Trump Administration Wants To Start Sending Secret Service Agents To Polling Stations

from the Make-America-Grovel-Again dept

Something pretty ugly has been attached as a rider to a routine reauthorization bill. If the bill manages to move forward without this being stripped, future elections would resemble those held by dictatorial governments, where the outcome is assured before the first voter is even intimidated.

President Trump would be able to dispatch Secret Service agents to polling places nationwide during a federal election, a vast expansion of executive authority, if a provision in a Homeland Security reauthorization bill remains intact.

This appears to be the result of Trump's continued insistence he would have won the popular vote if there hadn't been so many illegal votes. Of course, the administration has produced no evidence this happened in the last election. The only story that surfaced as a result of this post-election scrutiny was one involving someone who voted twice… for Trump.

Needless to say, state officials overseeing elections are horrified. The intrusion of the law enforcement branch that works closest with the president would give elections the appearance that Secret Service agents are there to prevent voters from voting for the wrong person. Given Trump's antipathy towards anyone that isn't white with a red hat, dispatched agents would certainly deter those not matching the chosen description from exercising their rights.

State officials are trying to get the attention of unwary Capitol Hill legislators before it's too late. The bill with the rider attached has already passed in the House. The Senate is still looking through its two versions of the reauthorization bill -- one with the rider attached and one that's arguably more respectful of voting rights and the citizens exercising them.

“There is no discernible need for federal secret service agents to intrude, at the direction of the president, who may also be a candidate in that election, into thousands of citadels where democracy is enshrined,” according to a letter opposing the provision that was signed by 19 bipartisan secretaries of state and elections commissioners.

The letter — sent to the Senate’s majority leader, Mitch McConnell, and its minority leader, Charles Schumer, on Friday afternoon —requests that the Senate keep the Secret Service provision from the final legislation. The elections officials described the proposal as “unprecedented and shocking.”

“This is an alarming proposal which raises the possibility that armed federal agents will be patrolling neighborhood precincts and vote centers,” according to the letter, which was obtained by the Globe.

Very few people are going to see the presence of federal agents -- especially from an agency with close ties to the White House -- and think a fair election is in progress. The presence of any federal agents would be cause for concern, if not for the integrity of the election, than for the safety of those voting. Generally, a large law enforcement presence does not indicate safety. It indicates the area they're guarding may come under attack. Either way, this will do nothing for voter turnout and will definitely dissuade those who aren't voting for the party in power from casting their vote.

As it stands now, federal law prohibits federal agents for entering polling places. This rider would eliminate a protection put in place to protect Americans from government intrusion into the democratic process. Dispatching the Secret Service to any place Trump feels might be overrun with fake voters would only give citizens the impression the fix is in. And if it's already been decided, why bother running a federal gauntlet just to show support for your candidates?

Hopefully, common sense will prevail. But given the fact the rider was already approved by one half of legislative branch, relying on common sense seems almost nonsensical.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Jack.., 14 Mar 2018 @ 3:51am

    “Given Trump's antipathy towards anyone that isn't white with a red hat”

    What a way to ruin what started as a great article. Hard to take anything serious from someone throwing a tantrum.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 4:11am

      Re:

      "Hard to take anything serious from someone throwing a tantrum."

      Which is why Trump is making a laughing stock of your country. He does little else.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      carlb, 14 Mar 2018 @ 4:13am

      Red Hat?

      Indeed. He should install Debian instead.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 4:42am

      Re:

      Good, I don’t have to take you seriously, then.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 5:11am

      Re:

      Even from 8000 miles away, we can see that Trump is a racist tyrant. He HATES anyone who isn't white. If you can't see that from inside your own country, maybe you're a racist too.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        David, 14 Mar 2018 @ 5:36am

        Re: Re:

        He doesn't "hate" them. They just don't have business being in Trump's own country, molesting Trump's women before he has the opportunity doing them himself.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:20am

        Re: Re:

        Even from 8000 miles away, I can see you're an idiot.

