#freedom of information act
Text
A former aide to former Trump attorney Rudolph Giuliani says he told her the ex-New York City mayor and then-president Donald Trump were offering to sell presidential pardons for $2 million apiece, according to court documents.
The bombshell allegation was levied in a complaint filed against Mr. Giuliani by Noelle Dunphy, a New York-based public relations professional who is suing him for “unlawful abuses of power, wide-ranging sexual assault and harassment, wage theft, and other misconduct” committed while she worked for him in 2019 and 2020.
The lawsuit also claims that she was subjected to sexual assault, harassment, wage theft and other misconduct by Mr. Giuliani, and alleges that she was forced to perform sex acts on him and work in the nude.
Ms. Duphy’s lawsuit details an interaction she allegedly had with Mr. Giuliani on or about 16 February 2019, when he was serving as Mr. Trump’s personal attorney and attempting to dig up overseas dirt on then-former Vice President Joe Biden, who at the time was two months away from entering the 2020 presidential race against Mr. Trump.
She writes that as they reviewed emails between him and Ukrainian government officials, she asked if he had to register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act and offered to do the required paperwork for him.
The former mayor replied that he was allowed to violate FARA and other US laws because “[he had] immunity”, according to the lawsuit.
She then states that Mr. Giuliani asked her “if she knew anyone in need of a pardon” because he was “selling pardons for $2 million, which he and President Trump would split.”
“He told Ms. Dunphy that she could refer individuals seeking pardons to him, so long as they did not go through 'the normal channels' of the Office of the Pardon Attorney, because correspondence going to that office would be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act,” the suit added.
During Mr Trump’s presidency, he frequently granted pardons to wealthy or well-connected individuals without the involvement of the Pardon Attorney, the Department of Justice official who is charged with reviewing petitions for executive clemency and making recommendations as to whether a given petition should be granted.
No evidence has ever emerged that either Mr. Trump or Mr. Giuliani were ever compensated for any presidential pardon granted during Mr. Trump’s time in office, but Ms. Dunphy’s allegation matches that made by another person who once sought a pardon from the then-president.
In August, The New York Times reported that former CIA officer John Kiriakou broached the topic with Mr. Giuliani during a meeting at the Washington D.C. hotel Mr. Trump’s company ran between 2016 and 2022.
Mr. Kiriakou, who in 2012 was sentenced to nearly three years in prison for disclosing classified information, told the Times that one of Mr. Giuliani’s associates at the meeting said the ex-New York City mayor could assist him — for a price.
“It’s going to cost $2 million — he’s going to want two million bucks,” he recalled the Giuliani associate as saying.
He also told the Times that he did not pursue a pardon through Mr. Giuliani because he could not afford to pay him $2 million.
“I laughed. Two million bucks — are you out of your mind?” Kiriakou told the outlet. “Even if I had two million bucks, I wouldn’t spend it to recover a $700,000 pension,” he said.
Ted Goodman, a spokesperson for and adviser to Mr. Giuliani, told The Independent in an email that the former New York mayor “unequivocally denies the allegations raised by Ms. Dunphy.”
“Mayor Giuliani’s lifetime of public service speaks for itself and he will pursue all available remedies and counterclaims,” he added.
The Independent has reached out to Mr. Trump’s team for comment.
#us politics#news#donald trump#republicans#conservatives#trump administration#rudy giuliani#Noelle Dunphy#2023#the independent#trump pardons#presidential pardons#Foreign Agents Registration Act#Office of the Pardon Attorney#Freedom of Information Act#John Kiriakou#the new york times#Ted Goodman
32 notes
·
View notes
Text
@universalpublicfriend on tiktok
6 notes
·
View notes
Text
A federal judge on Thursday ordered the Small Business Administration to release details on coronavirus pandemic-related loans that would disclose information on businesses that benefited from $717 billion in federally backed borrowings.
The judge ordered the agency to disclose all the names, addresses and precise loan amounts issued through the Paycheck Protection Program and Emergency Injury Disaster Loan program. The decision comes after a lawsuit was filed by a dozen news organizations, charging that the agency was not fulfilling its obligations under the Freedom of Information Act.
The SBA had previously released only summarized and anonymized data for PPP loans under $150,000 — which account for about 4.5 million of the 5.2 million in total loans made — claiming they would violate borrowers’ privacy by revealing the size of their payroll.
When the SBA denied the FOIA requests by news agencies, it argued that releasing government loan information would reveal business and personal information that should be kept private.
