Did the FCC hide evidence that Russians were involved in the repeal of net neutrality?

Did the FCC hide evidence that Russians were involved in the repeal of net neutrality?
The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against the FCC under the Freedom of Information Act, seeking documents that allegedly reveal the scope of Russian meddling in the repeal of net neutrality. The Obama-era rules forced ISPs and wireless providers to treat all data streams the same. It prevented them from providing a "fast lane" to content streamers willing to pay for a higher resolution stream. It also blocked internet and wireless service providers from banning content that went against these firms' beliefs. The Trump-era FCC voted along party lines to remove net neutrality from the books.

A bill in California that would make net neutrality a law in the state is awaiting the signature of the governor, although FCC chairman Ajit Pai calls the action "illegal." Other states, including New York, are following suit. Surveys reveal that the majority of Americans are in favor of net neutrality.

According to court filings, the Times argues that releasing the requested documents "will help broaden the public’s understanding of the scope of Russian interference in the American democratic system." But the newspaper alleges that the FCC has blocked it from receiving these documents, citing a lack of "technical capacity" to give the Times what it wants.

Recently, it was discovered that a record 21 million comments were received by the FCC while the agency was deciding whether to repeal net neutrality. According to one report, 90% were form letters and millions of other comments raised suspicions. When John Oliver's show featured comments favorable about net neutrality and suggesting that comments be sent to the FCC asking the agency not to repeal net neutrality, all of a sudden the FCC website had problems receiving comments which the FCC attributed to a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack. The FCC Office of Inspector General discovered later that the FCC had lied about the DDoS attack.

FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel revealed in an Op-Ed that the FCC received 500,000 emails from Russian email addresses and 8 million comments from an email domain associated with FakeMailGenerator.com. All of those comments were practically identical.

FEATURED VIDEO

25 Comments

1. Scott93274

Posts: 6025; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

To deny a request like this will be an admission of guilt/wrongdoing if it is later proven to be true. I personally believe that it is, too many policies have been repealed that were put in place initially for the benefit of the American people, and the Trump administration is doing everything it can to undermine active investigations conducted by our national security agencies into Trump and his campaign's/administration's connections to Russia.

5. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

Let's be honest. Don't you think if there were an actual case against the guy he would have already been impeached by now? Talk about a waste of government resources. Not that the government needs any help with that...... I don't even like the guy, but if this were remotely legitimate, then they would have found something to hang him on by now, and clearly they haven't.

6. kiko007

Posts: 7469; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

That’s not how investigations work lol. Watergate took two years and all that was about was documents theft. This man was ACTIVELY trying to sabotage the United States via a foreign power. That’s not a case you take lightly as an investigator and that’s why Mueller is still working. Instead of trying to discredit the investigation into a man you say you dislike, why don’t you sit back and let said investigation continue? It’s not like you’re being caused any inconvenience by waiting for it to end... the investigation is almost all privately funded anyway.

7. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

Lol, ok. Keep telling yourself whatever you needed to justify an insane waste of resources for partisan bitterness. Again, I dislike the guy, and Ive more than made my political beliefs (anarchist) known here, but you people are delusional. Even more lol is the fact that you believe a public investigation is "privately funded". I'm not sure how you can even say that with a straight face. If it were "privately funded", as you moronically claim, then that would be the epitome of a conflict of interest. Personally, from an impact on my life, I don't gas if the investigation continues. However, I'm sick of the waste of resources they could be used for much more pressing matters. Not to mention, how about we use those resources to get the federal deficit and debt under control. Much greater impact to our life and economy than some stupid "Russian meddling" nonsense that has been going on for greater than two years with no fruit.

8. kiko007

Posts: 7469; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

Wtf are you gonna spend 20 million dollars on that's more beneficial to America than finding out if your President is a LITERAL traitor? I'll wait...

9. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

You mean just like the last almost 20? Ummmkay. Feel free to be falsely outraged all you want to show how "progressive" you are. I'll just sit here and make fun of all of you idiots who believe your "side" is actually any better.

12. kiko007

Posts: 7469; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

So basically... You can't name a single venue where the money would be better used? Got it. Have a nice life straddling the fence as a willfully ignorant contrarian.

20. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

You're joking, right? No, I didn't go line by line and list where the money should be used. But your the moron that said that the "investigation was privately funded"...... How about fixing our damn infrastructure? That would be a great start. That's about the only place our government actually has a mildly legitimate role. Or close the SSI funding gap and then allow us to finally dump this abortion of a program. Or.... Just maybe, we get taxes back under control, and move back to an excise only basis, AS THE FOUNDERS intended. Not that a moron like you has any understanding of the actual constitution. I mean who doesn't love free giveaways for "poor" people.

13. Dr.Phil

Posts: 2253; Member since: Feb 14, 2011

No, the Watergate scandal in its entirety took 2 years. The FBI investigation took about four months to conclude Nixon campaign involvement. They reported in October 1972 their findings which Watergate took place in June 1972. Then in May of 1973 they appointed a special prosecutor to investigate whether Nixon for his involvement in covering up. That then took a little over a year before Nixon resigned in 1974 and his pardon ended the investigation. But, it should be noted that the main reason the investigation took even that year long was because Nixon refused a subpoena order and fired the special prosecutor which they replaced with someone else. So really, it could have ended a lot sooner. In this case, the special prosecutor hasn’t been fired and no subpoena has been denied yet.

10. Scott93274

Posts: 6025; Member since: Aug 06, 2013

How is it a waste of Government resources? The guy successfully got half a dozen GUILTY pleas and in just the last one alone secured over $40 million in assets, which is waaaaaaay more than the cost of the investigation. But if you want to talk about a waste of resources, how long has the GOP trying to take down Hillary Clinton? BTW, your excuse that the investigation has gone on long enough was exactly what Nixon said just before he was caught red-handed.

19. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

it seems to me the Hillary investigate stopped a long time ago..... Not to mention, it lasted all of about 6 months. (still a waste, but whatever). So I'm sorry, last time I checked, 6mo is still less than 2+ years. Also, all the guilty pleas have mostly be in other area not directly in the line of what they are investigating. So what is really being gained there? Actually, as someone else said, it took that one 4 months, this is *YEARS*. If you are spending 80% of your resources on a 20% position, it's malinvestment.

21. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

One has to always love asset seizure as a justifiable reason for an investigation..... Heck, even your own "side" doesn't agree with the practice.... Unless it suits them.... https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2017/07/24/how-the-fight-over-civil-forfeiture-lays-bare-the-contradictions-in-modern-conservatism/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.3f1d5a4b1e78 But hey, let's just champion BS investigations because "my side" lost..... This is why cable news needs to die. It has created mindless dolts that refuse to formulate any rational thoughts for themselves. They just parrot what their favorite talk show says....

16. Johnnycakes

Posts: 3; Member since: Sep 24, 2018

Investigations of this nature take years, not months. When the alleged crimes are this serious, you want the evidence to be a smoking gun / guns when you present it to the American people, since everyone will be so suspicious of the results. Also, multiple people have already been tried and convicted related to the investigation, how exactly has it found nothing yet? "Waste of government resources", the US will find a way to spend every dollar it can, I'd look to 4 billion dollar fighter jets that will never leave the runway as way more wasteful than 20 million spent on an investigation that has already yielded results. And the results DO MATTER. How can you say they don't? If a foreign government actively conspired with the US President to gain power, that matters, to everyone. Because Russia will want something for their efforts, and they are probably already reaping the benefits.

18. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

Member since 6 hours ago.... I'm sure this isn't a sock puppet account....

2. strategic_developer

Posts: 1627; Member since: Jul 17, 2018

I wouldnt be surprise. All govts are untrustworthy and corrupt. After Pearl Harbor and 9/11, we know exactly what govts will do to get what they want. Anything with Federal or NIST, FBI, CIA, or whatever are all nothing. It a bunch or corporate own criminals. But people were worried about Clinton. Reslly? Just shows how stupid and ignorant and gullible people can be.

3. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

Seriously? Why the fonk would Russia care about our "net neutrality"? Geez, you people seriously need to stop reaching for a bogeyman.

15. caqde

Posts: 13; Member since: Dec 16, 2017

Well as a thought if the internet in the US is controlled by the ISP's then that means all Russia would have to do to control their propaganda message in certain area's would be to take control of the ISP in that area. Although I don't see Russia being the only one that would want this level of Net Neutrality gone. There are multiple entities that would gain from being able to control access to the Internet.

22. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

Reach much? How is "russia" going to control a US based ISP, exactly? This is bordering on Pizzagate levels of insanity, so please.... Let's hear it... I can't wait to see how you are going to attempt to spin this one.

24. caqde

Posts: 13; Member since: Dec 16, 2017

You do realize that the US doesn't own all their ISP's right? Current examples would be Sprint (Owned by Japanese Softbank) and Ting (Owned by Canadian Tucows) which apparently serves Fiber to the home in some random areas of the US along with being an MVNO using Sprint and Tmobile's networks. For more fun if Tmobile buy's Sprint it will still not be a US based ISP as Tmoblie is owned by Deutsche Telekom so they are a German company. Mind you none of these are Russian owned but that isn't the point I was trying to point out why they might care I wasn't making a case for what they were going to do or saying they were involved just why they "MIGHT" care. Honestly I don't care. But these examples should show that it isn't impossible for a non US entity to own a US based ISP.

25. caqde

Posts: 13; Member since: Dec 16, 2017

You do realize that the US doesn't own all their ISP's right? Current examples would be Sprint (Owned by Japanese Softbank) and Ting (Owned by Canadian Tucows) which apparently serves Fiber to the home in some random areas of the US along with being an MVNO using Sprint and Tmobile's networks. For more fun if Tmobile buy's Sprint it will still not be a US based ISP as Tmoblie is owned by Deutsche Telekom so they are a German company. Mind you none of these are Russian owned but that isn't the point I was trying to point out why they might care I wasn't making a case for what they were going to do or saying they were involved just why they "MIGHT" care. Honestly I don't care. But these examples should show that it isn't impossible for a non US entity to own a US based ISP.

4. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

Double post

14. gravityron

Posts: 46; Member since: Aug 07, 2012

The Russians, again?? bwahahaha~!!

17. ibap

Posts: 865; Member since: Sep 09, 2009

If anyone is surprised by any of this - I've got a bridge I'm willing to sell.

23. drazwy

Posts: 347; Member since: Jan 15, 2014

Russians killed Steve Jobs to try to destabilize Apple. Srsly.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.