Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Former FCC Broadband Panel Chair Arrested For Fraud (dslreports.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the gig-is-up dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from DSLReports: The former chair of a panel built by FCC boss Ajit Pai to advise the agency on broadband matters has been arrested for fraud. Elizabeth Ann Pierce, former CEO of Quintillion Networks, was appointed by Pai last April to chair the committee, but her tenure only lasted until September. Pierce resigned from her role as Quintillion CEO last August after investigators found she was engaged in a scam that tricked investors into pouring money into a multi-million dollar investment fraud scheme. According to the Wall Street Journal, Pierce convinced two investment firms that the company had secured contracts for a high-speed fiber-optic system that would generate hundreds of millions of dollars in future revenue. She pitched the system as a way to improve Alaska's connectivity to the rest of the country, but the plan was largely a fabrication, law enforcement officials say. "As it turned out, those sales agreements were worthless because the customers had not signed them," U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman said in prepared remarks. "Instead, as alleged, Pierce had forged counterparty signatures on contract after contract. As a result of Pierce's deception, the investment companies were left with a system that is worth far less than Pierce had led them to believe." Quintillion says it began cooperating with lawmakers as soon as allegations against Pierce surfaced last year. Pierce was charged with wire fraud last Thursday and faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

106 comments

  1. Like Madoff... by Mal-2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Like Madoff, the crime isn't that she stole a bunch of money. It's that she stole a bunch of money from rich people. This pierces the "one rule for me, and another for thee" veil.

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  2. Ajit Pai's friends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is how telecom is done, eh?

    1. Re:Ajit Pai's friends by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      My thoughts too, it's exactly the sort of person you'd expect to find among Ajit Pai's cronies.

    2. Re:Ajit Pai's friends by rsborg · · Score: 2

      This is how corruption is done. They are only sad because they got caught.

      In fact, this administration's only rule seems to be "don't get caught".

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  3. More sympathy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... investment companies were left with a system that is worth far less ...

    If they had been punished for the fraud they committed (and worked to hold rogue managers responsible), I would have far more sympathy now they are a victim of fraud.

  4. Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Obviously it's not news that some random, quickly-fired bureaucrat was a scam artist, but if we mention that Ajit Pai was her boss a few times we can tap into all that pre-existing hate and generate clicks.

    1. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There is a saying that applies here. Something about like avian foliage and shared social circles. What was it again? Hmm...

    2. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Good point. Now let's talk about Obama and Eric Holder/Hillary Clinton/Andrew McCabe/Michael Flynn...

    3. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by greenwow · · Score: 0

      And Obama appointed Ajit Pai to the FCC board.

    4. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      stupid parent!

      do your research (NOT fox news, either, dummy).

      I won't do your research for you, but just lets say:

      YOU ARE CONTEXTUALLY WRONG.

      (although, not the best kind of wrong....)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    5. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by AceViper · · Score: 5, Interesting

      True. However, it's important to point out that he was forced to select a Republican, by law. It's possible Ajit was the best of all the bad options.

    6. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by Q-Hack! · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I am missing something, but how is the GP wrong? A quick google search clearly shows that Ajit Pai was appointed to the FCC by Obama.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
    7. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by thesupraman · · Score: -1, Troll

      Its called denial.

      You have to remember that the echo chamber MUST be maintained, and denial is one of the last resorts (along with abuse, claiming 'isms and trying to poison the conversation)

      The fact that 'our side is at least as bad as their side' is simply not acceptable to their black and white world (lolz, I wonder if they think that one is racist).

    8. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by Shikaku · · Score: 4, Informative

      It says right there, appointed FCC chairman by Donald Trump (emphasis mine). Under Obama he was in the FCC as the Republican seat; the chairman under Obama was Tom Wheeler: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/....

    9. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Ah, so appointing a corrupt/incompetent/malevolent Literal Indian Hitler to fill one of 5 positions on an extremely powerful government commission is perfectly fine, just as long as you don't make him Chairman. Got it.

    10. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are referring to "Mutual speaking assumes the leaf of birdkind."

    11. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 2

      And Obama appointed Ajit Pai to the FCC board.

      It says right there, appointed FCC chairman by Donald Trump (emphasis mine). Under Obama he was in the FCC as the Republican seat; the chairman under Obama was Tom Wheeler: ...

      The original post made no mention of who was chairman.

      This part is also interesting (from the wikipedia article):

      He was confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate on May 7, 2012

      So everyone is at fault. Don't worry though guys he is a historic diversity appointment.

    12. Re: Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Left wing or right wing, it's all attached to the same dirty bird. The best we can do is devolve their power base and try to drive political power back to being more local so the crooks have less power to do damage and are more directly accountable.

    13. Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! by greenwow · · Score: 1

      Nice whataboutism. I posted "to the FCC board" which is true.

  5. Mod parent up by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    it's just coincidence that she's related to somebody /. hates. And I'm sure she was promptly replaced by somebody just as bad. I keep saying this, but if people want this to stop you need to get out there and vote these bums out.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Mod parent up by youngone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...get out there and vote these bums out....

      Ha ha! As if that will make any difference. It's America, you just vote in some other bums.

    2. Re: Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Hah, In Trump's America we bend over for them and spread our own ass cheeks so that we can be conveniently screwed by our master class.

      And they told us we wouldn't have a thing to worry about. After all, a lifetime of greed and covetousness has instilled them with a particular set of virtues.

    3. Re:Mod parent up by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      it's just coincidence that she's related to somebody /. hates.

      How's the new swamp drainage system looking? I expect they'll open the sluices any day now, right?

      Right?

      --
      No sig today...
    4. Re: Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both of you are right. ;) Trump may have put Idjit in charge, but Obama's administration brought him on board in the first place.

    5. Re:Mod parent up by Jeremi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ha ha! As if that will make any difference. It's America, you just vote in some other bums.

      All bums are not created equal. The trick is for voters to accurately evaluate the bumminess of each bum, and choose the less-bummy bum in each election. That way, in the best-case scenario, we slowly work our way up the bum-gradient, and even in the worst-case scenario, while things don't improve, they don't degrade either.

      Saying it won't make any difference only discourages voters from evaluating the candidates carefully, which increases the chances of them accidentally choosing the bummier bum, and thereby making things worse than they were before.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    6. Re:Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      but if people want this to stop you need to get out there and vote these bums out.

      They did. Enter the power vacuum that is Trump. What else could possibly happen when you have so many new immigrants, waiting to swallow whatever power they can get and a Government so corrupt they can't even get rid of their own any more? You get a cluster fuck. A legal, invasion level cluster fuck. It's already happening in other Countries like Canada. If Trudumbdumb (Canadian PM), could walk around in pink drag he would.

      Wouldn't at all surprise me if Ajit finds his way to a jail cell too, he is a retarded pawn they can't have ties to for long. Trump may be a manchild, but he is at least accomplishing _some_ filtering of the swamp that is in Government. On both sides.

      Capatcha: reviving -- Seriously Slashdot how the hell do you do this.

    7. Re: Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      H|llary Cl|nton In 2020! Defeat TRUMP!
      H|llary Cl|nton In 2020! Defeat TRUMP!


      H . . H | L . L . aAAAa rRRR .Y . Y
      H . . H | L . L . A . A R . R . Y Y
      H H H H | L . L . AAAAA RRRR ... Y
      H . . H | L . L . A . A R R .. Y
      H . . H | LLl LLl A . A R . R .. y

      H|llary Cl|nton In 2020! Defeat TRUMP!
      H|llary Cl|nton In 2020! Defeat TRUMP!

    8. Re: Mod parent up by houghi · · Score: 1

      As long as you have a bi-party system where winner tajes all, that will not happen.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    9. Re:Mod parent up by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Right, let's vote Kodos next time, that's gonna change it all!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re:Mod parent up by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but no. If the choice is to get shot or get hung, the correct choice is to shoot the executioner.

      False dichotomies are never solved by choosing either wrong choice.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re: Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      More shit is flushed out every day. Surely you've noticed the incredible screeching coming from politicians and bureaucrats every day with every single action President Trump takes.

      If he hadn't been become President the scum in Hollywood wouldn't have been flushed. The FBI would be running smooth and slimy like always before.

      Trump is the Drano president. You don't have to find him pleasant to know he's getting the job done.

    12. Re:Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, there's been plenty of indictments with more to go.

    13. Re:Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All bums are not created equal. The trick is for voters to accurately evaluate the bumminess of each bum, and choose the less-bummy bum in each election.

      Where have I heard this before? Ah, yes...

      "The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
      "Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
      "I did," said Ford. "It is."
      "So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't people get rid of the lizards?"
      "It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
      "You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
      "Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
      "But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
      "Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"

    14. Re:Mod parent up by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I agree with you, and usually vote against the encumbent, but it doesn't seem to be making things better. :/

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    15. Re: Mod parent up by wyHunter · · Score: 0

      Do you really believe it's any different under a D administration? I haven't seen much difference actually, but then again, I don't watch TV and get 24x7 propaganda.

    16. Re: Mod parent up by Falconnan · · Score: 1

      Um... No.

      I think we established that, for reasons both fair and unfair, this cannot happen. And Bernie was already near the maximum age I was comfortable with electing to this office. Elizabeth Warren, on the other hand...

    17. Re: Mod parent up by Lab+Rat+Jason · · Score: 1

      If only all those things were intentional. Trump can't claim #MeToo as his idea, and most of the people he's fired are also people he made a choice to hire, so while maybe we're moving in the right direction, it's not because of his deft maneuvers.

      --
      Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
    18. Re: Mod parent up by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 2

      More shit is flushed out every day.

      Too bad it's all been the shit that Trump and company brought with them to DC.

    19. Re:Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Don't blame me I voted for Kang.

    20. Re:Mod parent up by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Yes, we have to make sure the wrong lizard doesn't win.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    21. Re: Mod parent up by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 0

      I don't think so. She's in worse legal trouble than ever.

      Hillary, DNC Funneled $84 Million Through State Parties To Avoid Campaign Finance Laws, Lawsuit Claims "FEC officials did not respond to a request for comment, 'citing an open investigation.'"

      The Real Clinton Foundation Record is Getting Exposed

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
    22. Re: Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice sources LUL.

      One of them is a personal blog LOLOLOL.

    23. Re: Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both of you are right. ;) Trump may have put Idjit in charge, but Obama's administration brought him on board in the first place.

      Big different. One has not much power, but the other PROMOTE him to have much more power. It's like your CEO hired him as a programmer in a team. Then the new CEO promoted him to a director of the department. Still the same? Don't conflate what had happened.

    24. Re: Mod parent up by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 1

      Wow you don't even know who Charles Ortel is! LOL

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
    25. Re:Mod parent up by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

      Due to the nature of voting in the U.S., there are always just two political parties that elect candidates to office in any great number, except during times of transition. Those transitions occur when neither of the two dominant parties will address an issue that a large fraction of the voters think is important.

      That's how the Republicans came from essentially nowhere in the early 1850s to electing a president in 1860 and replacing the Whigs. (Having 11 states withdraw from U.S. politics for 4 years and then be banned from it for several more years certainly helped the Republicans.)

      Sometimes a new party will gain enough votes (and perhaps elected officials) that one of the two dominant parties will take that party's position. (The fans of Carrie Nation gave us Al Capone.) In that case the transition is not the replacement of one of the old parties, but the adoption of a position on that former "third-rail" issue.

      It's pretty hard to start a new party these days and compete on an even footing with the statutory duopoly parties, thanks to state laws that pretty much guarantee that the two dominant parties are always same two parties.

      For details about this process, and what party formation and operation was like before government-approved candidates and government-approved parties, see _Why American Stopped Voting_ by Mark L. Kornbluh. http://www.worldcat.org/search...

      --
      There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
  6. Fish rots from the head first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Ajit Pai - a diversity hire, and by whom, you may or may not ask? Some guy named Barry something or other...

    And considering this guy... from India.. home of some of the best corruption outside of Latin America, well, pretty easy to see this coming with the kind of company they keep, why hasn't his name come up in the court's papers?.. And Trump? Hey, bud, just take off somewhere, but you have to send the plane back

  7. DSL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that even a thing any more? Get with the times.

    1. Re: DSL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could have picked a forum website with 'torrent' in it's name. It would be the same bit-hoarders either way, grumbling about 'the gov and big biz' disrupting their high speed shuffle of somebody else's content around.

  8. What did Ajit know and when did he know it? by Proudrooster · · Score: 2

    It's time to find out what Ajit knew and when he knew it. I wonder if he is nervous.. Did Ajit know about these contracts? We he a reference for investors? Was he a willing party to the fraud? Was the connection to the FCC leveraged in the fraud? So many questions and inquiring minds want to know.

    1. Re:What did Ajit know and when did he know it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's time to find out what Ajit knew and when he knew it.

      The one and only functioning neuron in his brain is programmed exclusively to follow Trump's lead so it's hard to imagine you are going to learn much.

  9. Draining the swamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't think Trump meant to drain the swamp by having everyone associated with him and his appointees arrested and thrown into prison, but it's starting to do the job.

    1. Re:Draining the swamp by skids · · Score: 3, Funny

      If this keeps up he'll run out of names to namedrop during his speeches which don't result in "lock em up" chants.

      --
      Someone had to do it.
  10. Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is barely even news with this administration. It was only a piddly $250 million; chump change to the waste, fraud, and abuse in this administration. They spend $31K on some tables and chairs, hundreds of thousands per trip on private charter jets, millions on golf excursions to Florida, around $45K on a soundproof booth, a couple million on a private 24/7 security detail... She would probably be one of the most ethical members of the administration if she ONLY bilked people for $250m.

    1. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We tried to warn you how the last guy was moving the overton window... you called us racist.

      Enjoy the new normal you helped create :)

    2. Re:Yawn by iamhassi · · Score: 0

      He goes down to his own property to play golf. That's like saying playing golf in your backyard costs millions. How can that possibly cost more than the almost weekly vacations previous presidents took to Hawaii and Africa?

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    3. Re:Yawn by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      And he has security where ever he goes. It's not cheaper at the White House, still full security staff 24/7

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    4. Re:Yawn by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      How can that possibly cost more than the almost weekly vacations previous presidents took to Hawaii and Africa?

      That is a lie, and you are a liar. Trump has gone on more vacations so far than any president in history. Further, it doesn't much matter where he goes; the principal cost is security, which costs about the same amount whether he goes to Mar-a-Lago or Hawaii. Further, Trump is paying himself to stay at Mar-a-Lago, so he's actually just defrauding the American People by staying there every weekend. AFAICT it's his plan for getting out of debt. Just keep paying himself for vacation time.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Yawn by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 2

      Most of the White House security still has to be maintained, for the rest of the staff and documents in the White House, when the President is elsewhere. That makes the security on his travels an extra cost. I'd also suspect that much of the security at the White House uses tools and equipment that can be handled in bulk, much more efficiently, with a stable base of operations.

    6. Re:Yawn by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      And he has security where ever he goes. It's not cheaper at the White House, still full security staff 24/7

      How about you prove that thesis? That it costs as much to stay at the White house as it does to go to Mr-a-Lego most weekends.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    7. Re:Yawn by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      It was only a piddly $250 million; chump change to the waste, fraud, and abuse in this administration. They spend $31K on some tables and chairs

      I think you are missing important mathematical concepts like "order of magnitude" and "significant digits"

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    8. Re:Yawn by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      Trump isn't paying himself to go on vacation. And security is the same at his property or the White House, so all these "millions" people claim he's spending on vacation security would have been the same.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    9. Re:Yawn by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      How can that possibly cost more than the almost weekly vacations previous presidents took to Hawaii and Africa?

      That is a lie, and you are a liar.

      Your own link proved yourself wrong. Again, traveling to your own property is not a "vacation" anymore than going to your own backyard is a "vacation". The link you posted said he was going on vacation because he traveled to his own property. That is not a vacation.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  11. Show up at your primary by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    your primary vote is incredibly powerful since so few people show up to it. If you show up at your primaries you can do away with crap like the "Sheldon" primary (google it).

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Show up at your primary by youngone · · Score: 1

      I'm not American, so probably shouldn't vote in anyone's primaries.
      To be fair, the real problem you have is that you will wind up with the choice of a Democrat or a Republican. That is exactly the way the people really running the joint want it.

  12. You are looking at the wrong problem. by thesupraman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, I beg to differ.

    The current Bozo and friends are, as expected, foolishly blatant and open about what they are doing.
    This comes from a lack of political experience, and is actually rather refreshing.
    The other mod were almost the definition of pure slick politics - where everything was hidden.
    They only mad a few slip ups that got leaked out and tipped the balance, but they were certainly adept at playing kiss the baby while selling out your freedom.

    Having a loudmouth idiot in charge can have benifits, and I would suggest is making the whole system less corrupt, not more, as it is at least being exposed and made obvious.

    1. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually it is a solid indication of the extreme problem, corruption in US politics is causing. It is so bad and rampant, it is spreading through out the entire system. It is infecting US government at every level, Federal, State, Local and in every Agency. They are seeing the corruption at the top and emulating it. Seriously wire fraud from the agency that is meant to fight wire fraud (the distribution of the data and the management of the scam), a top level political appointee. Alarm bells should be ringing, you have serious, deep and pervasive corruption going on, you desperately need to crack down on it hard, otherwise it will destroy the country and it has already caused an enormousness amount of damage to the economy, to the society as a whole, to infrastructure, to global presence, to all government agencies and even to education of the generation. The continued failure to 'properly' investigate, prosecute, convict and penalise, in glaringly public incidents, is destroying your country. Corruption is becoming a mass problem and spreading, failure to carry out high level prosecutions ie 'See no one is above the law and everyone gets caught', is accelerating that growth of corruption, you have hit second world government levels of corruption, it looks like you a going on to third world level government, where bribes are expect to be paid for everything. You should be freaking the fuck out.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    2. Re: You are looking at the wrong problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The previous democrat president had to deal with republican majorities for his presidency. That means he had to compromise on who he could out into office such that a mostly Republican objection could block it.

      The current Republican president has a Republican house and a Republican senate. Even if every single democrat bites against his nominees, he still gets his choice.

      Every criminal in under Trump has been "vetted" by Republicans usually over the objections of Dems.

      The world is not flat.
      The world is not a perfect sphere.
      Both views are wrong.
      But one is definitely a lot more wring than the other. Don't equivocate between them as the same just because they are "both wrong".

    3. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You seem to think this is a new thing. This problem is the basis of the "small government" philosophy. Corrupt people will seek power, so the best protection is to limit the available power and localize it as much as possible to minimize the damage. Ideally corruption would be punished but it rarely is anywhere.

    4. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by rtb61 · · Score: 0

      Wrong, absolutely wrong. The only answer is massive government, gigantic government, include every single citizen government. To maintain that level of interaction between all citizens and government, does require massive resources. Why should that money be spent, to ensure you are heard, not just a one off vote but your opinion and your voice and that does mean individually and collectively as well. How big should government be exactly as big as the society it governs. How overbearing is that governing, not an iota greater than the substantive majority will accept, past 50% more like %80.

      Small government, monarchy, do as I say without criticism or I will have you publicly tortured to death (not me of course the typical behaviour of monarchies without over riding controls placed upon them). Small government bad, real, real bad. Big government the safest way to go, the bigger the better, because that means more citizens voices heard, listened to and democratically acted upon.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    5. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong, absolutely wrong. The only answer is massive government, gigantic government, include every single citizen government. To maintain that level of interaction between all citizens and government, does require massive resources. Why should that money be spent, to ensure you are heard, not just a one off vote but your opinion and your voice and that does mean individually and collectively as well. How big should government be exactly as big as the society it governs. How overbearing is that governing, not an iota greater than the substantive majority will accept, past 50% more like %80.

      Small government, monarchy, do as I say without criticism or I will have you publicly tortured to death (not me of course the typical behaviour of monarchies without over riding controls placed upon them). Small government bad, real, real bad. Big government the safest way to go, the bigger the better, because that means more citizens voices heard, listened to and democratically acted upon.

      Actually "big government" is a reference to a really powerful government while "small government" is a reference to a government with minimal, limited powers. So you see, an absolute monarchy is the biggest government achievable.

      It sure helps to understand what things mean.

    6. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The counter argument obviously is that if you have a small government of corrupted people, you get corruption in its most concentrated form. This leads to corruption spreading even further than it would otherwise, with far, far fewer stops since the "power/per capita" of the government will be much greater than in a proper government with proper mechanisms for auditing and accountability.

      Also, actually voting for what is known as decent people as opposed to voting for the worst scumbag you can find in order to watch the fireworks helps.

    7. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by Bruinwar · · Score: 1

      Actually it is a solid indication of the extreme problem, corruption in US politics is causing. It is so bad and rampant, it is spreading through out the entire system. It is infecting US government at every level, Federal, State, Local and in every Agency. They are seeing the corruption at the top and emulating it....

      Term limits can take a lot of blame for this. Go from board member to congressman back to board member after being term limited. Even when it's not that blatant, a term limited politician has no reason to work for the people that elected him & all the more reason to work towards their next position.

      Many are pushing term limits at the federal level. What we would get is even more corruption & a bunch of amateurs that have no clue how to govern (even worse that we have now).

      --
      SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT
    8. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Term limits can take a lot of blame for this.

      I originally wanted term-limits, then realized there's a better way - non-consecutive terms. You cannot run for re-election. Politics, especially congress, was never intended to be a career.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    9. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by Barefoot+Monkey · · Score: 1

      That has an added benefit of avoiding the incumbent wasting valuable time and attention on campaigning for re-election.

    10. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      AC, you're confusing the situation with facts :) Well done.

    11. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by gurps_npc · · Score: 1

      You have made several MAJOR errors in thought.

      Yes there are evil people in the world. But the good people outnumber them. The problem is getting the good people to take the thankless, low paying government jobs. For every corrupt person, there are 100 honest ones. But for every 20 corrupt people, there is only one or two honest, competent people willing take a low paying government job.

      Which means if you leave the power in local hands, you have one honest man surrounded by twenty of corrupt people.

      But if you put the power in the federal government, you can gather all those honest, competent, people in higher level positions of the federal government. Especially when you, like a sensible person, require the applicant to first work in local government and work his way up to federal - that way you have a record to check for corruption.

      Which is what my personal experience is. You find a ton of corrupt scum in local politics. People like Rod Blagovich and Eric Greitens. But, aside from this current disaster where we put in someone with a corrupt history of vile actions (multiple financial crimes he skated out of, from criminal Trump University, to criminal housing acts).

      Moreover, federal politicians are exposed to constant media attention, helping us make sure they are honest.

      Local government? No one watches them, they abuse their power at will until they go to radical extremes and end up in jail.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    12. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by Lab+Rat+Jason · · Score: 1

      This should be required reading for this debate:

      https://medium.com/civic-tech-...

      --
      Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
    13. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 2

      Of course, the problem with that is that power abhors a vacuum. Might Makes Right is the fundamental law of nature, so if you reduce the power of government, you end up with warlords (or their economic equivalent). And distributing governmental power doesn't do squat to curb corruption - it just localizes the corruption, and makes it cheaper to achieve.

      There's no way around the fact that dealing with corruption is difficult. It requires one to be a better version of oneself, and to demand others to be better versions of themselves. It requires transparency, and it requires vigilance. And it requires people to make it a priority. There is no easy mode.

    14. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by rsborg · · Score: 1

      You seem to think this is a new thing.

      Eternal vigilance, buddy [1] It wasn't a joke. Corruption is a natural state of lack of oversight, transparency and public engagement. Saying "suck it up, it's going to happen" is a sure way to propagate the corruption. The better solution is to hunt them down and make them pay. I refuse to give up.

      The solution to a democracy that isn't working as well is "more democracy".

      [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    15. Re: You are looking at the wrong problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suggest to add limits to wealth since wealth can translate into other kinds of power, If money is the rule for election, then something is wrong.

    16. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Both you and the article kind of miss the bit where psychopathic crooks are plotting and scheming every waking hour, when not abusing people, to prevent reform of government. Main stream media and the establishment have worked extremely hard at keeping the population involved in politics, ridiculing that involvement, telling people they have no power, telling people they should not discuss politics because it causes arguments, telling people to live it to the wisest, you know pseudo celebrities being paid by corporations to play liberals whilst actually being hard right narcissists. Don't expect it to be easy, psychopathic scum are spending billions of dollars every year to block democratic reform. Reform has not failed by accident, it has been ruthlessly attacked by main stream media and the establishment for decades, the criminals wishing to retain power, so they can abuse the rest of us, to feed their ego and lusts. First reform, test for psychopathy any person wishing to run for office or hold a government position of any kind.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    17. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have lost any semblance to a society with a rule of law and if the failures of other such societies is any indicator we have and will experience a decline due to this failure.

    18. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by Lab+Rat+Jason · · Score: 1

      Oh trust me, I didn't miss that bit. You really don't understand your own argument do you? In the world you just described, it would be trivial for those in power to control the people administering the "test", thus changing nothing while adding a veneer of legitimacy to those in control. Plus, a test for psychopathy isn't exactly like a math test... there's no black and white right and wrong answers, just opinions and spectrums, so any "result" will always be debated. Any law that requires you to pass some kind of psychological test to hold office would instantly be weaponized to help keep power for those who you are trying to keep out. Maybe you should consider that there are also lots of good people in government trying as hard as they can to do right, but right is also subjective and up for debate, which is why we are where we are. Sure there are lots of people who seek power for power's sake, and there are definitely people who are corrupt to the core, but you don't hear about the honest hard working ones in the news, so you have a bit of selection bias going on. Things aren't so grim... except in west Philly. That place IS actually corrupt.

      --
      Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
    19. Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Every obstacle put in place is a choke point on corruption, sure they can try to cheat and inevitably they will get caught. You need to get the bullshit idea out of your head that politicians are special, they are just your typical crap head used car salesman, that often by family connection decide to become politicians rather than used car salesman. This was more accepted early in last century but endless purposeful deceit by main stream media to denigrate the capability of the general population and hugely, wildly, inflating the capability the establishment, has shut down the voice of general population. They are not special, you have as much right to a political voice as an orange glow in the dark numb nut with a bad hair piece. You still do not get, you are silencing yourself based on establishment main stream media propaganda. You completely ignore that the existing government, the main stream media, the corrupt tech companies, the deep state and the shadow government lost the last US election against a bunch of trolls, us all of us, they call us the trolls. It has been them for at least three decades, lying to us, diminishing our power and diminishing our voice, yet, we kicked their ass (by we I mean the majority).

      Why have any laws, people will break them, real fine logic that.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  13. Doubtful by aepervius · · Score: 3, Insightful

    He could have searched for somebody knowing tech among the republican, launched a call for a republican with fair and balanced view. He did not. He took an industry lobbyist, which had already very publicly made clear of its view.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Silly. Republicans are too dumb to use technology. Everyone online is either a morally upstanding liberal or a russian troll/bot.

    2. Re:Doubtful by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      He could have searched for somebody knowing tech among the republican, launched a call for a republican with fair and balanced view..

      In other words, a Unicorn

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:Doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Obama was standing on traditional courtesy by appointing McConnell's recommended candidate. Which just goes to show that showing this type of courtesy towards elected Republicans is unwarranted and unwise.

  14. OBAMA's FCC CHAIR by iamhassi · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Interesting that you didn't call him Obama's FCC chairman, because if it was Trump's or Bush's I have a feeling that important detail would have been mentioned. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

    --
    my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    1. Re:OBAMA's FCC CHAIR by Peter+P+Peters · · Score: 1

      Interesting that you didn't call him Obama's FCC chairman, because...

      Interesting that you prefer to turn this into a political debate eh comrade?

    2. Re:OBAMA's FCC CHAIR by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 2

      He wasn't Obama's FCC chairman. Wheeler was. It was Trump who made him chair.

    3. Re:OBAMA's FCC CHAIR by jbengt · · Score: 1

      He was essentially appointed to the FCC board by Mitch McConnell, and Trump appointed him chairman.

  15. What a cynic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... to believe that we couldn't ever put someone honest in charge. It must be that they hide everything better.

    1. Re:What a cynic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      ... to believe that we couldn't ever put someone honest in charge. It must be that they hide everything better.

      Along with Trump, the GP post was referring to Hillary Clinton.

      Are you really trying to paint Hillary Clinton as honest?!?!?!?!

      What color is the sky on your planet? Fuck that - you're not on a different planet. What is the speed of light in your universe?

    2. Re:What a cynic... by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 0

      ... to believe that we couldn't ever put someone honest in charge. It must be that they hide everything better.

      To do that, you would need the ability to put someone in charge that was not interested in the job. Honest people do not do well in a political environment, because what the people value there is the ability to be two-faced and an accomplished back-stabber.

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
  16. A Legit Comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, this scheme apparently bilked two investment firms out of about $250 million dollars, and the sole perpetrator is likely going to get prison time.

    In another scheme, countless everyday Americans were bilked out of BILLIONS of dollars by a conspiracy of multiple banks coercing them into toxic mortgages. Many of those people lost their homes. Not a single day of prison time has been served by anyone involved in that scam.

    So, if you're going to steal, make sure you steal from everyday Americans and not big, politically-connected investment firms.

  17. It must be a gift. by bill.pev · · Score: 1

    250 Million bucks worth!. That's a lot of fraud going on. She must be quite some woman that she could find time to advise Pai on how best to rip off the American public as well. Maybe that's why she stepped down. Ain't nobody got time for all that.

  18. Criminals all the way down by ne7minder · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The entire Trump maladministration is criminals all the way down. Not a one of them that isn't feathering their own nest at the expense of the nation.

    1. Re:Criminals all the way down by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      Let's see, in Obama's admin, we had Susan Rice lying to teh American public saying that Bengazhi was caused by a spontaneous outburst because of an American Youtube Video. We also had a lying AG who presided over smuggling thousands of guns to Mexico, many of which killed Mexican and US citizens. Now, let's talk about Mrs Clinton, whose foundation collected boatloads of money for Haiti relief, most of which was not used there and was "donated to charity" aka the Clinton Foundation. Oh yes, then there's the selling of American uranium to Russia. I could find a bunch more, but you get my point. It isn't one party, it isn't the other, it's BOTH.

  19. pedant alert by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's "get hanged", not "get hung".

    - Anomalous grammatical coward

    1. Re:pedant alert by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Sorry. English is the only language I use that makes a difference there.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:pedant alert by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are going to be a pendant, at least have the correct answer, and only use it in reply to an incorrect one.

      "get hung" has been proper usage and in the etymonline since the end of the 1960's.

      Your current knowledge has been incorrect and out of date for over 50 years now.
      Go back to school, learn 50 years worth of changes that have happened in the world, learn how to not be a dickhead, and try again.

  20. All she has to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is run for public office and write a book, then she'll never see prison, much less a courtroom.

  21. There's "diversity" for you... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pai's a "diversity" hire by Obama iirc. Don't do best man for the job? Here's your result (shit). Software today also shows you that much!

    Imo, you're the SAME type of stupid moron bitching about cops (coming from a person in myself that won a lawsuit vs. a city for having the shit beaten out of me by cops no less)!

    NEWSFLASH though, despite my "bias" (there IS none & this proves it) - TRY LIVE MINUS POLICE! We'd have chaos minus law enforcement.

    Are cops perfect (is any man)? No. More people die from medical fuckups than from police by FAR mind you. Are professional athletes perfect? No, they made errors too! You expect cops to be 'perfect' then?? Minus police (which yes, we need) there would be TOTAL CHAOS. We make a social contract by hiring these officials to maintain order & then to let the legal system take its course (yes, it's also far from perfect & has been shown to be corrupted @ times (e.g. witness Hellary Clinton being allowed to go free after Comey the traitor f'd up trying "intent" bs to make it look like he actually tried, when the REAL CASE vs. her was "ignorance is no excuse for the law" since she was a former attorney & secretary of state who KNEW she wasn't supposed to have a private @ home server that wasn't DoD secured NOR was she supposed to share top-secret info.)).

    Still, TRY live in a world minus policemen (you wouldn't SURVIVE it).

    APK

    P.S.=> All this "liberal" bullshit is DESIGNED by the "JWO" to take down OUR SOCIETY (which for the most part worked pretty good, hence the USA being "ontop" in most things for decades on end) - & not all "your kind's" CRAP (anti-common-sense) from brainwashed fools OR disgruntled losers that wasted their time & lives f'ing around vs. becoming the best you can be ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE YOUNG (the future IS now), makes any sense OR holds a shred of water vs. common-sense & a system that was working (or are 'liberal cities' like Chicago under that FOOL Rahm Emmanuel doing well? Hell no)... apk

    1. Re:There's "diversity" for you... apk by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 1

      Pai's a "diversity" hire by Obama iirc.

      Yes, he was required to appoint a Republican to maintain ideological diversity, rather that going with the best qualified candidate, who would certainly not have been Republican.

  22. Reqiured by WHOM? Who wrote that 'law'?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & answer the question: Better yet, let ME answer it for you - BEST MAN FOR THE JOB wasn't put in & THIS IS YOUR RESULT, period!

    Who wrote that 'requirement' up?

    ANSWER: Those TRYING to destroy the United States (the "JWO" as I call it headed up by Satanic fake jews in the Rothchild BANKERS (prove to me they have hebrew bloodlines (they don't) for 'racism' on MY part + I can't be "RACIS" vs. a religious cult that claims in their book of law the talmud the rest of us are swine to be robbed, raped & murdered!)

    These are NOT true torah/old testament jews (they are the ones Jesus kicked the SHIT out of in the temple, & Jeremiah scolded them also, along w/ the Essenes).

    NO- they are Khazars/Ashkenazi turkic satanic swine faking they are jews - Exactly what St. John in Revelation said of in "those who claim to be jews and are not but are rather the Synagogue of Satan (not this bs "globalist" label, devil worshippers) - along w/ their puppet George Soros backed by them who wants to destroy the USA & any constitutional republic + claims he "is a God" no less (megalomaniacal delusions, just like his culture))

    They, alongside the Masonic order (look up Albert Pike dedicating his masonic books to LUCIFER)). They buy up legal, media, & political might via corporations (w/ money they robbed OR hoodwinked others out of, like their treasury dept./FED (not federal @ all) reserve stole the gold out of Ft. Know, as they did in Egypt ages ago (despoiling it)).

    * They wrote OR rewrote all "laws" to THEIR ENDS - & they are out to 1st destroy the family (do that, no guidance to the young, creating fatherless bastards as women CANNOT raise a MAN (a girl to be a woman? Yes, but they turn MEN INTO snowflake women)), then the society in nations. Take away traditional rules/parameters/morals? Society crumbles, & lawlessness results (out of desperation more than out of PURE 'evil' on individual's parts - the WANNABE controllers have the PATENT on PURE evil)).

    APK

    P.S.=> IF you don't realize ALL OF THE ABOVE? Wake the FUCK UP... apk