FCC feedback on net neutrality faked and the FCC blocks investigation, NY attorney general says

[cellio]

The New York Attorney General is investigating fraud aimed at FCC commenting. The FCC refused to cooperate. According to this post, tens of thousands of New Yorkers, and many more people elsewhere in the US, had their names falsely and illegally used in fake feedback on net neutrality.

Successfully investigating this sort of illegal conduct requires the participation of the agency whose system was attacked. So in June 2017, we contacted the FCC to request certain records related to its public comment system that were necessary to investigate which bad actor or actors were behind the misconduct. We made our request for logs and other records at least 9 times over 5 months: in June, July, August, September, October (three times), and November.

We reached out for assistance to multiple top FCC officials, including you [Chairman Pai], three successive acting FCC General Counsels, and the FCC’s Inspector General. We offered to keep the requested records confidential, as we had done when my office and the FCC shared information and documents as part of past investigative work.

Yet we have received no substantive response to our investigative requests. None.

Net neutrality is important. The integrity of the public record is even more important, as it is used to support policy changes (not just this one). And right now it looks like we've lost both.

You can use this site to look for fake comments using your name and, if you find them, file a complaint. With, um, somebody -- I didn't find any under my name, so I haven't gone down that path.

Comments

[osewalrus]

Ah, the believer wants to believe.

There has been a fair bunch of analysis, going back to the beginning, of where the bot traffic is coming from. The ONLY evidence that does actual forensic analysis demonstrates 'bot traffic and forgery from the anti-Net neutrality side. This has been fairly clear since May, when multiple neutral sources reported on it.

You, oh True Believer, will no doubt respond that all such evidence ios fake news. After all, Breitbart ha said otherwise. Whi is the True Believer to dispute the pravda.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/11/15626278/net-neutrality-spam-bot-fcc-leak-data

http://www.zdnet.com/article/a-bot-is-flooding-the-fccs-website-with-fake-anti-net-neutrality-comments/

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/43a5kg/80-percent-net-neutrality-comments-bots-astroturfing

Mind you, the FCC's comments are not "inept." That is such a useful idiot response. Ajit Pai's response has been quite calculated.

it has, however, failed miserably. Other than a handful of True Believer useful idiots, months of hard sell (including one rather laughable "Antifa" cosplay at which i was present, attempted to interview the "Antifa" protesters, was told they did not give interviews, and then saw them give interviews to conservative outlets in "support" of net neutrality as a means of blocking True News like Brietbart) Pai has been utterly unsuccessful in selling anti-net neutrality even to conservatives. Still polling, according to Harvard Harris, at 75% in favor across the political spectrum.

So, to revap -- why does the NY AG ask about fake pro comments?

Because those are the ones in evidence.

Oh yeah, including the very specific allegation of forgery by a reporter, Karl Bode, which the FCC refused to remove from the public records file -- despite the request from Bode. You can find that evidence too, if you are interested, by using your preferred search engine.

Law enforcement usually only investigate crimes for which there is evidence, not crank allegations supported by demonstrably false flag operations. Complete with video taped evidence of the false flaggie. (I mean really, these guys were a hoot.)

[madfilkentist]

Harold, your ridicule does not address any of my points, and it's far beneath your normal intelligent analysis of issues. I'm going to assume you were drunk or otherwise not in control of yourself when you wrote it and ignore it.