Is ICE the correct agency for voter fraud?
ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125M to Find Voter Fraud
21–30 of 157 posts
Re: ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125M to Find Voter Fraud
#22I reckon that if you replace "find" with "make", you might be closer to the truth about what this data will be used for.
The boring truth is they’ll find nothing and the admin will pretend it never even looked. They’ve done this already with all the “very real and provable voter fraud” they investigated in previous elections. All the initiatives quietly disbanded after saying they found nothing. They can’t even say they’ve found evidence when pressed https://newrepublic.com/post/213185/trump-election-fraud-guy...
Are you not counting the SAVE Act as an “initiative”? Even if it doesn’t pass, it’s certainly keeping the idea of election uncertainty front and center going into the midterms. Which gives cover to the local officials who have been inserted all over the country to mess things up.
Re: ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125M to Find Voter Fraud
#23Has this always been ICE responsibility?
Re: ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125M to Find Voter Fraud
#24I reckon that if you replace "find" with "make", you might be closer to the truth about what this data will be used for.
So the fraud perpetrated here will be this administration denying people their right to vote?
Re: ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125M to Find Voter Fraud
#25Ah yes, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, that famous election security wing of the US Government
We called them Sturmabteilung in the original German.
Re: ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125M to Find Voter Fraud
#26Well there's obviously at least some amount of fraud and a lot of people with eyes on it so finding it seems like the best course of action at the moment, mostly due to the latter since millions of people trusting the elections is pretty important AND if they are verifiably secure it prevents people from running their mouth about it and swaying anyone to distrust them (had to get ahead of it).
But really if you compare the US with the first country your mind thinks of when you think if trustworthy elections we have a long way to go and spending money and time looking for the weak spots is the correct start.
This is an example of the minimum viable amount of effort that should go into this:
"Belgium who was little known that time received more votes than mathematically predicted. So the members of the counting authority took out the magnetic cards and started counting again. After several hours they found that the vote total for every candidate was exactly the same before except for Maria Vindevogel. For Maria Vindevogel, the number of recounted vote was less than the original by 4096 number of votes. How this inflation in votes becomes possible even? What went wrong? Computer experts were brought in to run extensive tests to check the programme. They combed through the code but no bug was detected. Then they tested the hardware again and again."
https://scotopia.in/journal/journalbkend/paper_list/v-4-i-1(...
Re: ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125M to Find Voter Fraud
#27I reckon that if you replace "find" with "make", you might be closer to the truth about what this data will be used for.
Either outcome is risky for TR here. They're a very respected news publisher, so if they start colluding in fraud that would damage all their other business. If they take it seriously and don't produce results they'll get reprisals. I suspect they'll dig up every random voter registration paperwork error they can find and hand that over, while trying not to have their name tied to bigger conspiracy theories.
Re: ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125M to Find Voter Fraud
#28Is ICE the correct agency for voter fraud?
No, of course not. They have zero domestic police authority for US citizens.
Re: ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125M to Find Voter Fraud
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
The boring truth is they’ll find nothing and the admin will pretend it never even looked. They’ve done this already with all the “very real and provable voter fraud” they investigated in previous elections. All the initiatives quietly disbanded after saying they found nothing. They can’t even say they’ve found evidence when pressed https://newrepublic.com/post/213185/trump-election-fraud-guy...
Are you not counting the SAVE Act as an “initiative”? Even if it doesn’t pass, it’s certainly keeping the idea of election uncertainty front and center going into the midterms. Which gives cover to the local officials who have been inserted all over the country to mess things up.
I’m not sure what you’re asking. All I’m saying is they keep saying they’re “going to prove it” and when they find no evidence, they don’t stop acting like they’re going to solve the problem that they know doesn’t exist. The investigations are a waste of time and money because they already decided it’s true. They don’t care what the results are.
Re: ICE to Pay Thomson Reuters $125M to Find Voter Fraud
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
The legal argument is that we gave this data "voluntarily" to the data broker so the government no longer needs a warrant. This is an area that desperately needs new laws to catch up to the reality of what is going on, but I don't really see much motion toward that goal in the near future.
The government never needs a warrant merely to ask for info, and a private entity doesn't need a warrant to voluntarily hand over info that they have. If we had decent privacy protections then a private entity couldn't decide to just hand over whatever data they have on others, but, well, we don't.
Increasingly it's becoming necessary to disclose data to private entities just to survive and live a reasonable approximation of a normal life.
Why have constitutional protection against search if in practice nothing can be shielded from such searches?