        See how easy that is to do? It requires nothing to back it up, and is clearly unassailable.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Roger Strong (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:11am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Don't tell us; tell Trump. HE'S the one who has tirelessly cultivated his "hates everyone who isn't white with a red hat" persona.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 9:38am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Gosh, it must be just a coincidence that he's surrounded himself with white supremacists. Gosh, it must be just a coincidence that he called the murderous Nazis in Charlottesville "good people". Gosh, it must be just a coincidence that both the Klan and Nazis have gone on the record stating that Trump supports them. Gosh, it must be just a coincidence that Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon have played key roles in his administration/campaign. Gosh, it must be just a coincidence that he called for the execution of the Central Park Five AFTER they were exonerated by DNA. Gosh, it must be just a coincidence that he was fined for racial discrimination in housing. Gosh, it must be just a coincidence that he calls out black politicians and athletes but not white ones. Gosh, it must be just a coincidence that he's directed the Justice Department to stop going over the most violent and dangerous people in America: white supremacists.

          If you don't see all this (and there's more, but I got tired of typing it out) then you're willfully blind. TRUMP IS A RACIST, dummy.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          JMT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:23pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          "See how easy that is to do?"

          I'm not sure why you think it's a valid comparison. You made a judgement based on one comment, whereas an opinion on Trump can be made based on thousands of comments, tweets, videos' speeches, etc. And if you can't see and admit that he's racist from all that, you're clearly racist too.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        ShadowNinja (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:47am

        Re: Re:

        But Trump holds rallies talking about the plight of black people!

        Rallies that are attended by mostly white people sure... where he talks as if all blacks live in crime infested urban areas... and all of them are on welfare... despite the fact that none of those things are true...

        OMG, Trump is totally a racist, I must be the first person to notice!

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:43am

      Re:

      Tim Cushing has taken to forcing SJW rhetoric into his articles lately. It's actually kind of tempting to build a FF plugin to hide his writing.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:45am

        Re: Re:

        Are there SJWs on both sides?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:45am

        Re: Re:

        Feel free to do so, Russkie!

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:57am

        Re: Re:

        Yeah, far easier than either a) reading opinions from someone who disagrees with you politically or b) scrolling past the article when you see his name.

        But, hey, why exercise intelligent thought or risk being exposed to alternative ideas, when you can just create an echo chamber for yourself? If you build it right, the world will conform to your ideas instead of you being forced to adapt to the world!

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:00am

          Re: Re: Re:

          I've seen enough SJW rhetoric to know it's not going to "challenge" me, and that I don't want it in my tech journalism. Thanks.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:08am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            What is this nebulous SJW to which refer?

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:25am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              It's one of the silly labels that the right-wing media outlets seem to use to describe people they don't like. In my experience, it's a red flag indicating that the people using it aren't worth your time nor interested in addressing positions you actually hold. They'll usually attack strawmen then call you names and disappear when you correct them.

              This guy can prove us wrong if he wants. But, since his reaction thus far has been to whine about a blog writer having opinions different from his, and wishes to hide those ideas rather than discuss them, he probably won't do that.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:29am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                It's not they're "different" from mine. I actually agree with him, for the most part. The fact that you see all criticism as disagreement, and all disagreement as desecration is the problem.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:40am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  "I actually agree with him, for the most part."

                  Then why is your reaction to try and avoid him and call him names rather than address the smaller points you disagree with him on?

                  "The fact that you see all criticism as disagreement"

                  No intelligent criticism has been presented as yet. Give it a try, you might see a better reaction than I have to childish name calling and whining that the author isn't reflecting your personal political views.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                    identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:42am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    You're part of the hivemind. There's no such thing as intelligent criticism against Techdirt writers to you, because Techdirt is your echo chamber.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • icon
                      PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:53am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      See what I mean? Strawman positions, so much better for you than addressing actual viewpoints. You guys are so predictable - self-important whining rather than addressing real thoughts.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                        identicon
                        Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:55am

                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                        I don't think you understand what a strawman is.

                        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                        • icon
                          PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:58am

                          Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          A strawman is an invented position that you can attack instead of a person's real opinions. It's a common tactic of your type, who would rather whine about "SJWs" and other labels than engage in real conversation.

                          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:55am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      Given the frequent wars in the comment section from varying perspectives...