Federal Judge James Boasberg rejected those claims, saying in his ruling that, “the significant public interest in shedding light on SBA’s administration of the PPP and EIDL program dramatically outweighs any limited private interest in nondisclosure.” The judge discounted the SBA’s claim that the size of a loan would reveal a company’s payroll, calling the assertion “fundamentally flawed.”
He noted “the PPP loan application expressly notified potential borrowers — admittedly in a form disclaimer — that their names and loan amounts would be ’automatically released’ upon a FOIA request,” and criticized the agency for offering “a series of arguments that essentially all reduce to the unavailing contention that the agency did not mean what the loan-application forms actually said.”
The SBA had no comment, agency spokesperson Jim Billimoria said in an email to NBC News. The Justice Department, representing the agency in the lawsuit, did not reply to requests for comment and whether the Trump administration plans to appeal the ruling.
“In response to the unprecedented challenges faced by small businesses this year, the Trump administration provided more than three-quarters of a trillion dollars in financial assistance to support impacted small businesses," SBA Administrator Jovita Carranza said in a recent release. "SBA lending data further reflects the extraordinary commitment this administration has made to supporting entrepreneurs in underserved communities.”
Nearly 30 percent of the PPP loans were made in low-and moderate-income communities and over 15 percent were approved for rural communities, according to the agency.
Government watchdog groups welcomed the release and pledged to begin scrutinizing the data once released.
“From the beginning, the Trump administration did everything in its power to hide the recipients of PPP loans,” Jeremey Funk, spokesman for Accountable.us, a progressive government watchdog group, told NBC News in an email. “As soon as the administration abides by the court order and releases all data, we will scour it to see whether more Trump administration officials and family members — and other well-connected folks — than previously known received the loans.”
The data was released following a FOIA request filed by 11 news organizations, including NBC News, The Washington Post and The New York Times, and was consolidated with a separate lawsuit filed by the Center for Public Integrity, a DC-based investigative journalism nonprofit.
News organizations had mined the limited data released in July to reveal loans given to those connected with the Trump administration and how Black-owned businesses appeared to have greater difficulty getting SBA aid.
#us politics#news#2020#ppp loans#donald trump#trump administration#Small Business Administration#Paycheck Protection Program#Emergency Injury Disaster Loan#foia#freedom of information act#Judge James Boasberg#Jim Billimoria#nbc news#Jovita Carranza#Jeremey Funk#Accountable.us#The Washington Post#the new york times#Center for Public Integrity
20 notes
·
View notes
Link
By Sam Roberts
Published Nov. 7, 2022Updated Nov. 11, 2022
Ernie Lazar, an unheralded hero of researchers who mined his vast digital and documentary archive of government records on political extremists to invigorate their books, articles and arguments and to warn against “it can’t happen here” complacency, died on Nov. 1 at his home in Palm Springs, Calif. He was 77.
His death was confirmed by the Coroner’s Bureau of the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department. He reported online a few months ago that he was receiving home hospice care for kidney disease.
Mr. Lazar estimated that more than three million people around the world had accessed his encyclopedic digital library found in the Internet Archive, Wikipedia and other sites while pursuing their independent investigations into political organizations ranging from the Communist Party USA to the virulently anti-communist John Birch Society.
He culled those records after submitting what he said were some 10,000 Freedom of Information Act requests to the F.B.I. and other sources. He then made the documents available at no cost to historians, authors, journalists, doctoral students, debaters and the incurably curious, either online or through a hard-copy paper library.
“Over the past 30 years, literally no one has made greater use of the Freedom of Information Act than Ernie Lazar,” David J. Garrow, the Pulitzer Prize-winning biographer and historian, said in an email.
Mr. Lazar’s name was largely unknown beyond the tenacious group of researchers who regularly plumb government records and the meticulous readers of footnotes and authors’ acknowledgments in books in which he sometimes received credit. But the fruits of what he acknowledged was his “unusual hobby” proliferated.
Ronald Radosh, an emeritus history professor at the City University of New York, credited Mr. Lazar’s research when he reported in The Daily Beast in 2020 that Phyllis Schlafly, a leader of grass-roots campaigns against communism, abortion and the Equal Rights Amendment, had been a member of the John Birch Society. Mrs. Schlafly, who died in 2016, had consistently denied that she belonged to the organization or that it supported her campaigns.
“Given the bureaucratic difficulties and delays in getting F.B.I. files,” said Harvey Klehr, a professor of politics and history at Emory University in Atlanta who has collaborated with the historian John Earl Haynes on books about Soviet espionage in the United States, “it is doubtful if much of what Ernie received and made available would have ever seen the light of day.”
