[johnforbes]

thoughts?

Bear in mind that there are plans to dramatically expand Obamaphones and give them out with Internet access too.

All courtesy of the American taxpayer.

[Clownkicker]

It's hilarious that dimwit johnforbes has no trouble copy-and-pasting his own droning nonsense but he can't figure out how to copy-and-paste a news story that seems to have his panties in a bunch. :lol:


What are you babbling about this time, johnny?
Is this "Obamaphone" anything like a Sousaphone?

[johnforbes]

Well, there's an Obamaphone fraud coverup.

That's what this is about.

If Clownswisher had not been in a locked ward all week, he would know about this.

[elklindo69]

Well, there's an Obamaphone fraud coverup.

That's what this is about.

If Clownswisher had not been in a locked ward all week, he would know about this.

OH Johnnie Boy what a lie............you're on a roll!!!!!!!!!!!!

[johnforbes]

Actually, young master Elkin, you are simply uninformed.

There is an Obamaphone scandal, and a coverup was intended.

Look at the universal charge on your phone bill. It will go up because Obamaphones will be expanded to give welfare recipients free Internet too.

[johnforbes]

Federal regulators were instructed to keep a massive fraud investigation under wraps until a day after a controversial vote to expand a program that was allegedly used to bilk taxpayers of tens of millions of dollars, one those regulators claims.

The Federal Communications Commission on Friday announced that it would seek $51 million in damages from a cell phone company that allegedly defrauded the federal Lifeline program of nearly $10 million.

The commission’s five members unanimously backed the Notice of Apparent Liability (NAL), but Republican commissioner Ajit Pai parted from his colleagues in a partial dissent. According to Pai, he and other commissioners were told not to reveal the details of its investigation until April 1, a day after the FCC voted to expand the Lifeline program.

“Commissioners were told that the Notice of Apparent Liability could not be released or publicly discussed until April 1, 2016, conveniently one day after the Commission was scheduled to expand the Lifeline program to broadband,” Pai wrote. “That’s not right.”

Pai did not say who issued that directive. However, it had the effect of preventing public knowledge of widespread fraud in the Lifeline program ahead of a contentious vote on expanding it despite persisting concerns about a lack of internal safeguards.

FCC spokesman Will Wiquist insisted that the timing was completely coincidental. “The timing of the enforcement action was in no way related to the timing of the vote on the program modernization,” he said in an email.

[Clownkicker]

No wonder I didn't know what johnforbes was talking about.

"Critics of the Lifeline program [Republicans against Obama] began calling its subsidized cell phones “Obamaphones” early in the Obama administration in response to viral YouTube videos of beneficiaries thanking the president for their free phones. The program was actually created under President Ronald Reagan."-johnny's article

So they're really "Reaganphones".
I'm surprised at you, johnny. First RealTool comes out against a Republican program. Now you come out against a Republican program. You clowns are finally catching on to the great Republican scam going on right under your noses. :lol:

Who's next? sillydaddy? Are there any other Republican programs that get your panties in a bunch as well?

[johnforbes]

Federal regulators were instructed to keep a massive fraud investigation under wraps until a day after a controversial vote to expand a program that was allegedly used to bilk taxpayers of tens of millions of dollars, one those regulators claims.

The Federal Communications Commission on Friday announced that it would seek $51 million in damages from a cell phone company that allegedly defrauded the federal Lifeline program of nearly $10 million.

The commission’s five members unanimously backed the Notice of Apparent Liability (NAL), but Republican commissioner Ajit Pai parted from his colleagues in a partial dissent. According to Pai, he and other commissioners were told not to reveal the details of its investigation until April 1, a day after the FCC voted to expand the Lifeline program.

“Commissioners were told that the Notice of Apparent Liability could not be released or publicly discussed until April 1, 2016, conveniently one day after the Commission was scheduled to expand the Lifeline program to broadband,” Pai wrote. “That’s not right.”

Pai did not say who issued that directive. However, it had the effect of preventing public knowledge of widespread fraud in the Lifeline program ahead of a contentious vote on expanding it despite persisting concerns about a lack of internal safeguards.

FCC spokesman Will Wiquist insisted that the timing was completely coincidental. “The timing of the enforcement action was in no way related to the timing of the vote on the program modernization,” he said in an email.

[johnforbes]

bump