of US history, much less bother with the many spectacular failings of the US pertaining to corruption going back to its beginnings.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Tuesday July 31 2018, @09:27PM (5 children)
How many indictments, guilty pleas and convictions happened to the Obama administration?
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday August 01 2018, @03:59AM (4 children)
Not good enough. Let's review a sample of the actual crimes of the time: 200+ cases of accessory to murder of people in Mexico and the US, fraudulent statements about the Benghazi attacks prior to the 2012 election, illegal IRS interference in the creation of tax exempt conservative groups, and a massive security breach (and subsequent destruction of evidence) committed by a Hillary Clinton for the purpose of bypassing Obama Administration oversight and FOIA requests.
At this point, the question becomes not how many "indictments, guilty pleas and convictions", but rather why we don't have more of them? The administration without the convictions then becomes more corrupt than the one with convictions.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Wednesday August 01 2018, @04:22AM (1 child)
and with all of the investigations, hearings, etc, how many indictments were there?
And why isn't the Trump Justice Department prosecuting all these crimes? Is the fix in with Trump, too?
Man, you gotta get off the Qanon shit. It's distorted your ability to reason beyond all repair. Tomorrow, you should step away from the computer and go outside, maybe ride your bike around a little bit. Get some fresh air. You might regain some perspective on where you lost your way.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:04PM
Exactly.
Because they'll need protection from the next administration.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @03:54PM (1 child)
At this point, you should stop trying so hard to rationalize your beliefs and start wondering if maybe, just maybe, you have flawed beliefs.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:28AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @03:48PM (1 child)
If choosing Tom Wheeler is your best example of Obama being corrupt then two things:
1.) Trump is far, far more corrupt. It's not even close.
2.) Your not trying that hard.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:27AM
It's not.
Bingo.