Posted on 03/07/2020 5:37:48 AM PST by Libloather
Sen. Bernard Sanders says he is building a nationwide movement of people who back tuition-free college and government-run health care. But the wave bypassed the House, where Democratic leaders hope to prevent his plans from seeing daylight.
Despite pressure from some rank-and-file members, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she is not about to sink the Democratic majority by holding votes on bills that would expose the deep ideological split within the party.
Instead, she has pursued legislation on gun control, election reform and prescription drug price reductions - what she called “mainstream and non-menacing” legislation that can guarantee near-unanimous votes from her troops.
“We have to win in certain particular areas; we’re not about a popular vote in the country. … We are district by district,” she said.
Still, Mr. Sanders’ acolytes have tried to press their agenda.
(Excerpt) Read more at m.washingtontimes.com ...
It’s time she retires to her vineyard in California.
Penlosi: “We have to win in certain particular areas; we’re not about a popular vote in the country. … We are district by district,” she said.
====================================================
Did she mention Democraps winning elections by voter fraud? (snix)
SOME OF THE DEMOCRAP VOTER FRAUD PRACTICED TODAY:
Soros OWNS electronic voting machines he leases to over 25 states.
People wandering the Malls are ‘registering’ voters; getting paid for each one. NO ID is asked for & people can register more than once.
There is NO system in place for death certificates to be forwarded to the Registrar of Voters to REMOVE a dead person from the voting rolls.
Voter fraud and election experts detailed findings from a cyber/forensic investigation reveal
compromised voting machines in 2018 (and quite probably, in the recent KY and LA governors' races).
(1) security protections in voting machines were disabled,
(2) penetration and manipulation of actual vote tabulations was and is possible, and
(3) evidence already exists that votes were surreptitiously, electronically manipulated to change election results.
Broward Fla 2018 was a dress rehearsal for massive 2020 voter fraud:
<><> Expect voter fraud in every single district with a Dem supervisor of elections.
<><> Dems will find sympathetic ballot printers, they’ll shred ones from the military.
<><> put people on notice NOW so more people are watching for it.
ELSEWHERE:
<><> buying homes in needed voting districts then busing in illegals as tenant/voters;
<><> illegal aliens added from voter registration DMV database -
<><> 175,000 purged voters put back on registration by Bevin opponent, now democrat governor Andy Beshear when he was KY AG.
<><> Repub Woman married to an Immigrant (not eligible to vote) moved out of Kentucky and unregistered as a precaution.
<><> yet she and her Immigrant husband both ”voted“ Democrat in Kentucky, though they lived elsewhere.
<><> dems have absentee ballots sent to PO Boxes, are discarded, then retrieved by vote fraudsters.
<><> modern-day slavery--herding native African into rubber dinghys--- to be sold in America as Democrat voters
======================================
Electronic fraud is rampant:
Dems calculate how many votes they are behind, how many votes still to be counted,
<><> they then trigger fraudulent software to fractionalize at random the votes being counted…... in just the right proportion to steal the election.
<><> One method of triggering is uploading a ballot that is marked completely illogically to the election management system to start the random shading routine.
<><>crooked software also survives check-sums and other elementary security checks.
<><> coded machines that gave every tenth vote to Hillary.
IIRC Fauxahontas planned on using Executive Orders on the first day to get some of her kooky plans rolling.
Pretty sure Bernie would try the same tactic.
Become the Benevolent Dictator.
Chavez/Maduro lite. (at least try)
Mobile voting application could allow hackers to alter individual votes and may pose privacy issues for users. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in using internet and mobile technology to increase access to the voting process. At the same time, computer security experts caution that paper ballots are the only secure means of voting.
Now, MIT researchers are raising another concern: They say they have uncovered security vulnerabilities in a mobile voting application that was used during the 2018 midterm elections in West Virginia. Their security analysis of the application, called Voatz, pinpoints a number of weaknesses, including the opportunity for hackers to alter, stop, or expose how an individual user has voted. Additionally, the researchers found that Voatz’s use of a third-party vendor for voter identification and verification poses potential privacy issues for users.
The findings are described in a new technical paper (PDF) by Michael Specter, a graduate student in MIT’s Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (EECS) and a member of MIT’s Internet Policy Research Initiative, and James Koppel, also a graduate student in EECS. The research was conducted under the guidance of Daniel Weitzner, a principal research scientist at MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab (CSAIL) and founding director of the Internet Policy Research Initiative.
After uncovering these security vulnerabilities, the researchers disclosed their findings to the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA). The researchers, along with the Boston University/MIT Technology Law Clinic, worked in close coordination with election security officials within CISA to ensure that impacted elections officials and the vendor were aware of the findings before the research was made public. This included preparing written summaries of the findings with proof-of-concept code, and direct discussions with affected elections officials on calls arranged by CISA.
In addition to its use in the 2018 West Virginia elections, the app was deployed in elections in Denver, Oregon, and Utah, as well as at the 2016 Massachusetts Democratic Convention and the 2016 Utah Republican Convention. Voatz was not used during the 2020 Iowa caucuses.
