Privacy Watchdog Sues Trump's Election Committee Over Voter Data (engadget.com)
From a report: When the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity sent a letter to all 50 states seeking personal, identifying information on all voters in the US, at least 44 states refused in some part. Trump signed an executive order last May to create this commission while claiming that millions of people had voted illegally. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has taken issue with this request, as well, and has filed a lawsuit accusing the Commission of violating the privacy of American voters. EPIC also asserts that the original request asks states to send the data to a non-secure website, making the data vulnerable to identity theft and financial fraud. Not to mention political agendas. EPIC is also seeking information about "the failure to conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment," and has filed for a temporary restraining order "to block the Commission's efforts."
No one is protecting anything except Trump's fragile ego. This whole Advisory Commission action was set into motion because Trump can't accept the fact that he lost the popular vote to Hillary. Total waste of time and money... plus it apparently jeopardizes voter privacy and security. So don't try to politicize Trump's grandiosity, malignant narcissism, impulsivity, maniacal insecurity, or hypersensitivity to slights & criticism.
I thought the states ran their own elections to choose electoral college members and the EC members voted at the national level for president. It's the presidential election that has triggered the most concern, but I'm sure there is concern about house and senate, perhaps even state level seats too, but these are all issues that affect how each state is represented and are proper matters for a state to research (perhaps with support from the federal gov).
This attempt by the administration to fish for anything they might use to bolster their fantasy that Trump won the popular vote has nothing to do with a search for the truth.
Nullius in verba
Especially with what they are requesting...military status, felony status, per-election voting results. I can see this being used as propaganda: each state has their own rules for felony voting. Some never let a felon vote again, some do after 2x time sentenced, etc. However, it's highly likely that this commission will "freak out" on Fox and Friends screaming about all the "felons voting!", and how that is "illegal", etc. They won't go into how it's illegal only in specific states, or that the states where felons are voting it isn't illegal...nuance like that is not usually fitting for Breibart, Fox, etc. All we will hear is is about "rapist, murderers, and pedophiles voting!" or such. They will probably just match up the last four SSN, take a list of dead people's last 4, and claim that ALL these people are "illegally voting dead people". Then, lawsuits from groups like "Voters Outreach of America" will start rolling in on those states, costing taxpayers millions and exposing even more voter information.
We all know that all this info will be rolled up into a highly insecure database and just behind-the-scenes handed over to companies like Cambridge Analytica. Or there will be some "cyber intrusion" and the data will be leaked...AND this cyber-incident will be used by "lawmakers" to clamp down even more on our distinguishing online freedoms.
In some states after passing such laws, they shut down most of their DMVs. Of course, that wasn't "planned" to disenfranchise in any way.
Why are people so resistant to a simple audit I wonder?
Don't know. Why don't you ask the con artist who fought tooth and nail to stop vote recounts in three states by claiming, wait for it, there was no evidence of vote fraud. The exact words used:
"There is no evidence - or even an allegation - that any tampering with Pennsylvania's voting systems actually occurred."
In Wisconsin, the recount and simultaneous audit went forward despite the lawsuits. That would have seemed a perfect time to see about illegal votes but instead, the con artist and his supporters filed suit to stop the process.
As Jill Stein stated in Michigan:
"In an election already tainted by suspicion, previously expressed by Donald Trump himself, verifying the vote is a common-sense procedure that would address concerns around voter disenfranchisement,"
And yet, the con artist didn't want vote recounts, or any checking of the votes. Now he does. Why the change? As stated above, it's simply to soothe his ego that he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton. That is it. Nothing more, nothing less. He can't stand it that he received fewer votes than a woman, and it is made worse that it was Hillary.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
If you know who the people are and when they vote your gerrymandering of the districts can get a whole lot more effective. Just saying.