                      No, Techdirt is arguably not an echo chamber. Being an echo chamber would imply the ability to shut out those who disagree and prevent them from posting comments.

                      Even when a comment is hidden due to being flagged, you can still click to show it. The ability to comment without logging in means there is no effective way to ban people from the system.

                      Techdirt just fights speech with more speech, regardless of what perspective you hold.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:35am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              People who can't write about anything without injecting identity politics. They think they sound smart and clever, but all they're doing is changing their writing from something compelling and thoughtful to something that only appeals to people who already agree with them.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:41am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                You just described yourself, you know.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:45am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  All you've managed to respond with, to this point, is "ur dumb" and "nou."

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • icon
                    PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:51am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    All you've managed is "SJW!" and "I don't want to read the opinion of someone on an opinion blog!"

                    If you want better, give me something to work with.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                      identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:53am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      Out of all the chains going on here, this is the worst possible one in which you could have tried to make this case.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                      • icon
                        PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:59am

                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                        The case that you have nothing to add to the conversation and are instead whining that a writer on an opinion blog offered his opinion?

                        Why, did I miss something of value that you posted?

                        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                        • identicon
                          Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:01am

                          Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          Do you feel better yet?

                          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                          • icon
                            PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:03am

                            Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                            So, nothing?

                            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                            • icon
                              Mike Masnick (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 9:29am

                              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                              I'm calling this one for Paul...

                              Paul: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAUY1J8KizU

                              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                              • icon
                                PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 9:42am

                                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                Heh, thanks. To remind everyone what I said earlier about people who use terms like "SJW" seriously:

                                "They'll usually attack strawmen then call you names and disappear when you correct them."

                                I forgot the whining about echo chambers, but it otherwise holds true here. I'm still yet to see anyone use such terms and not scurry back to whichever swamp they picked the terms up from once they realise they're being seriously challenged.

                                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                              • identicon
                                Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 4:23pm

                                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                I'm not sure how either of them "won". They both sounded like assholes to me; one red, the other blue.

                                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 11:53am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                The only thing you’ve talked about so far are identity politics you numpty.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Lawrence D’Oliveiro, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:47pm

              Re: What is this nebulous SJW to which refer?

              Some up-and-coming rubgy player named Sonny-Joe Williams or something.

              Sorry, but we tend to get too much sport in the NZ media, and after a while it all kind of blurs together ...

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:17am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I've seen enough idiots to know that anyone who uses "SJW" seriously are probably getting so much misinformation from their chosen news sources that they aren't worth debating with. They usually seem to be addressing strawmen and fantasies rather than real life issues, because they've been trained to apply silly labels to people and assign teams rather than address actual ideas..

            But, I normally exercise my brain to avoid them, rather than pretending you people don't exist. That way, I'll occasionally come across comments like yours and be reminded that people like you sadly still exist.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:27am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Tim Cushing is injecting identity politics into Techdirt articles. This is indisputable.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:38am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                This is an opinion blog. The author is stating his own opinions on politics, on an article about politics. This is also indisputable.

                Do you whine about identity politics on the sites that taught you to whine about people who disagree with you as being "SJWs" as well, or only here?

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                  identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:43am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  No, they're already capable of having discussions without everything devolving into identity politics. They dig in against different challenges to the hivemind aspects of their communities.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • icon
                    PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:50am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    "No, they're already capable of having discussions without everything devolving into identity politics."

                    Then why are you name calling instead of doing that?

                    "They dig in against different challenges to the hivemind aspects of their communities."

                    When the only thing presented from outside of the "hivemind" is people calling names and whining that the author doesn't subscribe to their vires, can you really blame them? You're not even being original with your whining.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                      identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:52am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      >Then why are you name calling instead of doing that?

                      That's actually you.

                      >When the only thing presented from outside of the "hivemind" is people calling names

                      Again, you.

                      >whining that the author doesn't subscribe to their vires

                      Not what's happening. And I don't believe you could miss the point this hard without doing so intentionally.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                      • icon
                        PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:00am

                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                        "That's actually you."

                        No, that's the person rambling on about SJWs and hiveminds.

                        "Not what's happening"

                        Strange, that's exactly what your first comment in the thread was, from what I can see. What did I miss?

