The Trump Investigations Report: Palmer Report: Donald Trump’s Orwellian nightmare goes off the rails

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

“President” Donald Trump recently referred to Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, as “Tim Apple.” Not a big deal, people make mistakes on names and places, and they laugh and correct themselves. Not “Orwell Lie Until I Turn Redenbacher” Trump. Trump cannot admit a mistake, rather, he wants his Cult 45 to ignore reality and yell “Fake News” and deny reality. Over the weekend, after making the mistake, Trump insisted that he’d called him “Tim Cook of Apple” and that no one heard him correctly. Chris Hayes on MSNBC on Monday night played the statement in slow time and nope, no “Cook” in between Tim and Apple. Again, no big deal, but no reason to lie.


When you are Corruptus Maximus with your entire orbit of stench and swamp surrounding you, you continue to lie. George Orwell warned us in his novel, 1984, alerting us: “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” Trump has told his followers similar things, but we are living in it every day, twenty-four hours a day.




It is not just Trump. Erik “Dark” Prince was interviewed recently, as reported by Palmer Report. When pushed on his not disclosing a meeting at Trump Tower about Iran policy with Donald Trump, Jr. and a UAE lobbyist, Price had the audacity to assert that he had told Congress about it, and that the transcript was incorrect. Bet you a mercenary force engagement he did not answer that question truthfully.




On Monday, Trump finally changed his story, tweeting: “At a recent round table meeting of business executives, & long after formally introducing Tim Cook of Apple, I quickly referred to Tim + Apple as Tim/Apple as an easy way to save time & words. The Fake News was disparagingly all over this, & it became yet another bad Trump story!”



Donald Trump lies about his lies. This is a man who talked drivel and proverbial BS for more than two hours last weekend, and yet he claims to have saved time by condensing four words (“Tim Cook of Apple”) to two words (“Tim Apple”) to save time and words. Believe what you see and hear – the Corruptus Maximus is exactly what he appears to be.



The post Donald Trump’s Orwellian nightmare goes off the rails appeared first on Palmer Report.

Palmer Report

The Trump Investigations Report


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

The Trump Investigations Report: “trump anxiety” – Google News: Trump budget boosts military and border wall, targets social programs – Japan Today

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Trump budget boosts military and border wall, targets social programs  Japan Today

President Donald Trump on Monday called for spending more money on the military and a U.S.-Mexico border wall while overhauling social programs for the …

“trump anxiety” – Google News

The Trump Investigations Report


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

The Trump Investigations Report: “Abedin” – Google News: Columbus weekend violence: one dead, four wounded in multiple shootings – The Columbus Dispatch

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Columbus weekend violence: one dead, four wounded in multiple shootings  The Columbus Dispatch

A 59-year-old man killed in North Linden Sunday night, near the end of an unusually violent weekend in Columbus, has been identified.Rodney Nathaniel Wade …

“Abedin” – Google News

The Trump Investigations Report


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

The Trump Investigations Report: “trump authoritarianism” – Google News: The double standards of our campus left – CU Columbia Spectator

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

The double standards of our campus left  CU Columbia Spectator

Groggily sloshing through Brooklyn’s streets and nursing a mild hangover with an Egg McMuffin in hand, I was as excited as I could be at 9 a.m. to attend Bernie …

“trump authoritarianism” – Google News

The Trump Investigations Report


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

The Trump Investigations Report: “Elections 2016 Investigation” – Google News: Federal investigators issue subpoenas in 9th district voter fraud investigation – CBS17.com

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Federal investigators issue subpoenas in 9th district voter fraud investigation  CBS17.com

According to a copy of the subpoena sent to the NCSBE, which was issued last Wednesday, the case is being investigated by the FBI’s office in Cary.

“Elections 2016 Investigation” – Google News

The Trump Investigations Report


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (87 sites): Eurasia Review: More Than 13 Million People Employed In Tourism In EU

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

In 2017 over 13 million people in the European Union (EU) were employed in economic activities related to tourism. Nearly 8 million of these people worked in the food and beverage industry, while 2 million were employed in transport.

The tourism industries are a major employer of women. The proportion of part-time employment in the tourism industries (24 %) is significantly higher than in the total non-financial business economy (17 %) and is comparable to the figure for the services sector as a whole (22 %). Nearly one in six people employed in tourism are foreign citizens, The Financial reports.

The tourism industries account for 21 % of people employed in the
services sector. When looking at the total non-financial business
economy, the tourism industries account for 9 % of people employed.
Among the Member States, Greece recorded the highest share (23.9 % or
nearly one in four people employed) followed by Cyprus and Malta with
respectively one in five and nearly one in six people employed working
in the tourism sector.

In absolute terms, Germany had the
highest employment in the tourism industries (2.5 million people),
followed by the United Kingdom (2.3 million), Italy (1.5 million), Spain
(1.4 million) and France (1.1 million). These five Member States
account for 66 % of employment in the tourism industries across the EU.

Eurasia Review

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (87 sites)


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (87 sites): Eurasia Review: When Green ‘Fixes’ Actually Increase Carbon Footprint

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

When a big technology company moves to town, it often promises
eco-friendly infrastructure and encourages a sustainability ethos to go
along with it.

That was the idea when Amazon announced plans to bring its
headquarters to Seattle’s South Lake Union neighborhood a decade ago. It
coincided with low-carbon investments the area had already been
making—a new light rail between downtown and the airport, more protected
bike lanes—and the company’s desire to promote a climate-friendly
lifestyle.

But as well-paid tech workers arrived in South Lake Union and
adjacent neighborhoods, moving physically close to the headquarters
building and public transit options, the area’s demographics started to
shift in what University of Pennsylvania sociologist Daniel Aldana Cohen
and colleagues describe as “carbon gentrification.” Beyond that,
instead of a resulting in a lower carbon footprint, greenhouse gas
emissions and overall consumption there likely increased.

According to a new paper in the International Journal of Urban and Regional Research
from Cohen, Jennifer Rice of the University of Georgia, Joshua Long of
Southwestern University, and Jason Jurjevich of Portland State
University, what happened with Amazon in Seattle isn’t unique. Rather,
it’s an unforeseen and unfortunate trend that will likely continue and
requires more granular data to fully understand.

“There’s clear evidence that the arrival of tech companies is
causing a significant migration of lower-income and non-white
populations out of urban cores where firms locate. Then more affluent
residents are taking their place,” says Cohen, an assistant professor
and member of the Population Studies Center (PSC) at Penn. “From the
carbon analysis so far, when density results from more high-income
residents, the low-carbon benefits of that density get wiped out. We
believe the carbon emissions in these neighborhoods are staying the same
or increasing.”

Residential density—in this context the concentration of
people—living near mass transit can play an important role in lowering
carbon emissions. “The core issue is what kind of density,” Cohen says.
“The data are telling us that the kind led by tech companies and tech
workers causes social displacement and has no climate benefit. On the
other hand, density anchored by affordable housing would yield climate
and social benefits at the same time. And it could be pursued all across
urban and suburban areas, led by public planning and public
investment.”

The research began after Cohen, a sociologist focused on Sao Paolo
and New York City, and Rice, a geographer focused on Seattle, were
co-panelists at a conference. Rice has researched governance in Seattle
for more than a decade, allowing her to observe firsthand the changes
Amazon brought. “As wealthier people arrived,” she says, “I suspected
that was counteracting the city’s climate-related goals.”

Teaming up with Long and Jurjevich, they began studying links
between big tech, gentrification, and carbon emissions there. They
looked at what are currently the best zip code-level carbon footprint
data in the United States, and conducted a demographic analysis of
Seattle, then did a deep dive into how housing advocates perceived the
changes since Amazon arrived.

