Trump’s abrupt firing of both Democrats on the FTC ends a 90-year tradition of independence at the agency, sending a message of “complete control” by the White House. Our story: www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2... - ThreadSky

willoremus.com • 1 day ago

Trump’s abrupt firing of both Democrats on the FTC ends a 90-year tradition of independence at the agency, sending a message of “complete control” by the White House. Our story: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/03/18/two-democratic-commissioners-fired-ftc/

Comments

mitycheese.bsky.social•1 day ago

Assuming SCOTUS upholds the law (months from now) will that also invalidate whatever bullshit Trump's lapdog version of the FCC does in the time being, or will he get away with whatever he does in the meantime?

cv-danes.com•1 day ago

Sadly, I think you already know the answer to that question.

jrtomlin.bsky.social•1 day ago

Your owner gave you permission to get off your knees?

gojira65.bsky.social•1 day ago

Wow, sounds bad. But what does Jeff Bezos think?

richardho.bsky.social•1 day ago

Is it a 90 year tradition or a 90 year old law? I am unclear on that as I only saw reference to law in the article, but didn't catch what 90 years referred to. If it is the Supreme Court precedent, isn't that law, not tradition?

cv-danes.com•1 day ago

Trump is clearly operating an openly criminal regime, which means he has no fear of reprisal and is legit out of control unless the judiciary can find the resolve (and people) to actually start apprehending those breaking the law.

proppiebay.bsky.social•1 day ago

Trump is not a President, he's a gangster!

cv-danes.com•1 day ago

He fancies himself the Godfather.

proppiebay.bsky.social•1 day ago

The Godfather would be ashamed.

cv-danes.com•1 day ago

Yeah, even the Godfather had something of a moral compass.

piranha4d.bsky.social•1 day ago

"Illegal" instead of "abrupt" would be much more accurate.

Ghods, the lukewarm wording gets me almost as furious as the act itself. Democracy dies in tepid response to darkness.

WaPo has become utterly feckless. Not blaming you, I think we all know who is responsible for that. Allegedly.

hobscrk777.bsky.social•1 day ago

Trump declaring that they’re fired doesn’t make it so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humphrey%27s_Executor_v._United_States

hey.rupert.murdochbait.click•1 day ago

Show Bedoyan your support.

tashenubaste.bsky.social•1 day ago

(My education is in writing and my husband's background is in radio & broadcast journalism, FWIW. I submit the suggestion from that POV and again--I DO understand where you're coming from and I know strangers yelling at you on the internet can be exhausting.)

tashenubaste.bsky.social•1 day ago

I do understand and respect the explanations you've given about language choice. I would respectfully submit that "tradition" indicates a much more relaxed, informal situation, and that "precedent" is more accurate and better illustrates the impact and true severity of the move.

indnial.bsky.social•1 day ago

ILLEGAL FIRING.

thezinger.bsky.social•1 day ago

📌

willoremus.com•1 day ago

The FTC firings, like others before them, fly in the face of the Supreme Court’s 1935 ruling in Humphrey’s Executor, which established that independence. The Trump admin is challenging that precedent in cases that will almost certainly land before the current Supreme Court.

scrambojambo.bsky.social•1 day ago

ok so here’s the issue though, you say that trump “fired” them, past tense. if you’re going to actually avoid prejudging outcomes when legality is questionable, then trump didn’t fire them. he *attempted* or *purported* to find them. as is, you have failed your own test.

billy158.bsky.social•1 day ago

“fly in the face of” a SCOTUS decision ain’t much better, tbh

amymwb.bsky.social•1 day ago

Yes and we all know how much this SCOTUS respects precedent.

jjsands.bsky.social•1 day ago

That's not true. The circuit courts can all laugh this out of court, which leaves no need for SCOTUS to address it.

curtismilam.bsky.social•1 day ago

Whew….luckily this SCOTUS respect precedent.

Wait….

chriroch.bsky.social•1 day ago

Weird, if I took a loaf of bread without paying, it would be called stealing, not "bread acquisition in the face of traditional legal theory".

faeelin.bsky.social•1 day ago

What value add did your reporting here provide?

rebelrabbit.bsky.social•1 day ago

your paper has no credibility anymore Bezos flushed that down the toilet

rebelrabbit.bsky.social•1 day ago

yes it's called fascism but then again your handlers at the Washington post hold your balls

ssommer642.bsky.social•1 day ago

It’s not legal! That should be the headline but you are no longer legit!

rtoit.bsky.social•1 day ago

Can we stop saying Trump succeeded in firing them? He is ATTEMPTING to fire them. It is illegal. So it is NOT a fait accompli.

riderbabe52.bsky.social•1 day ago

Abrupt??

ILLEGAL is the word you should have used.

slickpoetry.bsky.social•1 day ago

You need to start using the word "illegal" a lot more in your writing

dhunterto.bsky.social•1 day ago

And it is false—and deeply misleading—to say that Trump fired the FTC board members. He pretended to fire them. He has NO power to do that.

edroso.bsky.social•1 day ago

Nazis.

tofanacocktails.bsky.social•1 day ago

90 years? Is that the best you can do? Nah, I’m sure he can demolish things with much longer non-hardcore-statutory precedent.

Anything that was once upheld by “norms” or “traditions” just got swept off the table, dumped into a pile, and set on fire.

As promised.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply