I don't know that I've ever seen a change like that in real time to the text of an official government website. It's absurd, and yet it's not surprising for this administration.
Of course, Brendan Carr can say the FCC isn't independent, and online text can follow suit, but Anna Gomez and others who vow that it should be independent are in the right. Until leadership changes, however, we'll need to put up with the farce that the agency as a whole is acting with legitimacy.
I think the change was related to the recent SCOTUS decision that eliminated the Democrat dream of unelected bureaucrats that can never be fired even if found to be connected to Soros or the CCP or the Democrat command center (all related). I like the FTC being under the Administration so we can fire the leadership if they suck, and elect a new administration if they direct the FTC leadership to suck. Note that the FTC generally lacks teeth unless supported by the antitrust arm of the DOJ.
The law says a President can fire members of independent commissions but only "for cause" which just means Tubby needs to show evidence of incompetence or corruption or other malfeasance. Not that high a bar to clear if these people were really as awful as Tubby claims, but "show evidence" has never been his thing, has it? So instead, the standard he wants - and the standard this Supreme Court is likely to give him - is: When I said "Jump!" she didn't say '"How high?"
We'll have to check back with Frank and see how he feels about all of this once President AOC is in the Oval Office.
Hey, while I'm wasting my time on you, suppose the President says to the head of the FCC, "I don't like ABC's news coverage of me, yank their license." Should the FCC head have legal authority to say no to this Presidential order, or - as an employee of the President - are they obligated to follow through on his orders? Please consult any relevant Constitutional amendments, you won't need to go very far down the list.
If you don't like the hiring and firing decisions of the CEO of the government, then you can vote to remove him and replace him with a bumbling, low achievement, kackling, schoolgirl like Kamala Harris.
It is hilarious that Justice Brown lacks the self-awareness of stepping in it when she transparently asks if it is better for us to be ruled by the credentialled expert class. You could not write a more dystopian novel than she put out there.
Democrats are like sugar-saturated children in a knife factory. Just trying to prevent them from hurting themselves is exhausting.
Any action like that will be challenged in the courts. And since Democrats dominate the courts, it should be vetted to your satisfaction.
But Trump has never taken' the approach of getting an FCC license yanked just because he does not like the report". Hell, if that was the standard he would have yanked all the licenses for the legacy media by now. The crime is absolute dishonesty to sway voters. And if you are a good American, no matter what side of the political aisle you reside on, you would support that type of action. We cannot have a functioning democracy with the media becoming a PAC for one party or the other.
I don't know that I've ever seen a change like that in real time to the text of an official government website. It's absurd, and yet it's not surprising for this administration.
Of course, Brendan Carr can say the FCC isn't independent, and online text can follow suit, but Anna Gomez and others who vow that it should be independent are in the right. Until leadership changes, however, we'll need to put up with the farce that the agency as a whole is acting with legitimacy.
I think the change was related to the recent SCOTUS decision that eliminated the Democrat dream of unelected bureaucrats that can never be fired even if found to be connected to Soros or the CCP or the Democrat command center (all related). I like the FTC being under the Administration so we can fire the leadership if they suck, and elect a new administration if they direct the FTC leadership to suck. Note that the FTC generally lacks teeth unless supported by the antitrust arm of the DOJ.
The law says a President can fire members of independent commissions but only "for cause" which just means Tubby needs to show evidence of incompetence or corruption or other malfeasance. Not that high a bar to clear if these people were really as awful as Tubby claims, but "show evidence" has never been his thing, has it? So instead, the standard he wants - and the standard this Supreme Court is likely to give him - is: When I said "Jump!" she didn't say '"How high?"
We'll have to check back with Frank and see how he feels about all of this once President AOC is in the Oval Office.
It is easy to prove incompetence for Democrat plants in these positions. Democrat and incompetence are synonymous.
Hey, while I'm wasting my time on you, suppose the President says to the head of the FCC, "I don't like ABC's news coverage of me, yank their license." Should the FCC head have legal authority to say no to this Presidential order, or - as an employee of the President - are they obligated to follow through on his orders? Please consult any relevant Constitutional amendments, you won't need to go very far down the list.
If you don't like the hiring and firing decisions of the CEO of the government, then you can vote to remove him and replace him with a bumbling, low achievement, kackling, schoolgirl like Kamala Harris.
It is hilarious that Justice Brown lacks the self-awareness of stepping in it when she transparently asks if it is better for us to be ruled by the credentialled expert class. You could not write a more dystopian novel than she put out there.
Democrats are like sugar-saturated children in a knife factory. Just trying to prevent them from hurting themselves is exhausting.
Filtered through the insults in search of an answer to my question, but found nothing.
Any action like that will be challenged in the courts. And since Democrats dominate the courts, it should be vetted to your satisfaction.
But Trump has never taken' the approach of getting an FCC license yanked just because he does not like the report". Hell, if that was the standard he would have yanked all the licenses for the legacy media by now. The crime is absolute dishonesty to sway voters. And if you are a good American, no matter what side of the political aisle you reside on, you would support that type of action. We cannot have a functioning democracy with the media becoming a PAC for one party or the other.
Also awaiting an answer: "How Frank feels about all of this once President AOC is in the Oval Office."
He can't imagine a Democrat ever being elected President, or he can't imagine any elected Democrat trying the things Tubby is trying. Take your pick.
Firing politicians who suck, coming to a polling place near you in November 2026.