                        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:20am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    These sites being the ones that are themselves so "hiveminded" that they can't refer to the people who disagree with them as anything other than "the left", "snowflakes", and "libtards", even when they are none of those things?

                    The same sites that, despite all evidence and facts to the contrary, insist black is white, the sky is falling, and Ajit Pai saved the internet? Those sites?

                    Don't make me laugh.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 10:25am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      Their projection is so good that one can ascertain their game plan from what they are accusing their opponents of.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 11:55am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                This is you so far. “SJWs are touching dicks over my Cheerios. “

                “No U”

                Repeat

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Toom1275 (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:23am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Yeah, you've already made it perfecly obvious you're "challenged" enough as it is.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Uriel-238 (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 3:02pm

        "SJW rhetoric"

        Should we infer from this you stand for social injustice?

        Rather than labeling and dismissing you could, you know, actually make a disagreeing argument.

        Or is that too difficult?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          JMT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 9:02pm

          Re: "SJW rhetoric"

          However misapplied the label, it is kinda amusing that there are people who think it's an insult to accuse someone of fighting for social justice. It's like they never actually learnt what the words mean.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:44am

      Re:

      “Given Trump's antipathy towards anyone that isn't white with a red hat”

      The statement is not wrong, perhaps there is something I am not aware of - if so, please explain.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 11:50am

      Re:

      You’re right about that last sentence. Too bad you have the self awareness of a dead sloth.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 4:14am

    Desire to be Dictator

    Is there any doubt that Trump is jealous of Putin after this? This attempt to interfere with the voting process should lead to impeachment. He seems to have no grasp of what democracy is and will stop at nothing to pervert it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 14 Mar 2018 @ 4:45am

      Re: Desire to be Dictator

      The U.S. never aimed to be a democracy. It is a republic. The electoral college is just one measure for mitigating the influence of less desirable people. Slaves and women were not supposed to vote at all. Trump is just turning back the clock and not even to the Middle Ages.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 5:40am

        Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

        The electoral college, along with the delay between election and inauguration was a solution to the problem that it took weeks, if not months, to travel from one end of the states to the other. That was also the time it took news to travel across the states.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          An Onymous Coward (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 9:53am

          Re: Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

          This. Can we please do away with the electoral college now? Please? It's an antiquated system easily replaced by the instant communication of which we're now capable.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            David, 14 Mar 2018 @ 3:59pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

            Can we please do away with the electoral college now? Please? It's an antiquated system easily replaced by the instant communication of which we're now capable.

            Well, communication is just as instant from Russia. If you don't get your information via slower and more reliable channels, you might just as well elect Trump president.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Roger Strong (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:04am

        Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

        The U.S. never aimed to be a democracy. It is a republic.

        Oh, don't start that nonsense. The US is a democracy, as intended. It's also a republic. The two are not mutually exclusive. "Republic" just means no monarch.

        Non-republic democracies also tended to limit voting to white males until around the same time.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:47am

        Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

        You neglected to answer the main point of the post to which you replied - nice deflection.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:50am

        Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

        "The electoral college is just one measure for mitigating the influence of less desirable people."

        The electoral college was created when the educated and well-off lived on country estates and plantations.
        Workers, merchants, and craftsmen lived in the cities, and were usually less-educated than the rich.
        After the Industrial Revolution, the educated and rich now live in the cities and the uneducated live on farms and small towns, so the electoral college gives priority to the ignorant, as this past election proved!

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:30am

          Re: Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

          HAHAHHA, what a load of crap.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:50am

          Re: Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

          Was that back when only property owners were afforded the right to vote?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 11:52am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

            Don't forget, not just property owners, white male property owners where white pretty much just meant English (can't have those dirty Irish voting).

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Uriel-238 (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 3:08pm

        Not even to the Middle Ages.

        No. The corporations have turned us back to the middle ages. They are the new aristocracy, only they owe fealty only to their shareholders and neither the territory nor the people who dwell upon them.

        So we've receded back to a perversion of feudalism before the social contract.

        I'd say I miss the rule of law as defined by the Napoleonic code, but we never had that.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 4:46am

      Re: Desire to be Dictator

      Don’t forget about his “joke” that he wants to be president for life. He does not want to lead—he wants to rule.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:42am

        Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

        Don’t forget about his “joke” that he wants to be president for life.

