Never mind that those six or so companies are all owned by the same parent company. Nothing to see here.
Unless of course you have to buy the rights to host your site from a company who holds a monopoly on hosting services.
Nope.
The suit against Ma Bell was because they were subsidizing their telephone network with profits from other subsidies, artificially keeping their prices low.
The break-up was a settlement on the part of AT&T, who knew that they would lose, and were going to be hit with massive fines.
There is no company with a monopoly on web hosting.
Which isn’t illegal. Just like peering agreements aren’t illegal now.
It was illegal. It violated anti-trust law.
Blame Clapper if you don’t like the way it was said. The issue here was that President’s shouldn’t order investigations. I think that clears up the situation, unless you think Obama was wrong.
Sure. You know what you’re talking about.
Yet. Not like we haven’t seen any big mergers or buyouts recently. Perhaps because anti trust laws aren’t really being enforced anymore?
Actually, if Trump is concerned about Twitter being a monopoly then at least a quicker road for him to take would be to drop twitter and use one of those open source alternatives you are talking about.
That would likely have a more immediate effect than some investigation that might not even pan out.
No, thats not “the issue here”. You’re doing your best to reduce everything to overbroad statements.
The issue here is a sitting President publically ordering a law enforcement investigation into their perceived political enemies.
Obama ordering an intelligence assessment into Russian election interference is not a comparable situation.
Oh my god are you even trying here?
Yeah. Like there was no guess at that point as to which side was being helped.
yep…
Try looking up antitrust laws. Your question is simplistic.
As opposed to a President getting election help and quashing his agencies recommendation to pursue antitrust?
Do you really not see the difference between a President tasking his foreign intelligence community to find out about foreign election interference, and a President tasking a law enforcement agency to criminally investigate their political enemies?
That sounds like a crime. If you have evidence of a quid pro quo, I suggest you notify your local FBI office.
What does that have to do with what we’re talking about?
No. There is no difference between initiating a foreign intelligence investigations than there is in initiating an antitrust investigation.
And Obama wasn’t politically motivated? We have no idea. If the DNC emails had been hacked by then, he was likely highly politically motivated.
Conversely, are social media organizations to be exempt from our laws because they may be anti Trump?
how does twitter hold a monopoly on anything.
