Elections and Media

There was a time in the not-too-distant past when President Donald Trump refrained from flamethrowing messages on Twitter. That time is over. Never mind that his aides have asked him to stop. Never mind that now the lawyers have told him to stop. Even though his White House has been warned that tweets could be used as evidence against him, President Trump has made clear in the days after returning from a largely Twitter-free overseas trip that he fully intends to stick to his favorite means of communication. Throughout 2016’s campaign and into the early months of his presidency, the concern among Trump’s advisers was mainly political. Every time the president let loose with one of his 140-character blasts, it distracted from his agenda and touched off a media frenzy that could last for days. But now the worry has turned increasingly legal. With multiple investigations looking at whether the president’s associates collaborated with Russia to influence the election, any random, unfiltered tweet could become part of a legal case.

[Commentary] Montana GOP congressional candidate Greg Gianforte said of a Guardian reporter, “The last guy did the same damn thing.” From the looks of things, “the same damn thing” appears to boil down to asking questions of the candidate. Polite and relevant questions: Are they what had made Gianforte so “sick and tired”? Are polite and relevant questions what he was bemoaning when he talked about “the same damn thing”? Speaking of the news media as the people’s enemy and singling out reporters in menacing fashion at public events are both aspects of Trump’s trickle-down authoritarianism. He has done both. For decades, Republican candidates talked and talked and talked about the ravages of the so-called liberal media. Historians may look back at recent events — the manhandling of reporter Michelle Fields by a Trump campaign aide last year; the Jacobs confrontation — as the beginning of an action phase.

Now that the Federal Communications Commission has released its official proposal to repeal network neutrality rules, Democrats are vowing to fight that measure in the courts, at the Federal Communications Commission, and in the realm of public opinion.

Sensing they've hit on a white-hot campaign issue, Democrats are seeking to stir up a grass-roots firestorm around net neutrality that can thwart the GOP plan — or at least make it incredibly costly for Republicans to support. Democrats argue that Republicans want to strip consumers of key online protections and hand more power back to large Internet providers, and liken the issue to another hot-button topic: former president Obama's health-care law. “The more the public understands about what the Trump administration is trying to do to net neutrality, they'll understand that it's the same thing they're trying to do to the Affordable Care Act, to the Clean Air Act, to gun safety laws — and net neutrality is just another part of the very same story,” said Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA).

By raising the issue of net neutrality to the level of health care, Democrats such as Sen Markey appear to believe they're in for similar victories on net neutrality. The decision reflects a doubling-down on a populist strategy — and it reflects how deeply they are convinced the public is already on their side.

For years, consumers have warred with telemarketers for ringing their landline phones at all hours of the day. Pretty soon, though, they might find their mobile voicemail under the same sort of assault — that is, if the Republican Party and others have their way.

The GOP’s leading campaign and fundraising arm, the Republican National Committee, has quietly thrown its support behind a proposal at the Federal Communications Commission that would pave the way for marketers to auto-dial consumers’ cellphones and leave them prerecorded voicemail messages — all without ever causing their devices to ring. Under current federal law, telemarketers and others, like political groups, aren’t allowed to launch robocall campaigns targeting cellphones unless they first obtain a consumer’s written consent. But businesses stress that it’s a different story when it comes to “ringless voicemail” — because it technically doesn’t qualify as a phone call in the first place. In their eyes, that means they shouldn’t need a customer or voter’s permission if they want to auto-dial mobile voicemail inboxes in bulk pre-made messages about a political candidate, product or cause. And they want the FCC to rule, once and for all, that they’re in the clear. Their argument, however, has drawn immense opposition from consumer advocates.

John Brennan, the former CIA director, described a nerve-fraying few months in 2016 as American authorities realized that the presidential election was under attack and feared that Donald Trump’s campaign might be aiding that fight. Brennan, in testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, said he was concerned by a series of suspicious contacts between Russian government officials and Trump’s associates.

The CIA learned about those meetings just as it was beginning to grapple with Russian hackers and propagandists trying to manipulate the presidential race. His remarks were the fullest public account to date of the origins of an FBI investigation that continues to shadow the Trump administration. “I know what the Russians try to do,” Brennan said. “They try to suborn individuals and try to get individuals, including US individuals, to act on their behalf, wittingly or unwittingly.” When he left his post in January, he said, “I had unresolved questions in my mind as to whether or not the Russians had been successful in getting US persons involved in the campaign or not to work on their behalf.”