        That could be arranged, though possibly not in the way he intends.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:56am

        Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

        Yeah - I doubt was a joke, he is as serious as a heart attack.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ninja (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:13am

      Re: Desire to be Dictator

      It seems to me that even if they are being hit from all sides by those in power, American democratic protections are pretty strong. They have been under fire for decades now and haven't broken down yet. Trump is the ultimate trial. If the US survives this then it's going to be a much better place.

      Time will tell.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Annonymouse, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:28am

        Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

        Well the trial was already passed when the anointed one did not win despite all her and those in the shadows tried otherwise.
        I am surprised at how long this supposedly despised President has lasted without being shot at compared to historical precedence. Oh right. He brought in his own security on the get go. 🙈🙊🙉

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        David, 14 Mar 2018 @ 9:21am

        Re: Re: Desire to be Dictator

        It seems to me that even if they are being hit from all sides by those in power, American democratic protections are pretty strong. They have been under fire for decades now and haven't broken down yet. Trump is the ultimate trial.

        Oh nonsense. Democratic protections rely on the populace doing/wanting the right thing. An election which fails to make anybody but the "ultimate trial" president means that the democratic protections have broken down.

        That holds even if you consider Trump the lesser evil since democratic protections are meaningless when procedures leave nothing but evil to choose from.

        You cannot talk about the U.S. as if it were an occupied country. That's just revisionism, like a Germany or other country full of resistance fighters overcome by a few dozen magical bad guys like "the Nazis".

        You can't magically hope this to be the worst to come yet and magically better choices being available next time round. Where should those better choices be coming from, and why would they be allowed to thrive in the first place?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 4:26am

    I fully support this after one simple amendment...
    Congress members can not meet with anyone with out armed federal police monitoring their actions.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 5:12am

      Re:

      That only works if the police are more than just a bodyguard service for the oligarchy.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      btr1701 (profile), 15 Mar 2018 @ 2:52pm

      Re: Silly

      This whole thing is silly and much ado about nothing.

      No Secret Service agents will be at polling places monitoring your votes. The agency only has 2500 agents total. And they're already damn busy trying to protect the people they're assigned to protect. There's no physical way the USSS could monitor elections at the thousands of polling places across the country even if they completely dropped protection on all the officials in their charge-- which is something they're never going to do.

      The source of this kerfuffle was a rider in a bill to permit Secret Service agents at a polling place WHEN THE PERSON THEY ARE PROTECTING GOES TO VOTE THERE. Apparently during the last election there was some pushback when Hillary Clinton went to vote and the poll workers didn't want to let her Secret Service detail into the polling place with her. So this rider is meant to address that issue and make it legal for USSS agents to be present at a polling place when their protectee is voting.

      That's it. That's all it is.

      It's no evil conspiracy to turn Trump into a dictator and if Cushing was honest and not pushing his own political agenda here, he'd have included the full explanation in his article.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 15 Mar 2018 @ 5:09pm

        Re: Re: Silly

        You might want to review your comment in light of the changes to Title 18 proposed by Section 4012 to what has passed the House, I.e., https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2825/text

        The section seems a bit broader than merely accompanying one under SS protection to a polling location.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          btr1701 (profile), 15 Mar 2018 @ 6:43pm

          Re: Re: Re: Silly

          SEC. 4012. SECRET SERVICE PROTECTION AT POLLING PLACES.

          Section 592 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

          "This section shall not prevent any officer or agent of the United States Secret Service from providing armed protective services authorized under section 3056 or pursuant to a Presidential memorandum at any place where a general or special election is held.”

          That does exactly what I said it does. It amends the law to make it clear that USSS agents cannot be barred from a polling place if they are providing protection to an authorized protectee. Nothing more.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 15 Mar 2018 @ 7:04pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Silly

            It is the “or pursuant to...” part that stands out to me as possibly problematic.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              btr1701 (profile), 16 Mar 2018 @ 11:45am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Silly

              That phrase relates to how people become USSS protectees. There's a list in Section 3056 of officials who automatically receive USSS protection (president, vice president, spouses, foreign heads of state, etc.) and at the end of that list it says, "And anyone else whom the president directs via memorandum". Which means the president can order the USSS to protect someone who's not on the automatic list if he deems it necessary. This is how, for example, Obama's mother-in-law became a USSS protectee while Obama was in office. Obama directed the USSS to protect her.

