@TheBTCTherapist Cool but this one is better. https://t.co/oDR0wQVJVI
— Hontas Farmer (@Hontas_Farmer) November 12, 2026
@TheBTCTherapist Cool but this one is better. https://t.co/oDR0wQVJVI
— Hontas Farmer (@Hontas_Farmer) November 12, 2026
Tom Homan's recent appearance on Fox News' America Reports discussing the ongoing federal investigation into Rep. Ilhan Omar for alleged immigration and naturalization fraud.
We need new laws to ban "Personalized Pricing".
There is no federal ban on algorithmic or personalized pricing (also called surveillance pricing) in the U.S., but the FTC treats undisclosed use of personal data to set individualized prices as potentially unfair or deceptive under Section 5 of the FTC Act. States are moving faster, creating a patchwork of disclosure requirements and outright prohibitions, mainly focused on consumer personal data rather than pure supply-and-demand dynamic pricing.
The FTC proposed an Enforcement Policy Statement on Personalized Pricing in August 2026. It states that where consumers reasonably expect prices to be uniform (not varying by personal data like browsing history, location, loyalty status, or willingness-to-pay estimates), companies must clearly and conspicuously disclose that a price is personalized, the basis for personalization, and the types of data used. Failure to do so is likely to violate Section 5. The FTC has acknowledged it lacks authority for an outright ban.
On October 28, 2026, the FTC issued Section 6(b) study orders (not an enforcement action) to nine companies—Delta, United, JetBlue, Lyft, Uber, DoorDash, Instacart, Target, and Walmart—seeking details on their use of personal data and AI/algorithms for consumer pricing and, for platforms, gig worker compensation. Responses are due roughly 45 days after receipt (around mid-December 2026). This follows a 2024 study the current Commission viewed as insufficient because it focused on intermediaries rather than the companies setting prices.
Proposed federal bills (such as versions of a Stop AI Price Gouging and Wage Fixing Act or One Fair Price Act) have been introduced but not enacted. Separate antitrust efforts target algorithms that use competitor data to facilitate collusion, distinct from individualized consumer pricing.
States are the primary source of binding restrictions, with approaches ranging from disclosure to bans (often with exceptions for loyalty programs, cost-based differences, or promotions):
California has targeted “common pricing algorithms” that use competitor data under its Cartwright Act (antitrust). Dozens of other states have considered or have pending bills. Scope, definitions of “personal data,” covered businesses, and exceptions vary significantly, creating compliance complexity for multistate operations.
The legal landscape is actively developing, with the FTC study results and further state action expected to shape it further into 2027. Businesses using these tools should map data inputs, document justifications, and prepare clear disclosures. For the most current status on a specific state or practice, checking official legislative sources or recent FTC materials is advisable.
https://t.co/NypuYPNQK5
— MAGAaTom -🇺🇸 🇺🇸- President Trump is Fantastic (@MAGAaTom) November 11, 2026
Please click here, and read the content that evil Google does not want you to see.
The Communist Democrats are making up lies about Pete Hegseth.
Please watch this video to learn the truth.
Major outlets (New York Times, Financial Times, BBC, CNN, Reuters, Guardian, and others) have covered it extensively since late October/early November 2026. The core claims hold up as follows:
President Trump has also commented publicly, noting the FBI is looking into aspects of it while expressing confidence in Huang.
The story is real and ongoing. The “alleged/suspected” language is accurate because the spy determination rests on intelligence assessments rather than public criminal charges at this stage. Investigations (NVIDIA’s internal one and any US government ones) are still in progress.