The findings underscore the need for transparency in the design of voting systems, according to the researchers. “We all have an interest in increasing access to the ballot, but in order to maintain trust in our elections system, we must assure that voting systems meet the high technical and operation security standards before they are put in the field,” says Weitzner. “We cannot experiment on our democracy.”
“The consensus of security experts is that running a secure election over the internet is not possible today,” adds Koppel. “The reasoning is that weaknesses anywhere in a large chain can give an adversary undue influence over an election, and today’s software is shaky enough that the existence of unknown exploitable flaws is too great a risk to take.”
Breaking down the results The researchers were initially inspired to perform a security analysis of Voatz based on Specter’s research with Ronald Rivest, Institute Professor at MIT; Neha Narula, director of the MIT Digital Currency Initiative; and Sunoo Park SM ’15, PhD ’18 , exploring the feasibility of using blockchain systems in elections. According to the researchers, Voatz claims to use a permissioned blockchain to ensure security, but has not released any source code or public documentation for how their system operates.
Specter, who co-teaches an MIT Independent Activities Period course founded by Koppel that is focused on reverse engineering software, broached the idea of reverse engineering Voatz’s application, in an effort to better understand how its system worked. To ensure that they did not interfere with any ongoing elections or expose user records, Specter and Koppel reverse-engineered the application and then created a model of Voatz’s server. They found that an adversary with remote access to the device can alter or discover a user’s vote, and that the server, if hacked, could easily change those votes. “It does not appear that the app’s protocol attempts to verify [genuine votes] with the back-end blockchain,” Specter explains.
“Perhaps most alarmingly, we found that a passive network adversary, like your internet service provider, or someone nearby you if you’re on unencrypted Wi-Fi, could detect which way you voted in some configurations of the election. Worse, more aggressive attackers could potentially detect which way you’re going to vote and then stop the connection based on that alone.”
In addition to detecting vulnerabilities with Voatz’s voting process, Specter and Koppel found that the app poses privacy issues for users. As the app uses an external vendor for voter ID verification, a third party could potentially access a voter’s photo, driver’s license data, or other forms of identification, if that vendor’s platform isn’t also secure.
“Though Voatz’s privacy policy does talk about sending some information to third parties, as far as we can tell the fact that any third party is getting the voter’s driver’s license and selfie isn’t explicitly mentioned,” Specter notes. Calls for increased openness Specter and Koppel say that their findings point to the need for openness when it comes to election administration, in order to ensure the integrity of the election process. Currently, they note, the election process in states that use paper ballots is designed to be transparent, and citizens and political party representatives are given opportunities to observe the voting process.
In contrast, Koppel notes, “Voatz’s app and infrastructure were completely closed-source; we were only able to get access to the app itself.
“I think this type of analysis is extremely important. Right now, there’s a drive to make voting more accessible, by using internet and mobile-based voting systems. The problem here is that sometimes those systems aren’t made by people who have expertise in keeping voting systems secure, and they’re deployed before they can get proper review,” says Matthew Green, an associate professor at the Johns Hopkins Information Security Institute. In the case of Voatz, he adds, “It looks like there were many good intentions here, but the result lacks key features that would protect a voter and protect the integrity of elections.”
Going forward, the researchers caution that software developers should prove their systems are as secure as paper ballots. “The biggest issue is transparency,” says Specter. “When you have part of the election that is opaque, that is not viewable, that is not public, that has some sort of proprietary component, that part of the system is inherently suspect and needs to be put under a lot of scrutiny."
Oh yes, free and fair elections - the US hallmark ...
Did you see the post about the Chinese voter registration drive credited with flipping VA?
Got a link?
Voter fraud dilutes and diminishes your vote!
You have to renew your driver's license, you should have to re-register to vote every 8 years, come hell or high water. And, show ID...
Nancy Satan? Her own SPAWN smilingly said on the teevee, “she’ll cut your head off and you won’t even know you are bleeding”.
jimmiehodgkinson and his deceived Bern Bros CAN’T do ANYTHING about that.
Get with the program Wash Times.
What a great plan! I am so pleased to hear that everyone who is employed at a university will work for free! Even better, the gov't has proven it can effectively compete in the private sector much more efficiently than private companies can--just look at Amtrak and the Post Office. Fight on Bernie...the world needs another Venezuela!
The guy has a very good reputation who wrote it. I post wherever I see the opportunity...
40 Million New Democrat Voters: Will The ‘State Power Caucus’ Destroy America?
No afraid not was back in early jan I think
EXCERPT: “The Power Caucus is a shadowy new alliance led by pro-China communists plans to mobilize 40 million
new Democratic voters for 2020.......these are the voters or potential voters who put AOC and Ilhan Omar into Congress.”
Mmmmmmmm.......too bad they couldnt get Yang nominated (snix).
I am of the opinion that if Bernie is the DNC nominee, they will lose the house and Pelosi will no longer have any power.
Election Reform = Rigging
Te only song the dems will hear this election is taps.
She a rigger.
She’S a rigger.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.