              That's what the "pursuant to a Presidential memorandum" phrase is referring to. It's saying that "if a Secret Service agent is protecting someone under the authority of 3056 or under the authority of presidential memorandum, he/she cannot be barred from a polling place".

              This really is a huge nothing-burger that has people who don't understand statutory language all in a lather for no reason whatsoever.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 16 Mar 2018 @ 12:14pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Silly

                Thank you for your perspective. Your’s was originally mine until I read 4102 a second time and noted that my original view was fully met had 4102 stopped upon referencing 3056. The text following “or” can be read as an authorization that is in addition to the authorization conferred by 3056.

                Personally, I do believe you are correct. Nevertheless, I cannot dismiss the possibility that a court presented 4102, if enacted as passed by the House, for interpretation might take a hyper-technical approach towards grammatical construction.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    John E Cressman, 14 Mar 2018 @ 5:09am

    Get back to tech stuff

    Please get back to things you can speak intelligently on.

    You may a number of completely false statements and quite a WRONG few assumptions based on some vague theory that you obviously created from a warped liberal mindset.

    While I agree that the Secret Service is probably NOT the agency to be monitoring election polling stations, the fact that there ARE monitors should make people feel SAFER to vote, knowing there is someone there to prevent ANY political organization or group from intimidating LEGAL voters.

    But... the moment they advocate one party over another or turn away a single LEGAL voter, then I would have a problem with it. THAT'S when it becomes similar to a dictatorship. If there are secret service agents walking into the booth with guns drawn while you cast your vote, then we have an issue. Just having armed members of law enforcement around... no... not even REMOTELY close to the "elections" in dictatorships.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Stan, 14 Mar 2018 @ 5:18am

      Re: Get back to tech stuff

      Curious how nobody remembers the panthers posting members at voting stations back in 2008.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 5:32am

        Re: Re: Get back to tech stuff

        Unless I'm mistaken, that was a single group at a single station and it was never proven that they caused any voting problems (although they did make it into quite a lot of racist memes that pretended differently).

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:08am

        Re: Re: Get back to tech stuff

        Curious how some ignorant morons can't discern the difference between private citizens with no legal authority and armed federal officers with the the authority to use legal force.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 5:31am

      Re: Get back to tech stuff

      You'd think by now the number of times you idiots have whined about this site not covering tech on a particular story, you'd have worked out by now that this site does not only cover tech issues.

      But, you're clearly a partisan idiot so you're rather whine about "liberals" than accept objective reality into your thought process.

      "But... the moment they advocate one party over another or turn away a single LEGAL voter"

      That's far, far, far more likely than Trump's claim that he only lost the popular vote by 3 million due to illegal voting.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:25am

        Re: Re: Get back to tech stuff

        Voters being turned away hasn't happened. Illegals voting has.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:32am

          Re: Re: Re: Get back to tech stuff

          "Illegals voting has."

          Oooh, do you have some of that proof that Trump never bothers to provide? Cool, let's see it!

          I would note that voters being turned away tends to happen with a little more subtlety, through poll taxes, gerrymandering and the like rather than literally standing there at the door, but this isn't an administration that's known for subtlety.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Toom1275 (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:34am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Get back to tech stuff

            And ID hoops.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:44am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Get back to tech stuff

              Well, that's certainly covered by poll taxes, I think. But, I've seen far more evidence of disenfranchising certain groups of people than I have of illegal immigrants voting. The idea that immigrants would risk deportation by voting in an election where their individual vote will not have a significant impact doesn't even make sense to begin with.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              JoeCool (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:09am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Get back to tech stuff

              And ID hoops

              Yeah, I got caught by that when I moved. I haven't voted Red since I was 19, and now somehow a valid out-of-state drivers license, a valid social security card, and a valid military birth certificate isn't enough to prove who I am enough to be eligible to vote at my new place.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:55am

          Re: Re: Re: Get back to tech stuff

          Voters being turned away because they have no special ID that was just made mandatory ... you mean those folk?