Thanks to Mr. Lazar, Professor Klehr and Mr. Haynes were able to provide “a much more complete and reliable picture” of the operation of the F.B.I. counterspies Jack and Morris Childs in an article this year, Professor Klehr said. From the late 1950s to the late ’80s the K.G.B. delivered millions of dollars to the American Communist Party through the Childs brothers, who were actually working for the F.B.I. as double agents.
Mr. Lazar’s research, Professor Klehr said, was “a major contribution to our understanding of one of the most successful and impactful F.B.I. counterintelligence operations it ever conducted.”
Mr. Haynes agreed: “Without Lazar having saved us years of making Freedom of Information requests, I doubt that we would ever have completed the article,” which appeared on H-Net, a humanities and social science website.
Mr. Lazar was tenacious, but unlike most researchers working on deadline or on a specific quest, he could be patient and take his time. He embellished his 600,000-page online and paper library — stored at his home and in a warehouse — with curatorial annotations that provided context and that distinguished him, as historians spanning the ideological spectrum largely agreed, as a discerning avocational archivist.
He immersed himself in censored, misplaced or redacted government records, decoding what had been rendered incomprehensible, deliberately or habitually. He supplemented those official files with copies of court decisions and the personal papers of figures in extremist groups that had been archived at colleges and other institutions.
In what Mr. Lazar described as his last online message, he advised his followers this year that in uploading a 490-page index of all his files and documents, he was struck by how deeply today’s controversies over racism and nativism are rooted in movements from the 1930s through the 1960s.
He urged “a new generation of researchers to continue preserving and sharing this historical record” and added: “Please continue the fight to make our country live up to its ideals!”
Mr. Lazar was born Ernest Clayton Jammes on April 16, 1945, in Minneapolis. He said his biological mother was Marjorie Jammes, who owned a bar in New Orleans and later worked in Las Vegas. He did not know who his biological father was, he said.
He was 3 years old when, after moving with his mother to Chicago, she gave him up for adoption to the Lazar family, who lived down the street and whose daughter had been his babysitter.
The Lazars raised him until the early 1960s, when he moved to the Bay Area of California and enrolled in what was then California State College at Hayward (now California State University, East Bay). He majored in history and made the dean’s list in 1965 with straight A’s but did not graduate.
He apparently left no immediate survivors.
Mr. Lazar was motivated to embark on his freelance research while he was still a teenager and a regular reader of the monthly F.B.I. Law Enforcement Bulletin, which a police officer relative subscribed to.
In one issue, Ernie noticed a statement by the F.B.I. director, J. Edgar Hoover, that flatly contradicted a John Birch Society supporter’s letter to the editor in a local newspaper, The Hayward Daily Review, stating that the American Communist Party was fomenting racial unrest to “convert the Dixie states into a Negro Soviet Republic.” Mr. Lazar wrote a letter to the editor quoting Hoover.
Among the hostile responses Mr. Lazar’s letter generated was an accusatory couplet, which read: “Is it just coincidence that Ernie’s words so arty, sound just like the Communist Party?”
He was baffled, he wrote, at how citing Hoover could imply a predisposition toward communism. “Thus began my lifelong interest in right-wing conspiracy theories and their adherents,” he wrote.
As his files grew, the Center for Right Wing Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, agreed to digitize some of them, thanks to a grant from the Southern Poverty Law Center. Mr. Lazar also began relying on online crowdsourcing for funding.
He supported himself by working in the music industry, including as a record promoter, as a disc jockey and as a record store owner in San Francisco specializing in disco music.
As a music promoter he helped propel Patrick Hernandez’s “Born to Be Alive” to Billboard’s No. 1 dance club disco album in 1979.
Mr. Lazar was also employed for 22 years by the State of California — in its Board of Registered Nursing, the Department of Motor Vehicles and the Secretary of State’s office.
“If there were some prize for ‘Important and Consequential People Who Are Unknown to the General Public,’ Ernie would be a top contender,” Mr. Garrow said.
Jason Scott, who worked with Mr. Lazar through the Internet Archive to catalog his online cache and preserve his documentary archive, described him as “meticulous, friendly, thoughtful and informative, even in the face of oblivion.”
In part because he feared retribution from extremist groups, Mr. Lazar was very private, almost reclusive. He said his enormous aggregation of files did not include a single photograph of himself. He also said that in making nearly 10,000 Freedom of Information requests to the F.B.I., he had never asked whether the bureau had compiled a file on him.
