The easiest way to explain the repeal of net neutrality is to call it censorship.
The WSJ article out tonight indicates that Mueller asked Cambridge Analytica earlier in the Fall âto turn over the emails of any Cambridge Analytica employees who worked on the Trump campaignâ.
WSJ confirms that Cambridge Analytica complied with the request. Though WSJ does not give an exact date (probably to avoid someone burning them the way that somebody burned Manu Raju of CNN last week (and btw I think that it was members or staff of the House Republicans on the Intel Committee that did that)) the article states the request happened before CAâs CEO, Alexander Nix revealed that he had contacted Julian Assange in June 2016 regarding the stolen emails that Assange had claimed he had in in his possession (this is around the same time that CA was retained by the Trump campaign). The article reporting this was published by the WSJ on 10/25/17. So Muellerâs request was sometime in September or October of 2017.
This means Mueller has every email exchange between CA and the entire Trump Digital team, of which Kushner was the head. He has had the emails for weeks if not months. The emails have also been turned over to the House Intel committee. CAâs CEO Nix was interviewed by the House Intel committee today (12/14/17).
This article could explain why the House Intel committee and Fox have been in such a hissy fit to undermine Mueller. If Mueller has these emails and there are incriminating statements regarding the use of stolen material he could be in trouble. This would explain what Iâm seeing/hearing in the rumor mill.
Thatâs a very broad category. For instance I didnât consider WikiLeaks to be a true menace until they clearly revealed themselves as a conduit for the Russian attack on our election (a recent development, donât think it was the case before 2015 but Russian direction could have been and we just didnât know). WikiLeaks wonât be over here planting bombs and Al Queda, ISIS, etc. will if they can.
We have to change our view of secrecy and classification. There is a difference between revealing policy or intent and revealing techniques. There is a serious danger of revealing techniques but there is also a beta-test factor at work in techniques being revealed. whatâs needed more than anything are contingency plans. Everything has to be done on the basis that it may be revealed. Assume thereâs an invisible expiration date on every secret and that the secret will eventually out itself. The more sordid, the more likely and the shorter the shelf-life. So for instance if a vital foreign source is in sudden danger by a public revelation, there should be a plan in place to get them and their immediate family out of there ASAP. Cervantes brings up the case of Daniel Ellsberg. Iâd second that in classing ALL revelations and whistle-blowing as automatically treasonous.
As for those damned Soviet Republican enablers in the Trump administration, Congress and the media (Russian Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and almost all of Fox News), I wouldnât lose any sleep if an angry mob hung them from lamp-posts. The weird thing is they donât view it as treason at all, weâre almost 30 years removed from the Cold War but, in my mid-50s and theyâre all my age or older, itâs like they grew up in a different country. They should think as I do that, even though Moscow has more billionaires right now than NYC, the Russian government is never trustworthy. Trump & Co. doesnât see borders, all they see is money, âA loose affiliation of millionaires and billionaires and babyâ, as Paul Simon sang. And Trumpco is in their debt.
As for the enablers, all they see is the deregulation and tax cuts that Trumpco might still deliver. Thank God for their incompetence, but man do things suck right now.
Hereâs an upvate just for raising my hopes for the night!
No, no - theyâre just saying âIâd like to take a fifthâ, as in bottle of whiskey. And who wouldnât want a nice bottle of whiskey? Well, not me (Iâm more a Chardonnay kind of guy), but for those who are onto the hard stuff, a fifth might just be the ticket. And who are we to judge? /s
One of my private pleasures is that I worked the musical âA Little Night Musicâ in my (possibly misspent) youth, touring it around Australia for almost a year. With that as preamble, I present:
Or to quote Bette Davis (on the death of Joan Crawford)
âYou should never say bad things about the dead, you should only say good . . . Joan Crawford is dead. Good.â
Iâm hoping and trusting that we can morph this to apply to Donnie soonâŚ
This. As I pointed out in an earlier post this evening, what we are seeing is censorship, and itâs a long established principle (ref. John Gilmore) that ***âThe Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around itâ***. I explain in more detail how this works in the real world:
When I saw this Friday morning, that was exactly my first thought.
âIf youâre innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?â
- Republican Nominee Donald Trump, September 2016
"because of Donald Trump"
No further comment needed, thereâs our answer.
Breaking news: Former liberals call amass for the head of their former darling, Assange (and Snowden)! You gotta give the FBI and CIA a hand for pulling that one off. Next thing yaâ know, youâll have all kinds of intelligent people claiming the FBI is an even handed and non political force for true justice. Much as I hope these guys get Trump, I think we need to remind each other that when you or I look around the poker table trying to figure out who the mark is, that invariably means that the mark isâŚyou or I.
So do you think there is incontrovertible evidence that Wiki leaks and/or the Russians who stole Hillaryâs emails?
Yes, and I think the computer forensics probably confirm it.
Actually, no one with a brain is gonna talk to an FBI person about anything at this point, no mtter what they have done or not done. His taking the 5th is the smart move even if heâs done nothing.
But heâs not dealing with just the FBI, but k.
Not really. You guys are as confident of this poorly unsupported shit that you hope will sink trump as the paranoid idiots posting at Consortiumnews.com are confident of the conspiracies of the deep state to hang a poor innocent Trumpkin. Yâall ought to get together sometime and see whoâs the least rationalâŚ
You out yourself by claiming this âshitâ is âpoorly supported.â The entire IC community here and abroad have the same fucking evidence.
Youâre going to get the shock of your life if you donât believe Trump worked with Putin to throw the election. I hope is stuns you utterly
Shades of Merry Fitz-mas⌠Iâm increasingly finding the premature glee around here to be sort of depressing.
I hear you, but if you follow the thread, it was an expression of solidarity with Tena who was expressing hope for big things, not assuming they were already happening.