          Illegal voting aka voter fraud has indeed happened. I think one can count them on one hand. The last one I read about was some dude that thought he could cast his deceased wife's ballot.

          On the other hand - electoral fraud is a huge problem.

          But you knew this - right?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 12:01pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Get back to tech stuff

            Congratulations you are wrong about every single thing you just said.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            JMT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 9:11pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Get back to tech stuff

            "...electoral fraud is a huge problem."

            ...said nobody who has independently researched the issue and published their findings.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 15 Mar 2018 @ 11:33am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Get back to tech stuff

              afaik, electoral fraud includes most forms of disenfranchisement invoked by governmental institutions, employees, etc. It is a well established fact that such activities are rampant - but it is not a problem according to some study you fail to specify. Ok - whatever.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Uriel-238 (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 3:12pm

          "Voters being turned away hasn't happened"

          Voter suppression has totally happened.

          Seriously, you'll do better on the test if you study first.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Cdaragorn (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:15am

      Re: Get back to tech stuff

      IF we were talking about a neutral law enforcement force being present, perhaps you'd be right. If you read the entire article you'd hopefully have noted that the true issue here is the presence of a clearly NON-NEUTRAL force.

      There's a good reason federal forces are not allowed at polling places. Their presence is not neutral and absolutely represents a threat. If you cannot see that then I suggest you go study sociology and psychology a little more. They don't have to DO anything to affect people's decisions at the polls.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:55am

      Re: Get back to tech stuff

      > the fact that there ARE monitors should make people feel SAFER to vote, knowing there is someone there to prevent ANY political organization or group from intimidating LEGAL voters.

      I disagree. I would feel much safer if there is *no one* with a gun standing around. If some group shows up to try to intimidate legal voters, you call the local cops. But until such a threat manifests, having armed guards present only escalates tension/anxiety because they themselves might be seen as intimidation or as a sign that such protection is *necessary*; where otherwise I would have assumed everything is fine.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 5:13am

    Big government is fine as long is it's our team.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:40am

    Techdirt carrying the water

    Way to take every opportunity to insight hatred techdirt. You just couldn't pass up the opportunity for bashing "wrong think".

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:49am

    "Given Trump's antipathy towards anyone that isn't white with a red hat"

    This is a supremely idiotic statement, with no bearing on reality.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:54am

    1) Voters do not like your policies
    2) Big mid terms coming up
    3) ?????
    4) Celebrate huge win at the polls
    5) More collusion, extortion and general grifting
    6) Profit!!!!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:55am

    no literacy required

    Who added the language to the bill in the first place?

    Also it seems Congress members don't read the bills anymore and just assume it's good as long as someone else says it's okay to vote on it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 6:59am

      Re: no literacy required

      Probably some intern ... just like last time.

      Who was it that said "We have to vote on it to find out what's in it"

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:14am

        Re: Re: no literacy required

        "Who was it that said "We have to vote on it to find out what's in it""

        Someone who's constantly incorrectly quoted out of context to distort what she was actually talking about. It seems to be a popular tactic in some quarters, since otherwise people who actually hear the correct context seem to end up agreeing with the speaker rather than the "news" outlet.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Toom1275 (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:26am

    The secret service was originally created to protect from counterfeiting.

    So at least there's theoretically an incredibly tenuous link between the SS and protecting election integrity.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Toom1275 (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 7:37am

    It's interesting to see the Internet's Canary-in-the-shit-mine in action. The moment trolls ooze out of the woodwork to infest the comments of any article that can even remotely be interpreted as criticizing Trump/Russia, their actions immediately add to the article's credibility.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Baron von Robber, 14 Mar 2018 @ 8:46am

    Trump is upset that somebody is investigating him to see if he has any known connections to America.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Roger Strong (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 9:23am

      Re:

      That would be a cheap shot if it weren't for Trump's wingnut claims that the previous President wasn't born in America.