Sam Roberts, an obituaries reporter, was previously The Times’s urban affairs correspondent and is the host of “The New York Times Close Up,” a weekly news and interview program on CUNY-TV. @samrob12
A version of this article appears in print on Nov. 13, 2022, Section A, Page 28 of the New York edition with the headline: Ernie Lazar, 77, Whose Dogged Research Helped Many Historians and Journalists.
8 notes
·
View notes
Text
EFFECTIVELY USING THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA)
1 note
·
View note
Text
NIH Secret Third-Party Royalty Database Uncovered
Amended complete response to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that is the subject of the Complaint filed in American Transparency v. Department of Health and Human Services No. 21-cv-02821 regarding FOIA request 57048, dated September 15, 2021.
Top COVID 'experts' including Dr. Anthony Fauci and former NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins cashed in on $325 million through royalty checks from the COVID-19 pandemic.
The release of the records were stonewalled by the NIH but they were eventually handed over, showing that 58 vaccine royalty payments were made to Fauci and Collins.
0 notes
Text
Information Commissioner says council is 'failing residents'
National regulator says it is ‘deeply disappointed’ with Croydon, which has broken the Freedom of Information laws at least 227 times in the past year and now faces possible High Court action. By STEVEN DOWNES
Cash-strapped Croydon Council could face legal sanctions from the Information Commissioner’s Office if it fails to abide by the law and starts to respond to Freedom of Information Requests…
View On WordPress
#Croydon#Freedom of Information Act#Freedom of Information Act 2000#ICO#Information Commissioner#Information Commissioners Office#Katherine Kerswell#London Borough of Croydon#Mayor Jason Perry
0 notes
Text
How Do You File A FOIA Request?
You can file a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with a federal agency in the United States by following these general steps:
1. Identify the agency that has the records you want to request. You can start by searching online for the agency's name and "FOIA" to find its FOIA office or contact information.
2. Write a letter or email to the agency's FOIA office that clearly describes the records you want to request. Be as specific as possible, including dates, names, and other relevant details to help the agency locate the records.
3. Provide your contact information, including your name, address, and phone number or email address.
4. Specify your preferred format for receiving the records, such as paper copies, electronic copies, or access to a reading room.
5. State your willingness to pay any fees associated with processing your request. The agency may charge fees for searching, reviewing, and copying the records, but you can request a fee waiver if you can show that you cannot afford to pay.
6. Sign and date your request.
7. Send your request by mail or email to the FOIA office of the agency that has the records you want to request. You can usually find the address or email address on the agency's website or by contacting the FOIA office directly.
It's important to note that each agency may have its own specific requirements or procedures for filing a FOIA request, so it's a good idea to check the agency's website or contact its FOIA office for detailed instructions before submitting your request.
0 notes
Link
0 notes
Text
Contrary To Trump Claim, White House Ordered USS McCain Hidden During His 2019 Japan Trip
Contrary To Trump Claim, White House Ordered USS McCain Hidden During His 2019 Japan Trip
Despite what Donald Trump claimed at the time, the USS John McCain destroyer was partially hidden from view, by orders of the White House, when the then-president visited a Navy base in Japan in 2019, according to new records newly obtained by Bloomberg.
The name on the warship, named for the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), his father and grandfather, who all served in the Navy, was covered…
View On WordPress
0 notes
Text
Donald Trump just needs a few names.
In recent months, the former president has asked close advisers, including at least one of his personal attorneys, if “we know” all the names of senior FBI agents and Justice Department personnel who have worked on the federal probes into him. That’s according to two sources with direct knowledge of the matter and another person briefed on it.
Trump has then privately discussed that should he return to the White House, it is imperative his new Department of Justice “quickly” and “immediately” purge the FBI and DOJ’s ranks of these officials and agents who’ve led the Trump-related criminal investigations, the sources recount. The ex-president has of course dubbed all such probes as illegitimate “witch hunts,” and is now campaigning for the White House on a platform of “retribution” and cleaning house.
Separately, the twice-impeached former president has been saying for many months that on “day one” of his potential second term, he wants FBI director Christopher Wray “out” of the bureau, according to another source familiar with the matter and two people close to Trump. It’s an ironic turn, given that Trump appointed Wray in 2017.
(Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Trump’s 2024 primary rival, has also pledged to fire Wray, telling Fox News last week that he’d do so on “day one.”)