“Many of the activist groups I work with in Seattle feel you can’t
have climate justice without housing justice,” Rice says. “We agree.”

Understanding the true societal cost of this relatively new problem
requires data that either haven’t yet been collected or aren’t yet
analyzed. Part of the challenge lies in how cities currently count
emissions.

Right now, according to Cohen, most do so territorially. In other
words, they consider what happens within the city limits as emissions
coming from that city, then add in energy that urban residents use. But
territorial accounting ignores any production or transportation beyond
city limits that goes toward producing goods and services distributed
within that city. That can lead to a skewed representation of carbon
footprints.

“For affluent, post-industrial cities, this is a convenient measure
to use. But it’s necessary to have even more granular data on carbon
emissions,” he says. “All the evidence we have so far strongly suggests
that gentrification, when you bring wealthier people into dense
neighborhoods, will maintain or even raise the carbon footprint of those
areas, particularly when you’re displacing low-income residents.”

A changing consumption pattern is likely at fault, since more
affluent people tend to have higher carbon footprints due to higher
consumption. Previously, consumption centered on places where people
spent time together, like rec centers and churches. In the new model,
luxury condo towers and high-end malls move in, closing off people from
one another yet putting expensive purchasing opportunities next door.
This move, from shared to private consumption, is already seen in places
like Seattle and New York and increasingly, Philadelphia, happening in
tandem with gentrification.

But it’s not too late to reverse course. “We need massive
investments in affordable housing paired with serious support to ensure
that density does not displace people, but rather that everyone can
benefit from it,” Cohen says, adding, “Sustainability interventions need
to be holistically deployed at the regional scale.”

A Penn project called the Socio-Spatial Climate Collaborative, or
(SC)2 aims, to help in that endeavor. With Kevin Ummel, a PSC research
affiliate, and graduate student Nick Graetz, Cohen is leading an effort
to analyze neighborhood-level carbon footprints and a range of other
social public health data across the United States. It won’t conclude
for at least a year, but once complete should better explain factors
like the root causes of climate change and vulnerabilities from it, the
true influence of green spaces, and who uses the amenities that they
live near.

The recent research is one step toward that broader goal. “Our aim
with this paper is provocation,” Cohen says. “High-tech development is
high carbon and is not giving the benefits that it promises. We think
there’s strong circumstantial evidence to support the case, and we want
people to be aware of it.”

Eurasia Review

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (87 sites)


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (87 sites): Eurasia Review: Ron Paul: Bipartisan Attacks On The Second Amendment – OpEd

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

The House of Representatives recently passed legislation that
would expand the national background check system to require almost
everyone selling firearms, including private collectors who supplement
their incomes by selling firearms at gun shows, to perform background
checks on the potential buyers. The bill has a section purporting to bar
creation of a national firearms registry. However, the expanded
background check system will require the government to compile lists of
those buying and selling guns. In other words, it creates a de facto
national gun registry.

Similar to the experience
with other types of prohibition, making it more difficult to legally buy
a gun will enhance the firearms black market. Criminals, terrorist, and
even deranged mass shooters will thus have no problem obtaining
firearms.

It is no coincidence that the majority of
mass shootings take place in “gun-free zones,” where shooters know their
targets will be unarmed. This shows that any law making it more
difficult for Americans to own and carry firearms makes us less safe. If
Congress really wanted to reduce the incidence of gun violence, it
would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act. This law leaves children
easy prey for mass shooters by mandating that public schools be
“gun-free zones.”

A nationwide system of gun
registration could be a step toward national gun confiscation. However,
antigun bureaucrats need not go that far to use the expanded background
check system to abuse the rights of gun owners. Gun owners could find
themselves subject to surveillance and even harassment, such as more
intensive screening by the Transportation Security Administration,
because they own “too many” firearms.

