FBI! OPEN UP! - US Department of Justice begins investigation into the FCC

[orbitalbuzzsaw]

Agitated Pie won't be happy about this

[mxk]

2 hours ago, pinksnowbirdie said:

Good job, constructive comment 

I'm just really salty about net neutrality and such.

[Salv8 (sam)]

4 hours ago, Nicnac said:

-snip-

damn you, i was going to make that joke...

[Trik'Stari]

10 hours ago, archbtw said:

Do it, they even had some dead supporters apparently. If it's not a law it damn well should be, the FCC can burn,

Just like some states have dead voters, voters who vote multiple times in different localities, etc.

 

9 hours ago, captain_to_fire said:

Someone take his big ass Reese's Peanut Butter mug first.

-snip

I've been saying for a while now that Anonymous needs to kidnap it, and ransom it back 1 broken piece at a time in return for reinstating Net Neutrality.

 

 

Yay democracy with two corrupt parties.

 

disappointing confetti and party horn

[kuhnertdm]

20 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

Yay democracy with two corrupt parties.

 

disappointing confetti and party horn

Yeah, no, this isn't a "both sides" thing. With the congressional review vote, literally every single democrat voted in favor of stopping the net neutrality repeal. Pulling the "both sides are corrupt" thing when it's blatantly untrue is irresponsible, and leads to people not voting when they should.

 

Source: https://www.cnet.com/news/senate-votes-to-restore-net-neutrality-heres-how-every-senator-voted/

Edited December 10, 2018 by kuhnerdm
Forgot source

[Trik'Stari]

1 hour ago, kuhnerdm said:

Yeah, no, this isn't a "both sides" thing. With the congressional review vote, literally every single democrat voted in favor of stopping the net neutrality repeal. Pulling the "both sides are corrupt" thing when it's blatantly untrue is irresponsible, and leads to people not voting when they should.

 

Source: https://www.cnet.com/news/senate-votes-to-restore-net-neutrality-heres-how-every-senator-voted/

I was stating that both parties pull corrupt bullshit, in the broadest general terms. My apologies if that was unclear.

 

And to be fair, a few years ago several Democrats backed a bill (I cannot remember the name of it, but it was when Obama was president) and it would have prevented the FCC from classifying ISP's as Utilities, this preventing any enforcement of Net Neutrality.

 

Looking for the bill now. I thought it was the "internet freedom act" but that's a different bill entirely. It was in 2014 or 2015 shortly after the lawsuit by Verizon against the FCC's open internet act. The judge said that the FCC could easily reclassify the ISP's as title 2 utilities, and thus be subject to the rule at the time. IIRC several members of congress including a few democrats received "donations" from these ISP's around the same time. Roughly $35,000-ish IIRC.

 

Gonna be up all night looking for this.

 

Edit: I would like to state that I am 100% pro-Net Neutrality. Just making the point that politicians do different things when people are looking as opposed to when they think people are not looking.

[Jito463]

11 hours ago, Jito463 said:

In fact, you're assuming the AG of NY even has merit to his case.

 

10 hours ago, Sakkura said:

And there's plenty of other evidence.

Quote

As many as 2 million identities were stolen to leave fake comments in support of the FCC's decision to kill net neutrality, according to the New York Attorney General's Office.

Did you seriously use the report from the NY AG to rebut my questioning whether the NY AG office has any merit to their case?  Umm, okay.

 

Just to clarify, I'm not saying there is no merit, I simply prefer to wait and see.  Just because an AG decides to open an investigation, doesn't mean there's any substance to actually support said investigation.

[Sakkura]

7 hours ago, Jito463 said:

 

Did you seriously use the report from the NY AG to rebut my questioning whether the NY AG office has any merit to their case?  Umm, okay.

 

Just to clarify, I'm not saying there is no merit, I simply prefer to wait and see.  Just because an AG decides to open an investigation, doesn't mean there's any substance to actually support said investigation.

Their report lists the extensive evidence they had even a year ago. So yes. It isn't just the AG saying they think there was crime.

[straight_stewie]

21 hours ago, rcmaehl said:

With how sloppily copy-pasted the fake comments were and the fact this was a government entity, I am glad that the FBI is investigating this and I'm sure many many other people are as well. Hopefully, how well the perpetrators hid their involvement is just as sloppy. 

I have no hope for FBI investigations. They couldn't find over 30,000 emails when an FBI most wanted person was literally posting a searchable database of them online, and they spent 2 years figuring out that Trump had sex 14 years ago, when he has a 14 year old son. I'm convinced that the FBI couldn't find their desks if they were sleeping on them. This will just go away like every other important problem that can't be tied with a nice bow.

[leadeater]

24 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

and they spent 2 years figuring out that Trump had sex 14 years ago, when he has a 14 year old son.

I don't see the connection between those two things, pretty sure it's unrelated 

[Tech_Dreamer]

32 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I don't see the connection between those two things, pretty sure it's unrelated 

the move is also known as scrapping at the bottom of the barrel excessively for anything or something for a particular subject, while favorably turning a blindside to another which is the opposite of the term 'justice' they try to serve or even adhering to proper equally weighed out logic .

 

meaning these improper/unfair selective scrutiny on these subjects acts as a precursor or an evident approach to political motives on certain subjects .

[leadeater]

4 minutes ago, Tech_Dreamer said:

the move is also known as scrapping at the bottom of the barrel excessively for anything or something for a particular subject, while favorably turning a blindside to another which is the opposite of the term 'justice' they try to serve or even adhering to proper equally weighed out logic .

 

meaning these improper/unfair selective scrutiny on these subjects acts as a precursor or an evident approach to political motives on certain subjects .

Just to make sure, that was a joke about having sex and having a son .

 

2 years to figure that out, would of been quicker to ask this guy.

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, VegetableStu said:

... oh uhh crap wrong meeting sorry

Could be worse, could go to a lecture with a friend for a paper you don't take and on that day there is a surprise test, after like 10 minutes so kinda weird to just up and leave, so I just did it. To this day I still have no idea what I scored on the test 

[TechyBen]

56 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I don't see the connection between those two things, pretty sure it's unrelated 

Well, I guess he could have used IVF...

 

(I'm scared that you see it as unrelated... how do you think children are made? XD )

[leadeater]

Just now, TechyBen said:

(I'm scared that you see it as unrelated... how do you think children are made? XD )

 

Is this not how it's done?

 

Spoiler

Annnnd I'll see myself out now.

 

[williamcll]

21 hours ago, DutchTexan said:

It does makes me wonder what data plans the people of the white house use.

[Theminecraftaddict555]

On 12/9/2018 at 10:28 AM, Nicnac said:

Actual Footage:

Wrong, that is footage of the obsama bren laden raid.