New Website PAYTOPLAY.BIZ covers the dirty corruption of “Pay To Play” Silicon Valley Politics
BOUNTY OFFERED ON DIRTY CAMPAIGN BILLIONAIRES. GET $1 MILLION HARD CASH FOR HARD EVIDENCE
In the last 48 hours, leaked documents have been published on the internet which reveal the Pay To Play corrupt quid-pro-quo schemes that a criminally illicit group of billionaires set-up in 2008 and 2009. The crimes are still happening but now, so is the blow-back.
The ad says:
“Billionaire Bounty”: Get $1M Cash For Tips”
“The alliance of Plaintiffs will pay one million dollars cash for hard evidence from leaks, tips or other legal outlets leading to the arrest and conviction in criminal and civil court of the SUSPECTS per Plaintiffs current lawsuits.
After consulting with law enforcement agencies and public interest law firms, we are delighted to discover that putting a bounty on the head of corrupt campaign billionaires is entirely legal.
Be your own version of “Dog, The Bounty Hunter”. Bring the Plaintiffs a dirty Silicon Valley Oligarch and they will bring you one million dollars in cold hard cash from their jury award against that person! Contact the Routing Office with your tip but do not send your tip until notified.”
Silicon Valley’s John Doerr, Larry Page, Elon Musk, Eric Schmidt, Steve Spinner, Steve Westly and the White House’s own indicted Steve Rattner have now been documented in public leaks bribing political officials and ordering “hit-jobs” on Bernie Sanders, Cheryl Attkisson, Monica Lewinsky and a host of their competitors. Now “heads must roll” and a one million dollar cash prize has been announced for each one that is arrested and dragged before a winning jury trial. Known as “Pay For Play” in the Guccifer Leaks, The “Special Accounts” in the HSBC Swiss Leaks and “The favors” in the Panama Papers the overt bribery of these men is now entering full view in the public media. An alliance of victims has announced the offer at their websites at http://www.slush-fund.com, http://xyzcase.xyz and in thousands of advertisements around the globe.
A personal “open letter” to one of them, a Mr. John Doerr of Kleiner Perkins, lays it out:
“Dear John”, it begins, “…our private investigators along with former FBI agents we retained and current U.S. Senate investigators that contacted us, inform us that you and your frat house boys organized and paid for the hit job on us. You have also paid off law enforcement bosses to seek to stall investigations. You did stall those investigations but the brakes on your corruption train have now worn out and you are now on your way down hill on the Corruption Express. I think it is non-stop…straight to hell.”
John Doerr, Eric Schmidt, Elon Musk, Larry Page bribed Washington and Sacramento politicians to give them all of the “green energy cleantech cash” while also bribing those same politicians to sabotage their competitors. They have tried to halt law enforcement and civil jury hearings but their time has run out. The victims of their incredible corruption and bribery are demanding their day in court. See more at www.paytoplay.biz
Hundreds of PR Staffers, for $500 Million a Year, work around the clock to try to cover-up these crimes
The Obama administration hired hundreds of public relations employees to sell the administration’s policies, costing U.S. taxpayers $500 million a year, according to the government’s top watchdog.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) said that the administration added 667 PR staffers between 2008 and 2011 to bring the staffing total to 5,238; the number decreased since then, but 5,100 staffers remained in the administration in 2014, The Washington Times reported.
The GAO says these figures do not include the $100 million spent on private PR consultants to bolster the government’s PR efforts.
The government spent $800 million on contracts with outside advertising firms in 2015 to promote the administration’s policies, The Washington Times reported.
“With increasing pressures on limited federal resources, it is crucial to know how much is spent across the federal government on public relations activities and which federal agencies are spending the most,” said Sen. Mike Enzi, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, who requested the report.
According to The Washington Times, the Pentagon gained the most PR staffers out of all the federal agencies, with 2,100 employees assigned to the agency.
The Interior Department, Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security also saw big gains in PR staff.
Some departments, such as Social Security, the Transportation and Labor departments, and the National Science Foundation, faced the smallest PR staffing gains in a decade.
Read More Stories About:
Google’s kick-back payola from Obama White House breaks all records
– More insidious than House of Cards “Pollyhop”
– Nearly a trillion dollars of tax payer give-aways and competitor hit jobs
– Google avoids all law enforcement and regulation based entirely on “pass” from White House
Google Reaps Harvest of Obama Support
AP Photo/Jeff Chiu
by Mike Flynn
Internet giant Google has been one of the strongest political backers of President Barack Obama. As the Obama tenure in the White House comes to an end, several recent regulatory decisions have benefited Google handsomely.
The symbiotic relationship has been good for both Obama and the titans of Mountain View.
In the 2012 election cycle, Google employees donated a princely $804,249 to President Obama’s re-election effort. Only employees at Microsoft and the University of California donated more, and each have more than double the number of employees as Google. In 2008, Google employees contributed $817,855 to Obama’s election campaign.
Google’s Eric Schmidt served on Obama’s President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, and provided valuable input on Obama’s 2012 campaign. Schmidt helped the Obama campaign recruit talent and coached the campaign manager on leadership. Schmidt even invested in a data start-up headed by veterans of the Obama campaign.
Obama also appointed a non-registered Google lobbyist, Vint Cerf, to the National Science Board. Last year, the Wall Street Journal reported that someone from Google attended a meeting at the White House an average of once a week throughout Obama’s tenure in office.
Now, in the final months of the second Obama term, Google has been the beneficiary of favorable decisions from federal agencies ranging from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
The FCC is handling its “set-top” box proceeding, ostensibly aimed at freeing TV viewers from expensive, restrictive contracts with cable providers, in a way that would greatly benefit Google whether seen from the perspective of giving Google a ton of new advertising data it currently lacks or giving the tech giant access to other entities’ content on uniquely favorable terms.
Because of Google’s relationship with T-Mobile, depending on how the FCC handles its spectrum auction, the agency could also be set to give the company a big boost in that realm, too. Google itself will not participate in the auction, removing a potentially large bidder from the sale. Google has close ties with T-Mobile, however, and the wireless carrier will be bidding on the auction.
And the FCC is also doing Google a big favor in pre-empting states from regulating Google Fiber. As Google’s own lawyer has noted, regulating Google under the federal Title II could give the company access to other companies’ hard infrastructure, such as telephone poles—a big boost to Google.
Meanwhile, NHTSA is giving Google and its self-driving cars another regulatory handout. According to Reuters, “NHTSA will interpret ‘driver’ in the context of Google’s described motor vehicle design as referring to the (self-driving system), and not to any of the vehicle occupants,” something that increases the commercial viability of Google’s driverless cars substantially. In other words, the Google’s on-board computer will be considered by the Feds to be a “driver,” clearing lots of hurdles for self-driving cars to hit the road.
Another big benefit to Google was announced by President Obama himself, when he announced the company would be the first American Internet Service Provider to be let into Cuba. Critics also allege that Google may be benefiting from the creation of new “Digital Attaches” at U.S. Embassies abroad, and from terms of free trade agreements sought by the Obama administration.
Earlier this year, the federal government announced an end to its nearly two-year anti-trust investigation of Google’s search business. In a break with precedent, the FTC accepted voluntary changes from the company rather than a formal consent decree. One FTC Commissioner even warned that the lack of a consent decree freed Google to reinstate anti-competitive practices at any time.
Of course, there’s nothing wrong with anyone—corporation or individual—advocating for their position and benefiting from sound, limited government policy. In Google’s case, however, they provided critical support for President Obama’s election. The President has pursued a heavy, interventionist policy in almost every other industry sector.
Google has not only escaped the heavy hand of government regulation, but, in a number of cases, it has benefitted from specific government decisions that have helped its businesses. That looks a lot less like an individual entity benefiting from free markets and a lot more like buying special, pricey favors, to the potential disadvantage of competitors. In other words, a kind of high-tech crony capitalism. One wonders if you can google that.
Google’s Android Targeted by EU Over Mobile Search Curbs
EU Sends Objections Over Android Pacts With Manufacturers
- EU sends objections over Android pacts with manufacturers
- Pre-loaded software pushes users to Google Search, EU says
Google was accused of wielding its power as the world’s leading phone software supplier to impose its search and Web programs on billions of mobile users as European Union regulators took another swipe at the U.S. technology giant.