Republican
control of the White House and the Senate does not mean our gun rights
are safe. Republicans have a long history of supporting gun control.
After the 1999 Columbine shooting, many Republicans, including many who
campaigned as being pro-Second Amendment, eagerly cooperated with
then-President Bill Clinton on gun control. Some supposedly pro-gun
Republicans also tried to pass “compromise” gun control legislation
after the Sandy Hook shooting.

Neoconservative
Senator Marco Rubio has introduced legislation that uses tax dollars to
bribe states to adopt red flag laws. Red flag laws allow government to
violate an individual’s Second Amendment rights based on nothing more
than a report that the individual could become violent. Red flag laws
can allow an individual’s guns to be taken away without due process
simply because an estranged spouse, angry neighbor, or disgruntled
coworker tells police the individual threatened him or otherwise made
him feel unsafe.

President Trump has joined Rubio in
wanting the government to, in Trump’s words, “take the guns first, go
through due process second.” During his confirmation hearing, President
Trump’s new Attorney General William Barr expressed support for red flag
laws. California Senator and leading gun control advocate Dianne
Feinstein has expressed interest in working with Barr to deprive gun
owners of due process. It would not be surprising to see left-wing
authoritarians like Feinstein work with right-wing authoritarians like
Barr and Rubio on “compromise” legislation containing both a national
red flag law and expanded background checks.

My
years in Congress taught me that few politicians can be counted on to
protect our liberties. Most politicians must be pressured to stand up
for freedom by informed and involved pro-liberty citizens That is why
those of us who understand the benefits of liberty must remain vigilant
against any attempt to erode respect for our rights, especially the
right to defend ourselves against private crime and public tyranny.


This article was published by RonPaul Institute.

Eurasia Review

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (87 sites)


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (87 sites): Eurasia Review: Libyan Elections: Are The Abu Dhabi Meetings A Turning Point? – OpEd

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

By Paolo Zucconi

Libyan Prime Minister Al-Sarraj and Khalifa Haftar met in Abu Dhabi
few days ago. Can this meeting be the chance for new elections in Libya?

Eight years after Qaddafi’s fall, Libya remains in a chaotic state
based on the fragmentation of power. The faultlines and conflicts are
numerous: between West and East Libya (Tripoli and Tobruk), suburban
clashes in strategic cities like Misrata, Sirte, Benghazi, and tribal
conflicts (especially in the Fezzan, where foreign interference of
Chadian and Nigerien militants in the Tebu tribes increase tribal
tensions to control the region). All of this affects the state-building
process and national reconciliation. New trends have emerged since 2013,
such as changes in the dynamics of illegal cross-border enterprise,
especially the rise of human smuggling and alleged illegal inward
migration into southern Libya.

State fragility and deep instability, and the emergence of informal
security providers and other non-state armed actors actively encouraged
the outsourcing of the security sector due to the lack of an inclusive
military command structure. In Libya this has been more of a bottom-up
process as national armed forces have lost internal cohesion, while
diverse armed actors have become integral to security arrangements
(mostly informal) and have almost acquired a legitimate status thanks to
de facto legitimization by state authorities.

Since the 2011 revolution, the United Nations (UN) developed an Action Plan
to stabilize Libya, but its implementation is extremely difficult. The
UN envoy in Libya, Ghassam Salamé, is pushing the two main political
leaders Al-Serraj (leader of the UN-backed government) and Haftar
(leader of the opposing Libyan National Army) to meet. Prominent
academic Ghassam Salamé, the Libyan Prime Minister Al-Serraj, and Haftar
met in Abu Dhabi a few days ago and agreed to promote political
elections in the country to begin a stabilization process. At the same
time, Ahmed Maitig, the strongman of Misrata (a strategic city for
Libya’s future), met
Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs Moavero-Milanesi on March 5 to
discuss the economic situation in Libya, strategies to manage migration
flows and the possible re-opening of the Italian consulate in Benghazi.