      Why haven't we seen Trump's long-form birth certificate?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    bernicestockstill (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 10:20am

    correct solution

    на самом деле очень правильное решение, потому что это выборная фальсификация имеет просто бешенные обороты

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ryunosuke (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 10:38am

    RE; THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION

    Trump is a fascist, pure and simple. He DEMANDS loyalty. If you did not vote for him, you made an illegal vote. He praised/is praising Duterte, who instituted executions of SUSPECTED drug dealers, not convicted, suspected. He praised Erdogan as his men attacked US citizens on US soil. He praised President Xi as he became president for life in China. THEN SUGGESTED WE SHOULD DO THE SAME. *Here's where Trump is an Idiot, before 1952 we did NOT have a term limit on the office of the president, it wasn't until FDR's 4th term that everyone said, "you know, maybe we should have a term limit." And do we even have to discuss Putin/Trump yaoi relationship?

    Republicans, by and large, are also complicit. They do not want to govern, they want to rule. Any Republican that puts party over country is (or at least should be) guilty of outright treason, or at the very least sedition against the United States. By defending Trump, they are also defending all of the above leaders I have talked about. Oh yes, John McCain will be "Very concerned" but is unlikely to do Jack and Shit about it. The simple fact is, To many Republicans, being Literal Hitler is better than being a dirty commie treehugging hipster Democrat, Even being Literal Satan is better than that.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 14 Mar 2018 @ 3:21pm

      Literal Hitler

      We almost went Literal Hitler (literal Fascism, at any rate) while it was still en vogue, until a general named Smedley blew a whistle.

      But the Democrats have gone way, way to the right of us dirty commie treehugging hippie liberals, these days.

      I was on the moderate left, once.

      Once.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 10:51am

    Voted twice

    The only story that surfaced as a result of this post-election scrutiny was one involving someone who voted twice… for Trump.

    How do we know who they voted for? It's supposed to be a secret ballot. Are we just going by their claim?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 12:25pm

    rules be damned - people will act in their own interest

    Although I usually agree with Tim Cushing, I think his logic is completely flawed here.

    When the threat of deportation is hanging over the heads of illegal aliens, depending on the outcome of an election, they have every reason and incentive to unlawfully vote (for Democrat candidates of course).

    Likewise, any Democratic party official would be a fool not to secretly encourage this sort of illegal voting, since it obviously helps get Democrats elected.

    In contrast, Republicans would benefit by spreading false rumors that polling stations would be scrutinizing voters in search of illegal voters and naturalized citizens who have an illegal alien in their household (reportedly a significant percentage) in the hope of preventing a large segment of eligible voters from voting (for Democratic candidates)

    Yes, it's all dirty and underhanded, but isn't everything in politics? A "fair" election is when the effects of Republican skullduggery cancel out Democrat skullduggery, even if both are present in spades.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 1:34pm

      Re: rules be damned - people will act in their own interest

      When did illegal aliens vote? How did they do this?

      Of the many studies into voter fraud, which ones do you think are wrong?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2018 @ 3:46pm

    There are reports that Homeland Security and an independent third-party have conducted review of the 2016 election and reports are due in the coming months.

    We'll see whether those reports ever come to light and be substantiated.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Agammamon, 15 Mar 2018 @ 12:06am

    1. Are there even enough SS agents for this to have any effect? And what are they going to do there? Check IDs of anyone who isn't sufficiently close to either end of the skin spectrum (ie, isn't Black or White)?

    2. Does Trump think the SS *is on his side*? There's only two possibilities for the SS - they take their duty seriously and so don't take sides (in which case they won't be doing anything at a polling station) or they're part of the deep state, wouldn't be unhappy if Trump ate a bullet, and would be more likely to help his *opponent* get elected.

    There is no way that deploying SS agents to anywhere is going to provide him an advantage.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    dickeyrat, 15 Mar 2018 @ 1:24pm

    What will probably happen

    It's all building the platform for Trump to outright-cancel the 2020 election, due to some unforeseen "national emergency", then remain in power for life, the way his much-admired Xi is doing in China. Even Trump will eventually die; then the power can be passed directly to his idiot sons.
    North Korea has its Kims, Haiti had its Duvaliers, Cuba had its Castros--and America will have its Trumps.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.