Probably a good idea, I used to be a verizon customer (only coverage where I am) and I'm not any more. We're now a SelectTel customer, which means we're still using the verizon post-paid towers, but we're paying less than half.
They'd be in real trouble trying to compete on price with a company using their own towers at half the cost. They'd have to rely on things like their stores, and customer service.
Interestingly, despite Huckabee's claim that it was not a campaign event, that it was so will allow him to use his campaign's warchest to pay off the settlement.
That he reached a settlement does not automatically make it a campaign event. Interestingly, since he's using campaign funds to pay off an event he's stated repeatedly (and quote from page 6 of his court filing in doing so)
The assembly in support of Mrs. Davis was not organized, advertised, or promoted as a Huckabee for President campaign event. No Huckabee for President campaign signs were present at the assembly or visible in news reports of the assembly. Mr. Huckabee appeared at the assembly without as much as a campaign button. Mr. Huckabee spoke instead of God, religion, Mrs. Davis, the role of the courts, and the U. S. Constitution. Moreover, Mr. Huckabee explicitly proclaimed that his message was non-partisan and was not in support or criticism of any major political party.
I don't think the FEC is going to be too happy with him using campaign funds to pay for an event that's been emphatically denied to be a campaign event in court motions. Now, had it gone to court, and a finding of fact happened that it was a campaign event, then that's one thing. However, as it's just a private settlement, then legally Huckabee still classifies it as a non-campaign event, and thus he's misusing funds.
He may face charges from misuse of funds as a result. You can't (as far as I know) make legal claims an event is not a campaign event in a lawsuit, then come to a private settlement and benefit from claiming it's a campaign event. You don't get to switch between them at will when it best suits you. Either he Perjured himself in his filing, or he's committing election finance malfeasance.
Oh, and it's funny but I've been meaning to write up about a FOIA request we did at last years panel/workshop, which was about as different from this case (and the others I've heard) as can be. In fact I've been meaning to interview the responder because of it.
I first heard of this story last week from some of my friends who are also journalists here in GA. It led to some real horror stories being swapped that'll be pretty eye-opening to the EFF's Dave Maass when I do a panel/workshop on the FOIA with him in 2 months time.
I'm actually thinking about driving up to speak to some of the people involved here later this week too. Anyone want to put aside some bail money for me?
"good guys with guns" is a myth promoted by gun companies (and their lobbyists) to justify lobbying against public safety gun laws, and increase sales.
In reality, it almost never happens, and most of the time it does, it goes badly, like REALLY badly.
Let me put it this way - there was a 7 year audit of all firearms discharges by the NYPD. Their hit-rate was under 40%. That's for guys entering a situation with training and having been schooled on the use of a weapon in such situations to meet a 'minimum standard'. Just how accurate do you think Bubba Budweiser is going to be, when he's surprised in a situation he's had no experience of, and no training except maybe an hour or two now and then at a range, calmly plinking at paper targets with no adrenalin rush or fog of confusion?
Yeah, 'good guy with a gun' - the solution is worse than the problem.
Too many cowards whinge about not being able to cower behind as many guns as they want against a non-existent threat, and see every fact-based action against their paranoia as 'destroying the country' and 'ignoring the constitution'
You want to see ignoring the fucking Constitution, it's cowards and authoritarian shitheads like this CBP agent that will probably be granted immunity from taking responsibility for the consequences of his actions - essentially kidnapping an 18yo girl, and having her raped because he felt like it, and hiding behind his badge while willing medical personnel at the local hospital were happy to do whatever he wanted them to do.
