Slashdot Mirror
Judge Rules AT&T Can't See Trump White House Communications About Time Warner Merger
The judge presiding over the Justice Department's attempt to block the AT&T-Time Warner merger has ruled that the White House's private communications on the merger will not be released. The Verge reports: When the department said in November that it would sue to block the mega-merger, thoughts immediately turned to the White House. President Trump has made no secret of his disdain for CNN, and some watchers questioned whether the White House's hand was present, guiding the Justice Department as a way to exact revenge on the Time Warner-owned property. The Justice Department has denied any wrongdoing, and said it is only looking to block the merger on the grounds that it is anti-competitive. But to prove the theory, AT&T and Time Warner requested communications between the Justice Department and White House that could have shown the department was engaging in "selective enforcement." In today's decision, the judge on the case said the companies had fallen "far short" of the legal bar required to receive the documents.
This seems very close to a blank check to the White House to engage in selective enforcement of anti-trust rules whenever they please. This ruling says that it is close to impossible to establish a clear line of political influence even when the circumstantial evidence for political retribution influencing it is pretty heavy. I'm in general in favor of stronger enforcement of anti-trust laws, but not if it is going to be done in a capricious fashion for political and personal goals.
The merger between AT&T and Time-Warner should be blocked. This is a case of the president doing the right thing for corrupt reasons, which I suppose we should take as a win.
But ultimately, I suspect the merger will go forward. AT&T and Time-Warner simply have better lawyers than the Trump administration.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The Trump administration is working hard to right the sinking ship that was Obummer's tenure, and if this kind of thing is what it takes then so be it. More courts need to step in line or get out of the way via impeachment if necessary.
Regardless of the reason, the merger shouldn't happen.
Should I be mad dumbass Trump did something good for a bad reason?
Huge companies merging is bad for America. Does no one realize that? Who fucking cares about the presidents motivations. Hyper-consolidation and the resulting lack of competition exacerbates every problem with our countries "free market" (LOL, free market)
Hey, that traitor smells like urine!
Shoulda picked a judge in Hawaii or San Fran. Those judges don't worry about pesky details
The AT&T merger is being blocked on the grounds it is bad for the consumer and AT&T and Time Warner are already on record stating it will allow them to raise prices.
Just because "Trump" does not excuse you for your poor logic on how bad this merger would be for consumers.
AT&T and Time Warner simply should not be merging.
And you thinking the merger would be good just because of "Trump" does not speak well of your ability to think.
A lot of people hate Trump and they all want a fishing license.
Just because you can imagine that a crime has occurred, doesn't mean you get to breech Executive Privlege and are owed transcripts of communications you only imagine exists.
If the lawyers demanding transcripts of any/all communication between the White House and DOJ had anything stronger than a 'belief' that something illegal 'may' have happened, they might get what they are asking for.
I seem to recall the previous administration refused to share communications between the White House and DOJ regarding the "Fast 'n Furious" gun-running fiasco when Congress asked for it - remember, Eric Holder was found in contempt of Congress in that case? I'm sure your outrage then, when people's actual lives were lost, not the prospect of possibly higher cable bills...
Ken
1. He is guilty as fuck.
2. The rabbit hole goes much deeper.
Translation: We know we're breaking the law, but want proof that we're being singled out for enforcement due to political reasons.
I frown on selective enforcement in general, but in this case it's a law that shouldn't be violated by anyone.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
The gamification of propaganda took longer than expected to arrive. Folks have been hinting around this for a while, notably FB and Twitter, but an actual game developed expressly for this is new. Orwell would be impressed.
Organization? You must be joking..
Go fascism!
What about a Freedom of Information Act request? Would that work in getting the desired documents?
You have to first establish that 'nationalism' or taking care of one's own country is bad. Socialists have made that the central failing of National Socialism to avoid casting aspersions on Socialism, but that doesn't mean they're correct. They're so worried about financial inequality that they're surprised by all the times they created a one-party state that went haywire both with Socialism and Communism. They simply find some group to blame for financial inequality and systemically oppress them. When they say "the 1%" now, they used to say "the Jews" and you can even now find plenty of Jews in the 1% due to them being successful, hardworking people that so many love to hate for their success.
Regarding a single party state, I see more danger of a Democratic hegemony as they've found various ways to invoke chilling effects, the heckler's veto and other means of deplatforming while arguing that it's legally okay when they do it so that makes it morally okay because they think of themselves as the good guys. But even the National Socialists though of themselves as the good guys--they were protecting oppressed German workers from the 1% of their day (Jews). We all know how well that went.
I don't see him saying "violence is acceptable." We do have a monopoly on violence in the state, to forbid private vengeance (which is sadly in vogue, though not always violent). The supposedly alt-right people who have committed violence are criminals, they deserve punishment, and they have no real support. I don't see many people on the left disavowing Antifa, and some seem to believe it doesn't exist. I have no interest in a pissing contest over who is worse, ALL of these creeps are criminal scum who belong in jail. So if you want to argue with me here, you'll be saying that some of this violence is okay, which by your own list makes you at least 1/4 fascist.
Regarding enforcement of gender roles, I don't see any enforcement. I also don't see where fascists did that historically, nor have you made a case why this is something terrible that will lead to murdering lots of people, sending people to gulags, or any of the horrible things historical fascists really did.
So you're really just throwing around an emotive word and failing to make the case of why these things deserve that strongly negative an emotion in that case, failing to show that he actually believes those things (show me HIS words, not yours, nor reports of other people who think he thinks that, I don't believe that any of you can read minds). The more likely case is that you've constructed a 'weak man' argument where you found some horrible example and are trying to present it as normal for the category. That's the sort of thing actual National Socialists used to justify the oppression of their various targeted groups, so you'll forgive me if I really dislike that sort of thing, the same as I am disgusted when ugly stereotypes are used against other groups of people, like blacks, by racists and other bigots.
P.S. the subject refers to the names of two fallacies if you're confused. Look up the articles on that subject on the Slate Star Codex if you're interested in understanding how they work and why they apply here.
"Why is @BarackObama spending millions to try and hide his records? He is the least transparent President–ever–and he ran on transparency." — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 6, 2012
Now it's shaping up to be yet another administration lacking in transparency. MAGA my ass.
P.S. - these attacks on Trump are his own fault. If he didn't want this to happen, maybe he shouldn't post his random thoughts on Twitter so much.
Is how high?