2/
It took decades after the passage of America's landmark antitrust laws - the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act - for trustbusting to occur in earnest, and what spurred the action wasn't mere corporate bullying, not just price hikes and labor abuses.
1/

2/
3/
4/
Hoover was beholden to plutes, had a cabinet full of them, turned over the nation's treasury to a sociopathic monster called Andrew Mellon whose stated ambition was to own all the world's aluminum.
5/
6/
7/
8/
9/
10/
11/
12/

13/

14/
15/
https://t.co/1Tqq9DMh6d
16/
Last July, the Epleys bought the house Warren rents from a Citibank exec called Brandt Portugal.
17/
18/
Warren continued sending rent checks to the Epleys, but they claimed the certified letters never arrived - so they served him with eviction papers.
19/
20/
On the one hand, this is a spicy story about small town politics, but on the other, it's a tale of how money becomes power becomes corruption.
21/
22/
23/
The Epleys are why Reagan and Bork were wrong: wealth concentration was never solely (or even primarily) an economic matter.
It's always been political.
eof/
https://t.co/GbAqYGdMSZ
More from Cory Doctorow #BLM
Inside: ADT insider threat; Billionaires think VR stops guillotines; Privacy Without Monopoly; and more!
Archived at: https://t.co/nu1HbReiEX
#Pluralistic
1/

This Wednesday, I'm giving a talk called "Technology, Self-Determination, and the Future of the Future" for the Purdue University CERIAS Program:
https://t.co/po5IivZyr4
2/

ADT insider threat: If you build it they will spy.
https://t.co/kJrmtu8L3S
3/

Self-control isn't merely a matter of eliminating your own weaknesses. Self control is primarily about compensating for those weaknesses. When you go on a diet, you don't just commit yourself to eating well - you also throw away the Oreos so you won't be tempted.
— Cory Doctorow #BLM (@doctorow) February 15, 2021
1/ pic.twitter.com/BCEc7FPkut
Billionaires think VR stops guillotines: TARP with tasps.
https://t.co/MIKwvsICkr
4/

The pandemic has afforded all of us a refresher course on the five stages of grief, a theoretical and controversial framework for describing how people cope with tragedy: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.https://t.co/nqPmjCvyab
— Cory Doctorow #BLM (@doctorow) February 15, 2021
1/ pic.twitter.com/lNk2vvhlNF
Privacy Without Monopoly: Podcasting a reading of the latest EFF whitepaper.
https://t.co/R2sl75y4rb
5/

This week on my podcast, a spoken-word version of "Privacy Without Monopoly: Data Protection and Interoperability," a major new white-paper that Bennett Cyphers and I co-authored for @EFF.https://t.co/oASlJFpz8t
— Cory Doctorow #BLM (@doctorow) February 15, 2021
1/ pic.twitter.com/UnA6fGoA6m
More from Law
\U0001f6a8New investigation: \U0001f6a8
— Tal Kopan (@TalKopan) January 22, 2021
How sexual harassment and misconduct has been allowed to flourish in the immigration courts, a system intended to give immigrants a fair chance to stay in the U.S.:https://t.co/Lw8hpK5jSe
The story notes that the EOIR Director served as an ICE attorney in Atlanta and practiced before Cassidy for years. And it points to FOIA records unearthed by Bryan Johnson showing they remain friendly.
A trove of complaints against Cassidy was published by AILA in 2019 after FOIA litigation. They generally show misconduct, substantiated in the record, followed by "written counseling" etc.
One way Cassidy could avoid discipline is by turning off the recording device during the hearing. If he made a lewd or offensive comment off the record, all the EOIR would do is listen to the recording. If it's not there, the complaint is "unsubstantiated" https://t.co/wUeBPEEbpV

In that case, Cassidy joked about a detained immigrant saying he missed his wife. The complaint was dismissed because the ACIJ found "no levity or joking" in the comment.

And I have thoughts (MY OWN). So, I’m sorry ... a thread 1/25
One of the main reasons I think users are best served by a recognition that social media services have 1st Amendment rights to curate the content on their sites is because many users want filtered content, either by topic, or by behavior, or other. 2/
So online services should have the right to do this filtering, and to give their users the tools to do so too. For more detail see our Prager U amicus brief https://t.co/73PswB9Q7Q 3/
So, I disagree with my friends (and others) who say that every online service should apply First Amendment rules, even though they cannot be required to do so. There are both practical and policy reasons why I don’t like this. 4/
Most obviously, the 1st Amendment reflects only one national legal system when this is inherently an international issue. So it’s politically messy, even if you think a 1st Amendment-based policy will be most speech-protective (though probably only non-sexual speakers). 5/