But in the years since, Trump came to deeply distrust Wray. By the end of 2020, Trump was venting to senior administration officials that he would make it a top priority to replace Wray “next year,” blasting the director for not wholesale purging the FBI of non-Trump-loyalists. Trump lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden, and thus didn’t get his chance to fire Wray in 2021.
During some of the conversations this year, including at Trump’s Florida club Mar-a-Lago, some of Trump’s close political allies told him that they are working on figuring out the identities of the FBI and DOJ staff and forming lists, two of the sources relay to Rolling Stone.
However, others have complained that the feds aren’t making it easy for them.
In December 2022, the conservative nonprofit Judicial Watch — run by prominent Trump ally Tom Fitton — filed a Freedom of Information Act request demanding information about “all employees hired by or detailed to the office of Special Counsel Jack Smith.” In April, the Justice Department denied the request on the ground that it was an “unwarranted invasion of personal privacy” and that it would “interfere with enforcement proceedings.”
“One can only conclude, after seeing the uproar over the anti-Trump, partisan Mueller operation, that the Garland Justice Department has something to hide about Jack Smith and his prosecutors again targeting Trump and other Republicans with unprecedented investigations,” Fitton said at the time.
On Friday, Fitton told Rolling Stone that the DOJ is still “stonewalling” him and his group on the identities: “I don’t understand why it is that the names of prosecutors involved in a criminal investigation are secret. The Durham report shows it’s important we know who’s working there. We don’t want Social Security numbers or personal phone numbers, but certainly senior leaders and others who are pursuing this need to be disclosed.”
“We were able to get hiring material for the Mueller investigations, interviews applications and stuff like that,” he added.
Fitton said his group is still seeking the information administratively, but that “this is the type of lawsuit we typically would pursue.”
Other developments have made it harder for MAGA allies to create a comprehensive list of whom to potentially fire. Prior to Smith’s appointment, full names — in official DOJ email addresses — would appear in emails sent by Justice Department lawyers working on the Trump-related probes, to attorneys for subjects and likely targets of the investigations. But in the time since Special Counsel Smith started overseeing the probes last year, such emails began at times only showing initials for multiple DOJ addresses, obscuring the names of certain lawyers or personnel working on the special counsel’s team, according to a source with direct knowledge of the situation.
The feds, including Special Counsel Smith’s office, are currently investigating Trump and his associates for their efforts leading up to the deadly Jan. 6 Capitol attack, as well as for the ex-president’s hoarding of classified documents after he left office. Trump remains the leading candidate for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination in various polls, and he has already been indicted in a separate criminal investigation in New York. His lawyers are also expecting a federal indictment in the Justice Department’s Mar-a-Lago documents probe soon, and have already briefed Trump as such.
The identities of law enforcement personnel involved in the Mar-a-Lago investigation have been a flashpoint between Trump and the Justice Department since the FBI executed a search warrant on his residence in August 2022. Prosecutors unsealed a copy of the search warrant with the names of agents redacted, but the former president posted a copy of the document with the names of two FBI agents involved in the search.
The search kicked off an “unprecedented” number of threats against FBI agents and an attack by an armed Trump supporter on the FBI’s Cincinnati field office.
Trump’s latest crusade against the FBI coincides with his plans for a complete remaking of the federal bureaucracy. That includes promises to install extreme loyalists like Jeffrey Clark and Michael Flynn, who aided Trump’s anti-democratic efforts to overturn the 2020 election outcome. Trump also has pledged to sign an executive order, dubbed Schedule F, that would make it easier to hire loyalists and fire nonpartisan civil servants.