The European Commission sent Google a formal antitrust complaint, accusing the company of striking restrictive contracts that require makers of tablets and phones to install its search and Web browser on new phones. The company also unfairly pays phone makers and telecom operators a share of advertising revenue if they agree to make Google’s search engine the default on devices, the EU said Wednesday.
“What we found is that Google pursues an overall strategy on mobile devices to protect and expand its dominant position in Internet search” with unjustified restrictions and conditions on phone makers and carriers, EU Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager told reporters. “Over half of Internet traffic takes place on mobile devices.”
By sending a statement of objections, the EU is opening a new front in its antitrust battle with the Alphabet Inc. unit — paving the way for potentially huge fines and radical changes to the way the company does business. It comes a year after the EU issued a formal complaint over Google’s comparison-shopping service.
Google countered the EU charges, saying that Android is a “free and open-source operating system.”
“Our partner agreements are entirely voluntary,” Kent Walker, the Mountain View, California-based company’s general counsel, said in a statement. “We look forward to working with the European Commission to demonstrate the careful way we’ve designed the Android model in a way that’s good for competition and for consumers.”
Google is in the EU’s sights more than a decade after regulators took aim at Microsoft Corp. for tying a media player to its bestselling computer operating system. While some things have changed since then, Google’s efforts are “a strategy to keep and expand” its power in search by nudging Android users toward Google’s mobile search, Vestager said.
Microsoft fought hard against EU charges, coughing up 2.24 billion euros ($2.5 billion) in four installments over 10 years and losing a challenge in court.
Android is loaded on most of the world’s smartphones and tablets — usually along with Google’s e-mail, maps and video software. The EU argues that users rarely bother to download alternatives to the apps that come on a new device, meaning Google’s deals ensure its free Web and search software grab attention — and the advertising revenue that powers the Internet.
The Android software for smartphones has been in the EU’s sights since 2013 after an industry group backed at the time by Microsoft Corp. and Nokia Oyj filed a complaint with regulators. The EU opened a formal probe last year that looks at Google’s anti-competitive practices on mobile since 2011.
That complaint focused on Google’s mobile application development agreements, such as those with handset makers Samsung Electronics Co. and HTC Corp., which require developers to use Google’s proprietary Play Services software. Manufacturers must also strike anti-fragmentation agreements to use the Play Store apps, which prevents them making their own versions of Android.
The EU is also looking at Google’s financial incentives — revenue sharing agreements for manufacturers and telecom operators that agree to its terms. It wouldn’t say how much was at stake but that income needed to be significant to keep companies within the Google ecosystem. The case doesn’t extend to the hefty fee paid to Apple Inc. to keep its search bar on the iPhone.
The EU case raises a potential threat to Android, and Google’s reach to “virtually every non-IPhone user in the world,” said James Cakmak, an analyst at Monness Crespi Hardt & Co., who rates Alphabet’s stock a buy.
“The most extreme consequence is some sort of unbundling or separation of Google Services from Android,” Cakmak said. “Limiting your ability to collect data would limit your ability to target users, which is what Google does — get the right ad in front of you at the right time.”
Google said last year that its agreements with phone manufacturers are voluntary and allow Android to be used without Google apps. Agreements to prevent fragmentation ensure that apps work well on all Android devices while distribution deals give users “a great ’out-of-the-box’ experience with useful apps right there on the home screen,” the company said.
The EU probe showed it’s “commercially important” for device makers using Android to put Google’s Play Store — where customers download apps — on phones. Loading handsets with Google Search and the Chrome browser is a pre-condition for licenses to use the Play Store, the EU says, meaning that rival search engines or Web software cannot become a default on most phones sold in Europe.
Vestager said Google now has 12 weeks to submit a formal response to Wednesday’s complaint. Even though the threat of fines persists, she said Google could easily address the EU’s concerns.
“The remedy in this case is basically quite simple — it’s to stop these practices,” she said.
Read More Stories About: