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

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.

Comments

Like Madoff...

[Mal-2]

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.

Ajit Pai's friends

[Anonymous Coward]

This is how telecom is done, eh?

Re:Ajit Pai's friends

[arglebargle_xiv]

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

Re:Ajit Pai's friends

[rsborg]

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".

Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!!

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Mod parent up

[rsilvergun]

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.

Re:Mod parent up

[youngone]

...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.

Re:Mod parent up

[Joce640k]

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?

Re:Mod parent up

[Jeremi]

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.

Re: Mod parent up

[houghi]

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

Re:Mod parent up

[Opportunist]

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

Re:Mod parent up

[Opportunist]

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.

Re:Mod parent up

[phantomfive]

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

Re: Mod parent up

[Falconnan]

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...

Re: Mod parent up

[Lab Rat Jason]

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.

Re: Mod parent up

[Green Mountain Bot]

More shit is flushed out every day.

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

Re:Mod parent up

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't blame me I voted for Kang.

Re:Mod parent up

[Shotgun]

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

Re: Mod parent up

[Curunir_wolf]

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

Re:Mod parent up

[eric_harris_76]

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...

What did Ajit know and when did he know it?

[Proudrooster]

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.

Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!!

[TheGratefulNet]

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....)

Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!!

[AceViper]

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.

Draining the swamp

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Draining the swamp

[skids]

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

Show up at your primary

[rsilvergun]

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).

Re:Show up at your primary

[youngone]

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.

Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!!

[Q-Hack!]

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/...

You are looking at the wrong problem.

[thesupraman]

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.

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[rtb61]

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.

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[Undead Waffle]

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.

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[Bruinwar]

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).

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[Gr8Apes]

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.

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[Barefoot Monkey]

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

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[wyHunter]

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

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[gurps_npc]

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.

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[Lab Rat Jason]

This should be required reading for this debate:

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

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[Green Mountain Bot]

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.

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[rsborg]

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/...

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[rtb61]

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.

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[Lab Rat Jason]

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.

Re:You are looking at the wrong problem.

[rtb61]

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.

Doubtful

[aepervius]

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.

Re:Doubtful

[Ol Olsoc]

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

Re:Doubtful

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Yawn

[iamhassi]

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

Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!!

[Shikaku]

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/....

Re:OBAMA's FCC CHAIR

[Peter P Peters]

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?

Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!!

[Undead Waffle]

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.

Re:Yawn

[drinkypoo]

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.

It must be a gift.

[bill.pev]

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.

Criminals all the way down

[ne7minder]

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.

Re:Criminals all the way down

[wyHunter]

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.

pedant alert

[Anonymous Coward]

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

- Anomalous grammatical coward

Re:pedant alert

[Opportunist]

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

Re:Yawn

[Antique Geekmeister]

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.

Re:Yawn

[Ol Olsoc]

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.

Re:Yawn

[phantomfive]

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"

Re:OBAMA's FCC CHAIR

[Green Mountain Bot]

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

Re:There's "diversity" for you... apk

[Green Mountain Bot]

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.

Re:OBAMA's FCC CHAIR

[jbengt]

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

Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!!

[greenwow]

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

Re:Yawn

[iamhassi]

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.

Re:Yawn

[iamhassi]

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.