#us politics#news#rolling stone magazine#2023#republicans#conservatives#gop#donald trump#fbi#fbi raid#department of justice#jack smith#special counsel#Schedule F#trump loyalists#alt right#Michael Flynn#Jeffrey Clark#Tom Fitton#freedom of information act#Christopher Wray
14 notes
·
View notes
Text
"Operation Legacy". L'operazione dell'intelligence britannica durata 20 anni per distruggere i documenti imbarazzanti delle ex colonie
“Operation Legacy”. L’operazione dell’intelligence britannica durata 20 anni per distruggere i documenti imbarazzanti delle ex colonie
La fine del secondo conflitto mondiale portò con sé anche la disgregazione degli imperi coloniali. La sensibilità e le teorie razziali mutavano e la decolonizzazione rischiava di travolgere gli stati colonizzatori.La fine dell’impero britannico iniziò nel 1947 con l’indipendenza di Ceylon. Con il passaggio dei poteri dalle amministrazioni coloniali a quelle locali a Londra si pose la questione di…
View On WordPress
#colonie#DG#documenti#Freedom of Information Act#impero#Impero Britannico#mi6#migrated archive#operation legacy#Public Records Acts#razzismo#segreti
0 notes
Text
New Post has been published on Books by Caroline Miller
New Post has been published on https://www.booksbycarolinemiller.com/musings/when-culture-seems-alien/
When Culture Seems Alien
The older I get, the more I fall behind the modern culture. For example, while taping a Just Read It segment on Colm Toibin’s fictionalized biography of Thomas Mann, I was stunned to learn that one of my young guests knew little about one of the twentieth century’s greatest authors. Later, someone explained, “Mann’s sentences are too complicated.” Was this perceived defect the result of text messaging, I wondered. Youth’s self-assurance can be intimidating, but as long as I have eyes to see, Thomas Mann won’t go quietly into that good night. A writer I came across had this to say about culture: It has no budget, no government, no army. It collects no taxes; it has no CEO, bible or headquarters. (“There’s No Such Thing As A Culture War,” by Virginia Heffernan, Wired, June 2022, pg. 14.) Even so, culture has clout. Sometimes, it makes me feel like a freshwater trout dropped into the Salton sea. Recently, the Supreme Court decided women had no right to privacy. I was appalled. Why should women have fewer privileges than men? Once I thought about it, however, I concluded no one had privacy rights anymore. Technology has created a world without secrets. A Google search will tell me the titles Bill Gates bought during his recent visit to a book store. LinkedIn, Twitter, and Facebook leave little to the imagination. Unable to find my passwords on my computer, I’m certain I can find them on the internet. Too late, I discovered that providing my date of birth on social media invites gawkers and fraudsters into my world. Not even banks can be trusted. Suisse Secrets has been known to tattle on its clients. Data Is Plural can’t stop spilling its guts. It will tell you everything from the number of underwater pipes resting on an ocean’s floor to the work habits of bees. The Freedom of Information Act blabs even more. Go there for a dose of brain overload. Why China and Russia need hackers when this site exists is a mystery to me. The other day, while trawling for information about an upcoming guest on Just Read It, I stumbled on a site that revealed the individual’s net worth. Surprised, I backed away, feeling as if I’d breached a men’s locker room. Having the world at one’s fingertips is both a heady and scary experience. After all, Information is power. Ideally, we use it to make better decisions. But a tsunami of information is daunting. Only librarians are unafraid to wade in. For example, everyone wants to know the secrets of Roswell and possible alien landings, but when the government made public its files on UFOs, so much data existed, people wandered off to watch the video series instead. (“The Age of No Secrets,” by Paul Ford, Wired, Issue 30.07, pg.14.) What’s the effect of all this information on our culture? Is it making us smarter or more dazzled? Marshall McLuhan, the media theorist of an earlier age was hopeful about one technology. Television, he predicted, would expand our consciousness. It did give us public television with its balanced reporting. But, it also gave birth to Fox News, a competitor noted for bombast and ultra-conservative opinions. The former has an audience of 1.1 million people. The latter has 2.27 million viewers. Would McLuhan be disappointed if he knew? Living without my computer would be a hardship, I admit. For the younger generations, it might be unthinkable. But what if our electricity grid was shut down for a day or two? In the silence, would anyone remember Thomas Mann? Or the beauty of a complex sentence? Would people rejoice that for a few limited hours they’d regained their privacy? Or could it be our brains are too fried to care?
#Just Read It#Colm Toibin#Data Is Plural#Freedom of Information Act#Marshall McLuhan#Paul Ford#right to primacy#Roswell incident#Suisse Secrets#Thomas Mann#UFO#Virginia Heffernan
0 notes
Text
The 'Freedom Of Information Act' (FOIA) - Our Flashlight In The Dark
“THE BRIDGE – AT THE PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT (POGO)” By Spurthi Kontham
“The Freedom of Information Act, passed in 1966 in the middle of the Cold War, gives anyone ‘the right to request access to information and records from any federal agency.’ Requests go through agencies’ respective FOIA officers, considered “the librarians of the government.”
FOIA’s got a long way to go before it’s…
View On WordPress
0 notes
Last Seen Blogs
watermelonkitty420
IM KINDAALL OVER DA PLACE ://
nyceonedude
Lord Canti
🔥🔥🔥
buns-with-a-book
Dreaming Eternal
awek-s
love so fine;
demonic-meow
Akitsu