Former FCC Broadband Panel Chair Arrested For Fraud (dslreports.com) 106
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.
Like Madoff... (Score:5, 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.
Mod parent up (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mod parent up (Score:4, 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.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:1)
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.'" [dailywire.com]
The Real Clinton Foundation Record is Getting Exposed [charlesortel.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Mod parent up (Score:5, 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.
You are looking at the wrong problem. (Score:5, 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.
Re: (Score:1)
... 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.
Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. (Score:5, 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.
Re:You are looking at the wrong problem. (Score:5, 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.
Re: (Score:1)
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, no
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This should be required reading for this debate:
https://medium.com/civic-tech-... [medium.com]
Re: (Score:2)
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 b
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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 hugel
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:3)
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 b
Re: (Score:2)
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/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
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: (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.
Re: (Score:2)
That has an added benefit of avoiding the incumbent wasting valuable time and attention on campaigning for re-election.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
pedant alert (Score:1)
It's "get hanged", not "get hung".
- Anomalous grammatical coward
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry. English is the only language I use that makes a difference there.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, we have to make sure the wrong lizard doesn't win.
Show up at your primary (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (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
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:3)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Right, let's vote Kodos next time, that's gonna change it all!
Re: (Score:1)
Don't blame me I voted for Kang.
Re: (Score:2)
Ajit Pai's friends (Score:1)
This is how telecom is done, eh?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
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: (Score:1)
There is a saying that applies here. Something about like avian foliage and shared social circles. What was it again? Hmm...
Re: (Score:1)
And Obama appointed Ajit Pai to the FCC board.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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/... [wikipedia.org]
Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! (Score:5, 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/... [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
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: (Score:2)
Nice whataboutism. I posted "to the FCC board" which is true.
Re:Don't forget whose fault this REALLY is!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Doubtful (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:1)
What did Ajit know and when did he know it? (Score:3)
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.
Draining the swamp (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.
Re:Draining the swamp (Score:4, 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.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (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 [cleveland.com]. 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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (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 [cleveland.com].
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (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?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It must be a gift. (Score:1)
Criminals all the way down (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:1)