It looks as though there are significant diplomatic efforts underway
to change the current situation, and the meetings in Abu Dhabi may
represent a significant step toward stabilization. However, the U.N. has
not yet announced any format or timeline for the national conference,
an event that is considered important for agreeing to electoral terms
and conditions. Salamé mentioned the necessity of this conference after
the Palermo summit of last November. Moreover, these meetings take place
under international pressure and this is not something that many local
tribes support.

Haftar’s Libyan National Army (LNA) has started a new military offensive in the key region of Fezzan. According to Haftar,
this offensive was necessary to fight terrorists, criminals, and human
trafficking. The LNA, supported by the Tebu and Tuareg tribes, occupied
Sabha (the main city in the region) and the important El Sharara oil
field. However, according to Libya Observer,
West Libya’s elder councils in Misrata and Zintan made clear the need
to build a civilian state based on constitution and unified army and
police forces under a civilian authority.

Western local actors (i.e. tribes in Misrata and Zintan) will not
accept Haftar as leader of any unified national army, especially
considering he is now consolidating his influence in the South. They see
these meetings and possible agreements as a threat against the
legitimate state-building process. The reinvigorated contrast between
western groups, tribes, and Haftar risks jeopardizing the current
Salamé-led efforts for a national conference and elections. We may be at
the turning point in the local political dynamics, but the situation is
highly complex and fluid. Should Al-Sarraj and Haftar get a political
agreement, this might be opposed by key local actors in West Libya,
leading to further divisions, polarization, and potentially fueling
military responses.

Libyan governance framework has often changed over the course of
history, but tribes always played a key role in any state-building
process (i.e. Ottoman era, Italian occupation, Qadhafi’s regime). When a
top-down state-building process was instituted, tribes mobilized to
resist it. The Italian occupation is a stereotype. Until 1935, Italians
leaned on tribal governance. After 1935, they decided to centralize
power and unify the three main regions: Tripolitania, Cyrenaica, and
Fezzan. This was a huge mistake. The exclusion of tribes from political
institutions strengthened tribal affiliations and affected Italian
administration’s power framework.

Tribes’ resilience needs to be take into account by international
actors involved in political negotiations. Underestimating the role of
tribes in efforts for stabilization can have bad consequences.
Developing a top-down government can be a mistake. An agreement between
Al-Serraj and Haftar might be a positive achievement from an
international point of view and establish a basis for national
reconciliation, but western actors in Libya see it differently.

Whereas national reconciliation may guarantee more stable
institutions and Libya’s future as a country, tribes and municipalities
need to be  the key part of this process and be integrated into the
security sector reform and reconstruction process.

From the most recent meetings, two issues emerged. The willingness to
develop a centralized governance trough a top-down process as well as
the further weakening of Al-Serraj and the strengthening of Haftar as
leader. This could compromise peace efforts, especially should tribes
have a minor role in core political negotiations. Any top-down
state-building process may fail as has happened in the past.

The views expressed in this article are those of the authors
alone and do not necessarily reflect those of Geopoliticalmonitor.com or
any institutions with which the authors are associated.

Eurasia Review

1. US Security from Michael_Novakhov (87 sites)


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Counterintelligence from Michael_Novakhov (50 sites): Eurasia Review: Robert Reich: Warren Is Correct About Busting Up Big Tech – OpEd

Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Presidential hopeful Senator Elizabeth Warren announced Friday she wants to bust up giants like Facebook, Google, and Amazon.

America’s
first Gilded Age began in the late nineteenth century with a raft of
innovations – railroads, steel production, oil extraction – but
culminated in mammoth trusts run by “robber barons” like JP Morgan, John
D. Rockefeller, and William H.(“the public be damned”) Vanderbilt.

The answer then was to bust up the railroad, oil, and steel monopolies.

We’re
now in a second Gilded Age – ushered in by semiconductors, software and
the internet – which has spawned a handful of hi-tech behemoths and a
new set of barons like Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos,
and Google’s Sergey Brin and Larry Page.

The answer now is the same: Bust up the monopolies.

The
current move is bipartisan. At a Senate hearing I testified at last
week, arch-conservative Republican Josh Hawley asked me, rhetorically,
“Is there really any wonder that there is increased pressure for
antitrust enforcement activity, for privacy activity when these
companies behave in the way that they do?”

Hawley added, “Every
day brings some creepy new revelation about these companies’ behaviors.
Of course the public is going to want there to be action to defend their
rights. It’s only natural.”

Natural indeed. Nearly 90 percent of
all internet searches now go through Google. Facebook and Google
together account for 58 percent of all digital ads (where most ad money
goes these days).

They’re also the first stops for many Americans
seeking news (93 percent of Americans receive news online). Amazon is
now the first stop for a third of all American consumers seeking to buy anything.

With
such size comes the power to stifle innovation. Amazon won’t let any
business that sells through it to sell any item at a lower price
anywhere else. It’s even using its control over book sales to give books
published by Amazon priority over rival publishers.

Google uses
the world’s most widely used search engine to promote its own services
and Google-generated content over those of competitors, like Yelp.
Facebook’s purchases of WhatsApp and Instagram killed off two potential
rivals.

Contrary to the conventional view of America as a hotbed
of entrepreneurship, the rate new job-creating businesses have formed in
the United States has been halved since 2004, according to the Census
Bureau. Part of the reason: gargantuan entry barriers put up by Big
Tech.

Such size also confers political power to get whatever these companies and their top executives want.

Amazon
– the richest corporation in America – paid nothing in federal taxes
last year. Meanwhile, it’s holding an auction to extort billions from
states and cities eager to have its second headquarters.

It also
forced Seattle, it’s home headquarters, to back down on a plan to tax
big corporations like itself to pay for homeless shelters for a growing
population that can’t afford the sky-high rents caused in part by
Amazon.

Facebook withheld evidence of Russian activity on its
platform far longer than previously disclosed. When the news came to
light, it employed a political opposition research firm to discredit
critics.

Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, who holds the world’s speed
record for falling from one of the most admired to the most reviled
people on the planet, just unveiled a plan to “encrypt” personal
information from all his platforms.

The new plan is likely to
give Facebook even more comprehensive data about everyone. If you
believe it will better guard privacy, you don’t remember Zuckerberg’s
last seven promises to protect privacy.

Google forced the New
America Foundation, an influential think tank it helped fund, to fire
researchers who were urging antitrust officials to take on Google.

And it’s been quietly financed hundreds of university professors to write research papers justifying Google’s market dominance.

What
to do? Some argue the tech mammoths should be regulated like utilities
or common carriers, but this would put government into the impossible
position of policing content and overseeing new products and services.

A
better alternative is to break them up. That way, information would be
distributed through a large number of independent channels without a
centralized platform giving all content apparent legitimacy and
extraordinary reach. And more startups could flourish.

Like the
robber barons of the first Gilded Age, those of the second have amassed
fortunes because of their monopolies – fortunes that give them
unparalleled leverage over politicians and the economy.

The
combined wealth of Zuckerberg ($62.3 billion), Bezos ($131 billion),
Brin ($49.8 billion) and Page ($50.8 billion) is larger than the
combined wealth of the bottom half of the American population.

A wealth tax (also proposed by Warren) would help.

Some
of the robber barons of the first Gilded Age were generous
philanthropists, as are today’s. That didn’t excuse the damage they did
to America.

Let’s be clear: Monopolies aren’t good for anyone except for the monopolists.

In
this new Gilded Age, we need to respond to them as forcefully as we did
the first time around. Warren’s ideas are a good start.

Eurasia Review

Counterintelligence from Michael_Novakhov (50 sites)


Spread the Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    27
    Shares
  • 27
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •