So bye-bye, Mr Ajit Pai. You drove our policy into the levee and we still wonder why FCC head Ajit Pai has announced he will step down on Inauguration Day in January, bringing an end to a tumultuous four-year reign in charge of the US telecoms regulator. In a statement on Monday, Pai said it had been “the honor of a lifetime” to serve as FCC chair, noting that he was the first Asian-American to head the agency …
To be fair, the lame-ass duck Idiot-in-Chief has been quite a bit less mouthy than he has been over the last four years. And soon he'll be silent, to all intents and purposes. Even the press is going to drop his drivel, most likely faster than they did Nixon's. The senile old git is officially irrelevant. Thankfully.
Yeah, well, I'm not sure that there are so many Asian-Americans that are going to be proud of that.
Actually, the same could be said of Preeti Patel on the other side of the pond - I doubt there are many British-Asians proud of the what she has done in office
I think the point is that one might expect someone with Priti 'Vacant' Patel's heritage as the daughter of Ugandan Asian refugees to have a little more insight and empathy towards others of similar backgrounds, rather than doubling down on the worst aspects of the hostile environment.
Look, if you want to challenge Patel's performance as Home Secretary then go right ahead.
Doing so while referencing her heritage is racist.
Doing so while claiming that you must have a similar background to someone to properly feel insight and empathy is xenophobic and racist.
Kemi Badenoch is not British born and does not have European heritage yet manages to speak eloquently for everybody in the country. Because she's not racist.
As for 'others of similar background' even your attack on her performance in her role makes no sense. What has she done to hurt people seeking legal migration to the UK? Nothing.
Maybe I'm doing this wrong. Maybe I shouldn't be defending her from racist attacks because I don't share her heritage. That certainly seems to be your argument.
Doing so while claiming that you must have a similar background to someone to properly feel insight and empathy is xenophobic and racist.
I said nothing of the sort. I suggested one might expect her to have more insight and empathy as the daughter of refugee Ugandan Asian parents (not that one can only have insight and empathy for people of one's own background).
Instead, she's gone full Daily Mail on the poor buggers who've crossed continents and a nasty stretch of water to get here to claim the same asylum as her parents (well, actually not the same, the asylum rules now are draconian compared to the regime her parents arrived under).
Cederick - What the fuck is a "British-Asian"?
Here you are, Cederick - for your general education, and seeing you're so quick to casually accuse another poster of racism using a non sequitur - from Wikipedia: "British Asians (also referred to as Asian British people or Asian Britons) are persons of predominantly South Asian and sometimes of broader Asian descent, who reside in the United Kingdom. [source - gov.uk].
And no, none of my British-Asian peer group is proud of UK Home Secretary Priti Patel - being found guilty of serious bullying in her last three government posts and needing her chumocracy mate Boris step in to save her career is only one of an appalling series of events she's been involved with, usually to serve her own career. She's a national disgrace - so at least she has one thing in common with Ajit Pai.
Not going to feed any more trolls today, Cederick, so you can speak to your own hand at this point.
Actually, I agree with you but terms like those are favoured by the ‘BAME’ people they refer to. Currently there have been a lot of complaints that ‘BAME’ English (and no doubt Scottish etc) people are being asked “where do you really come from?” but this is after years of people who, if their skins were ‘white’ would be called English, shouting about how important it is to reclaim their African or whatever heritage. Can’t have it both ways :(.
Agree.
I am a first generation Imigrant to the UK. I was born here but both my parent are Italian and came here in the 50's, but because I am white I am treated as English, My name is NOT English but people just accept it.
If I was NOT white. Asia, or Afro/Caribean etc then I am sure I would be treated differently. I do not know how these people feel but I assume they would prefer a more equal treatment.
Humans are very tribal, on many levels.
I hope that I treat people of a different skin colour that me well, the same as people of different religions and sexual orientation.
We are a savage race, I do not think that can be disputed, but we have to try and overcome that and try and treat all people the same.
I was born in England, to brown skinned parents from a former British colony. I have lived in that country during my early years - and felt an outsider. Having experienced the tail end of the '70s in England, things were much worse then, but intolerance is growing again. After all these years in England, still feel like an outsider. I would "pass" Norman Tebbit's Cricket Test. Outside of work, you can walk away. At work, it's more complicated - you know you are getting shafted, the easiest option is the door, but have to put up with it in order to keep a roof over the head.
I don't like terms like "BAME", "British-Asian", "Black-Caribbean" etc, and when asked for nationality, there is an in-perceptible delay whilst I answer "British" - that is what it says on the passport, even though that is what I have been from birth
I am a first generation Imigrant to the UK. I was born here but both my parent are Italian and came here in the 50's, but because I am white I am treated as English, My name is NOT English but people just accept it.
You're lucky. I'm a first generation migrant the other way - to Italy. My friends left Italy to work in the UK on the South Coast, they've had to return to Italy because of the racist attacks they have suffered at home, at work and on their children in the local school. They speak fluent English, so this is targeted racism. Someone has worked out they are Italian and is orchestrating attacks against them.
We encounter racism in Italy. I've been told to go home, had hunters on my land shouting racist insults at me, and even had racism from public officials. When I tried to register my car the official refused to process the paperwork and told me "Brexit has happened, go home, we don't want you." It's common for people to pretend they can't understand me speaking Italian too - yet north of Perugia everyone understands me and I get complimented on bothering to lean Italian.
Racism exists everywhere, but it has got worse in the UK and in Italy since the rise of populism in politics. Salvini encouraged anti-immigrant politics.
Before my post, I did a search for "British-Asian" to check if I was using an accepted term,
Thanks to all who countered the criticism. Alas, it is Patel burnishing her hard Brexiteer credentials and the need to prove she's as tough as they come which is the pity, especially after May's stint as Home Secretary and the Windrush scandal, it was a chance to reset things from the top from someone with a nuanced background
Alas, it is Patel burnishing her hard Brexiteer credentials
It doesn't matter how extreme, divisive or even murderous a political movement is. There are still those who will support politicians who are actively targeting their own community or religion because they see personal gain in being a collaborator.
This post has been deleted by its author
Former U.S. President Obama & V.P. Biden prior Trump made QoS traffic shaping illegal, forcing lower bandwidth & time sensitive interactive traffic to compete with massive bandwidth hogs, and degrading the internet experience for poor rural, apartment, and inner city communities where capacity was lacking due to lack of investment & not enough payment to sustain higher speed Internet by poor residents,
The IETF engineers knew this type of problem. They created Traffic Shaping with Classes of Service, so inexpensive but time sensitive services could still run reasonably well while poor infrastructure is under duress from higher bandwidth applications,
Trump’s chairman reversed this travesty, Mr. Pai reversed Net Neutrality,
What Mr. Pai did was protect the poor, in areas where internet access had been slow, from the wealthy content providers who consumed precious bandwidth beyond poor infrastructure capacity and negatively impacted other interactive services.
Mr. Pai was a champion for poor & disadvantaged & rural Americas, by making QoS legal again. Those in the rich cities & wealthy areas of the nation were completely ignorant of the plight of most of the nation.
The less advantaged, who understood how they were targeted with third-world interactive services by people prior Trump’s Mr. Pai, were glad when populists like Trump placed people like Pai in positions of authority, who cared about helping the least advantaged, before pandering to the suppression of the masses by the most wealthy.
An old article from an engineer, who understood the issues at that time.
http://netmgt.blogspot.com/2017/11/net-neutrality-dodging-government.html?m=1
Near the end of that...
"There is a true danger for innovation in the realm of low bandwidth but time sensitive applications, such as real-time IoT applications, which have the potential to greatly enhance the lives of American Citizens, not to mention the world."
Still waiting for *personal enhancement thru IoT, although recently (I hear) I have meshy help finding my lost dog.. or my car "items".
... is going to bail before he gets fired. The only question is why wait until the last possible second ... I'll bet he's getting paid by the hour. Always screwing the taxpayer out of every nickle that he can.
Don't go away mad, Idjiot "Tweety" Pai, just go away.
Sadly, the fucker is going to retire to a lifetime of payoffs from a very thankful industry. There really ought to be a law ...
The way to drive someone completely conspiracy-theorist kook QAnon Trump voter is to get him to listen to only one source of news. Once started the habit is self re-enforcing - the Trump voter will know any news that does not say the dear leader is an internationally renowned expert on everything is biased librul media fake news. The difficult bit is to drag new voters into the ring. The obvious solution is to ensure people have access to only one source of news. Decades ago someone recognised the danger and created laws to prevent things like the Sinclair/Tribune merger. Thanks to diligent enforcement of these laws the USA has a diverse range of independent news sources and there is no chance that Trump or anyone like him could ever get elected president.
Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul, Ash nazg thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
First listen to a competent lawyer and do not trust statements from random ignorant commentards like me. As I understand it, you do not need to step down to make a statement to the FBI. You may need whatever power you currently hold to get the assistance you will need from other officials. You can plead guilty as often as you like but that does not get you a conviction. In the US the president can only pardon you if you have a conviction. Getting convicted of every possible offence that can be inferred from your confession before the deadline would require an effort from people who may be busy covering their own arses before the holidays. Be certain they will make you a priority before you jump off a tall building. Your statement must be checked thoroughly for non-federal crimes. If you are convicted by a state the president cannot help you (although the state governor may have the power to pardon you).
If you somehow get your conviction in time you then need to actually get pardoned. Trump is not famous for doing things out of the goodness of his heart. You will need some quality dirt on him to ensure action. The delusional lame duck believes he is completely untouchable. Cast iron kompromat is no guaranty of actually getting a pardon.
If you really have a chance of getting a pardon there is a much less risky option available to you. Get your lawyer to arrange a deal for you: exchange the kompromat for immunity from prosecution. This is not entirely safe as someone less reprehensible may have already offered sufficient kompromat. Do not hold back on your confession. Immunity deals only cover what you have already admitted to and require you ongoing wholehearted cooperation - which will definitely uncover anything you 'forgot'. Forgetting about crimes cancels you immunity from prosecution and the feds get to keep the kompromat.
"In the US the president can only pardon you if you have a conviction."
Absolutely incorrect.
The canonical example is Ford granting Nixon a full and unconditional pardon for any crimes that he might have committed against the United States as president, before he was even charged with said crimes. You can read Proclamation 4311 for yourself here.
Are you suggesting Trump will try to pardon himself? That's certainly something he can do - that is, he can officially issue a statement of pardon for himself. Whether the courts would uphold it is a different story, as it's never been tested and there are substantial arguments against it.
Or are you suggesting that Trump would step down before the end of his term, let Pence become President, and then have Pence pardon him? Also possible. I wouldn't be surprised if Pence agreed, but it would be out of character for Trump, whose public persona is built on belligerence, not strategizing.
The "open pardon" that Ford issued for Nixon (or similar ones, such as Johnson's broad pardon that I mentioned in another post) was also not tested by the courts. It's possible someone would challenge any pardon of Trump and get SCOTUS to take the case. What they might decide is tough to handicap. I'm not certain Trump's appointees would back him in something like that (they don't have much reason to).
It doesn't really matter, though, because frankly I think some of the state AGs are more likely to go after Trump than the Feds are. Unless he can convince the Federal government to remove all such cases to Federal court (and does that even apply to criminal cases, or only civil?), a pardon wouldn't have any force.
Also, pardons don't apply to impeachment, so if it's possible for Congress to impeach him after he leaves office (also, AFAIK, untested by the courts), then a Democrat-controlled Congress could impeach him, though the only effective consequence could be preventing Trump from ever holding Federal office again. And that doesn't seem very likely. Might be useful against some of his spawn or other members of his gang, though.
Congress already impeached him. The Senate chose to acquit him. Thus neatly proving that all three corners of power are a travesty (it remains to be seen if the silly little girl just appointed will include the Supreme Court in that group ... ).
All together now, to the tune of Nellie the Elephant:
Donald the President had a sulk
And said Goodbye to the Whitehouse,
Off he went with a Trumpetty Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump
The head of the herd was Putin, far far away,
He had a sack full of Kompromat,
And Donald would have to pay…
etc etc. Please add more verses!
Trump could pardon them pre-emptively. Nothing in the Constitution requires the Presidential pardon power to be executed only after indictment or conviction, or to name specific offenses in the pardon.1 Ford's broad pardon of Nixon is an example of both; Johnson's sweeping pardon of Confederate soldiers after the Civil War is another.
There's no point in pleading guilty, as far as the Presidential pardon goes.
Presidential pardons only apply to Federal crimes. The various States can still go after anyone they like. (Or don't like, as the case may be.)
1The President has "Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment". That's all that Article II, Clause 1 says about it.
They should not be serving telcos but regulating them, protecting RF spectrum in a neutral fashion rather than to who spends most on lobbing, licences and fees. Protecting vital infrastructure and consumers. Not issuing and space sector (or terrestrial spectrum licences that cross borders) spectrum licences without prior international agreement.
FCC was broken before Pai and he made it worse.
Maybe it needs split in two: Spectrum and Interference management/regulation and other infrastructure as one part and a separate part for services and content (fibre, coax, copper, point to point, mobile, satellite, streaming, broadcast etc).
The net neutrality thing has giant vested interests and lies on both sides. That would need a big article to explain.
Was Big Telco's b**ch before he was appointed to the Commission
Was Big Telco's b**ch when at the Commission
Will be Big Telco's b**ch when he becomes a lobbyist / "media commentator" / mouth-for-hire when he leaves.
Perhaps he can take the Head of the Justice Dept and the GSA with him as well?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
