They'll come down hard all at once on a lot of stations to get them to fold fast and force everyone into line. Let Li'l Brendan pull the trigger on this threat. Every affected station will sue the government. Enjoy finding out what the inside of every courtroom in the country looks like, Bren.
I suppose it would be rude to point out that directly violating the Constitution (especially from a position of authority) is about the definition of treason, and that treason during wartime is the only punishment spelled out in the Constitution - and the penalty is death.
Let's put Oliver North in the dock. We've been at war with Iran for 47 years, and, during that time, North sold arms to them, aiding and abetting the enemy.
I dunno, that Sunday post “by” Shitler is over 400 words; I have a hard time believing his attention span is long enough to stay on topic without wandering off into something equally batshit yet completely unrelated, because it sure isn’t when he’s *speaking* ... ?
Smells more like the work of Nosferatu Goebbels Stephen (Miller) or Wo Fat’s underachieving nephew Steven (Cheung) IMHO.
Or maybe Musk or one of his other billionaire technazi enablers figured out how to give an AI dementia to write his posts for him.
Ta, Marcie. Lipless lizardperson Brendan Carr is welcome to an entire party size bag of salted rat dicks. When he's done with them, he can fuck off. Then he can DIAF.
And then there are hypersonic missiles. Think the navy can catch them before they destroy the ship? Probably not. And aircraft carriers have 5000 staff servicemen. One missile takes out the entire vessel? Not a good idea. Mr. Harm's Way Hegseth should go see for himself.
Such expensive missiles aren't necessary to sink a super-expensive, heavily-crewed modern warship. Remember, Iran manufactures so many drones they can give Putin enough to send 1,000 against Ukraine every day. Oh, and it's no surprise the West is underinvesting in drones and drone interceptors, (hence the quick shortage in even a limited war). The military-industrial-political complex is hooked on wildly overpriced, eternally buggy big systems, and are not interested in cheaply mass produced weapons.
Remember a few years ago when everyone signed that "Letter" about viewpoint discrimination on campus or whatever and how dangerous it was, responding to some forgotten controversy, and the signatories got their backs all the way up when people had questions and now when the president of the United States is threatening to use the power of the state to censor information about the dumb war he started, we hear crickets and tumbleweeds from these people? Good times, good times.
Fascinating that the case law Carr references (NBC v. US - 1941) deals with SCOTUS upholding the FCCs authority to *prohibit media monopolies*. Basically NBC had 2 networks, “Red” and “Blue”, which operated independently, but were both owned by the same corporate entity. Because the “Chain Broadcasting Regulations (most specifically Rules 3.106 and 3.107) prohibited one network from owning more than one broadcast station in a given market and no organization could operate more than one network in a market, NBC was forced to divest the “Blue” network, which became ABC.
The Public Interest Standard revision of the Communications Act of 1934 is (I surmise) What Carr is referring to, but even that falls flat unless you accept that the networks are — as he asserts — broadcasting untrue or distorted information (whcih I’d invite him to look at Fox NEws for that, but the FCC has no jurisdiction over all-cable or streaming services)
Historical & Contemporary Applications
The standard has historically been applied to six major areas:
1. Programming Diversity: Encouraging a variety of views and program types (e.g., the Fairness Doctrine, though now abolished).
2. Political Discourse: Ensuring candidate access to the airwaves and "equal time" rules.
3. Localism: Requiring stations to serve the specific needs and interests of their local communities.
4. Children’s Programming: Mandating educational and informational content for youth.
5. Accessibility: Providing services like closed captioning for individuals with disabilities.
6. Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO): Promoting fair hiring practices within the industry.
It was NOT intended to be used as a cudgel to force networks to broadcast government propaganda.
"MARTIN: So what powers does Carr actually have to change the way journalists report on the war?
FOLKENFLIK: Well, if you have the FCC threatening licenses, those are the licenses for local stations to continue broadcast. So he's limited authority over national networks directly. He's complaining about The New York Times, which actually owns no broadcast licenses, no stations. Complaining about The Wall Street Journal. Well, the Journal doesn't own a network, much less any local licenses, but its controlling owners do. That's Rupert, Lachlan Murdoch's Fox stations. Complaining about CNN. That's not even in broadcast at all, and it's not owned by a broadcast company."
I know who's doing a treaso , and it's the guy calling everyone else a traitor. He's killed the sanctions on Russia and now they're raking in the money they so desperately need to keep killing Ukranians and helping Iran KILL OUR TROOPS. Aid to our enemies.
They'll come down hard all at once on a lot of stations to get them to fold fast and force everyone into line. Let Li'l Brendan pull the trigger on this threat. Every affected station will sue the government. Enjoy finding out what the inside of every courtroom in the country looks like, Bren.
I suppose it would be rude to point out that directly violating the Constitution (especially from a position of authority) is about the definition of treason, and that treason during wartime is the only punishment spelled out in the Constitution - and the penalty is death.
Let's put Oliver North in the dock. We've been at war with Iran for 47 years, and, during that time, North sold arms to them, aiding and abetting the enemy.
Is there a statute of limitations on treason?
I dunno, that Sunday post “by” Shitler is over 400 words; I have a hard time believing his attention span is long enough to stay on topic without wandering off into something equally batshit yet completely unrelated, because it sure isn’t when he’s *speaking* ... ?
Smells more like the work of Nosferatu Goebbels Stephen (Miller) or Wo Fat’s underachieving nephew Steven (Cheung) IMHO.
Or maybe Musk or one of his other billionaire technazi enablers figured out how to give an AI dementia to write his posts for him.
Ta, Marcie. Lipless lizardperson Brendan Carr is welcome to an entire party size bag of salted rat dicks. When he's done with them, he can fuck off. Then he can DIAF.
the federal government doesn't issue broadcast licenses to networks. this yutz has no idea what he's talking about. par for the course I guess.
My job is to stop people from criticizing trump. It should be ill eagle cos WARWARWAR
It's boggling that Hair Führer demands China join his military coalition. Heck, why not North Korea, too?
He should be asking these people: https://bsky.app/profile/citizenbrooks.bsky.social/post/3mh6dn2bbp224
And then there are hypersonic missiles. Think the navy can catch them before they destroy the ship? Probably not. And aircraft carriers have 5000 staff servicemen. One missile takes out the entire vessel? Not a good idea. Mr. Harm's Way Hegseth should go see for himself.
Such expensive missiles aren't necessary to sink a super-expensive, heavily-crewed modern warship. Remember, Iran manufactures so many drones they can give Putin enough to send 1,000 against Ukraine every day. Oh, and it's no surprise the West is underinvesting in drones and drone interceptors, (hence the quick shortage in even a limited war). The military-industrial-political complex is hooked on wildly overpriced, eternally buggy big systems, and are not interested in cheaply mass produced weapons.
Whar profit??????
Yank? I'd say Jerk.
Remember a few years ago when everyone signed that "Letter" about viewpoint discrimination on campus or whatever and how dangerous it was, responding to some forgotten controversy, and the signatories got their backs all the way up when people had questions and now when the president of the United States is threatening to use the power of the state to censor information about the dumb war he started, we hear crickets and tumbleweeds from these people? Good times, good times.
It wZ the SOUNFAIR
Fascinating that the case law Carr references (NBC v. US - 1941) deals with SCOTUS upholding the FCCs authority to *prohibit media monopolies*. Basically NBC had 2 networks, “Red” and “Blue”, which operated independently, but were both owned by the same corporate entity. Because the “Chain Broadcasting Regulations (most specifically Rules 3.106 and 3.107) prohibited one network from owning more than one broadcast station in a given market and no organization could operate more than one network in a market, NBC was forced to divest the “Blue” network, which became ABC.
The Public Interest Standard revision of the Communications Act of 1934 is (I surmise) What Carr is referring to, but even that falls flat unless you accept that the networks are — as he asserts — broadcasting untrue or distorted information (whcih I’d invite him to look at Fox NEws for that, but the FCC has no jurisdiction over all-cable or streaming services)
Historical & Contemporary Applications
The standard has historically been applied to six major areas:
1. Programming Diversity: Encouraging a variety of views and program types (e.g., the Fairness Doctrine, though now abolished).
2. Political Discourse: Ensuring candidate access to the airwaves and "equal time" rules.
3. Localism: Requiring stations to serve the specific needs and interests of their local communities.
4. Children’s Programming: Mandating educational and informational content for youth.
5. Accessibility: Providing services like closed captioning for individuals with disabilities.
6. Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO): Promoting fair hiring practices within the industry.
It was NOT intended to be used as a cudgel to force networks to broadcast government propaganda.
Even in the short term Reality is way bigger than these clones.
NPR, this a.m., https://www.npr.org/transcripts/nx-s1-5748570
"MARTIN: So what powers does Carr actually have to change the way journalists report on the war?
FOLKENFLIK: Well, if you have the FCC threatening licenses, those are the licenses for local stations to continue broadcast. So he's limited authority over national networks directly. He's complaining about The New York Times, which actually owns no broadcast licenses, no stations. Complaining about The Wall Street Journal. Well, the Journal doesn't own a network, much less any local licenses, but its controlling owners do. That's Rupert, Lachlan Murdoch's Fox stations. Complaining about CNN. That's not even in broadcast at all, and it's not owned by a broadcast company."
Well but THEY LIE ABOUT THE TRUMP. new rule
Nothing says we're confidently, competently, winning like media censorship.
Baghdad Bob, meet Beltway Brendan!!
Can't believe we hadn't noticed this before:
"DEpartment of WAR" = DEWAR. Now it makes more sense....
Dewars is to alcohol what Trump's suits are to fashion.
I know who's doing a treaso , and it's the guy calling everyone else a traitor. He's killed the sanctions on Russia and now they're raking in the money they so desperately need to keep killing Ukranians and helping Iran KILL OUR TROOPS. Aid to our enemies.