Fuck the 2nd amendment,it's purpose was to provide an armed citizenry in place of an army. You see the US Army, the national Guards? They were established because the founders realised the 2nd didn't fucking work, and they were NEVER about personal protection (at least not until Scalia decided to re-write history back in 2008 and ignore 215 years of rulings - some by the people that wrote it and voted it into being - saying the opposite). You know what WAS supposed to protect you from things like the tyranny of the government? The 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments. So while people have been fixating on their personal paranoia and their desire to hold a blued-steel "comfort blanket", their actual protection from the government has been eroded with exception after exception and priviledge heaped upon immunity for police officers, while prosecutors defer to those same agents and refuse to apply the law to them as they do to us (in fact the courts NOW say law enforcement doesn't have to know the law, but for us 'ignorance is no excuse' still)
If you think your freedom depends on your owning a gun (and the 2nd amendment) and you don't care about the 4th, 5th, 6th or 14th amendments, then think on this. If a police officer makes something up about you (or just imagines something) and shoots you, odds are good he'll face ZERO PENALTIES for doing so. You shoot him, even with good reason, you'll be dealt with harshly, if not killed yourself. Again, it was written to provide an alternative to having an army, nothing more.
Your freedom doesn't depend on guns, it never has. It's depended on you defending your rights and ensuring they aren't weakened and made useless. It doesn't matter how much you fellate a .45 or worship the fantasy world of Wayne LaPierre, it doesn't do shit for your freedoms - if anything it creates more excuses to do away with your freedoms and rights. This case is a perfect example, but there are others, some this very week; cases of 'the end justifies the means', and that's bad.
But most self-proclaimed "patriots" and "lovers of freedom" don't care, because they're too worried about not being able to buy the gun they want to assuage their fear or compensate for their insecurities. That's just sad, and pathetic, and as far from 'patriotic' as you can get.
I think you should probably fire the pastor teaching you history.
The Catholic church held NO sway over the politics of Great Britain, not for several hundred years by the time of the 1st Amendment.
In case you've never been taught ACTUAL history, England split from the papalcy in the 16th century when the Pope wouldn't grant Henry VIII a divorce. So they expelled the papal representatives and so was excommunicated. Later Mary was put in the Tower for being a catholic, and the whole Spanish Armada thing was because the Catholic Spaniards were attacking the (to them) heathen English. And James I converted to Protestantism when he became King (he had been a Catholic when he was James VI of Scotland), which is what led to the gunpowder plot (to blow up the Houses of Parliament during the King's address) which is still commemorated today by Guy Fawkes night on November 5, and by Anon-tards buying masks from Warner Bros to show their desire to 'fight the system'. Oh, then he did the King James version of the Bible, for the common man (in English, rather than Latin). Also, funny thing, James was bisexual (although more strongly in the homosexual camp, having his first male lover - a Duke from the Scottish court iirc - at the age of 14).
What most Americans know as 'episcopalian', is more commonly known as 'Church of England', the head of which is NOT the Pope, but the British Monarch. Hence the queen's title, "Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith" - the last bit refers to her role as head of the CofE.
"and NOBODY pays attention to them because they are too gentle, peaceful and loving in a horror-show world !"
Er, those aren't the 'true' christians. They're the ones that follow the fictional idealised self-image of christians. The reality is that most christians are 'true' christians, as if you actually read the entire book and teachings, there's 10 lots of intollerance, for every 'peace and love'. Heck there's more 'kill unbelievers' than 'turn the other cheeks', and at least 3 places in the bible say 'you should commit genocide against unbelievers', one place even goes further and says you should also kill any believers around unbelievers, because they let the unbelievers live, so just destroy the entire city and everyone in it.
That's the real spirit of Christianity. hell, it's even in the 10 commandments, AS THE FIRST ONE "You shall have no other gods before Me"
WEll, to 'friend'them, they'd have to be a profile, but they're not a person, so they should have a 'page' instead (and 'profiles' for non-persons are reportable and a TOS violation), which can't do that.
Oh, and you can 'friend' them and then reclassify them using groups/listings to give them zero access if you want.
Yeah, a friend of mine FOIA's the CIA about their Kryptos statue in their garden(one she's actually been in to see) and it took about 5 years. Here's her explaining her process https://youtu.be/bau07LTrBZY?t=24m55s