Can’t say. If they aren’t, it will be a quick investigation.
what reason is there for an investigation.
This has come up in a number of threads, and I don’t know how else to explain this to you.
Intelligence agencies don’t “investigate”. They gather intelligence and analyze it. They’re not law enforcement. They don’t collect evidence, or charge people with crimes.
They collect information, and judge it’s relative veracity.
They are “Monopolies” because they are popular not because they are making it impossible for competition.
You think Obama wouldn’t have asked for an intelligence assessment if the RNC had been hacked by Russia?
Of course not.
Should they be investigated and scrutinized because they may be anti-Trump?
Same reason there was in 2011 before the chairman of the board of google campaigned for Obama and got it dropped.
That was an investigation into advertising.
This thread is hilarious… given some of the views that some here have on things like net neutrality.
2 Likes
No - Alphabet, Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat are not owned by the same parent company.
You don’t you can make your own server for under 500$
Well you can actually make your own computer a server with a bit of free software
Why? Does Fox News need to allow CNN to run ads on their network?
No. That’s one reason I said once any trust investigation is initiated, he needs to stay out of it.
You seriously think that would make you a competitor to twitter or facebook?
Oh dear. The WSJ thinks in was an anti trust investigation. Call them up immediately.
It would give you the same exact platform as them, the only difference is Facebook and Twitter are popular.
I use to host private servers quite a bit on a junk computer I had laying around doesn’t take much.
It had nothing to do with their search engine it had to do with them buying up every internet adverting company.
Yeah. Having a server puts me in competitin with Facebook/sarcasm. Actually, Facebook may be a natural monopoly. People want to use social media to be social. That means there is a critical level of members and no one else is going to compete.
But if you are right, then the investigation closes quickly.
If you are wrong, it doesn’t.
You can make your arguments of the laws and facts, but that is what an investigation is supposed to be.
I’ve been told for two years when I questioned the evidence of collusion that I needed to wait until the investigation was over.
