It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Homeland Security Takeover of US Elections

page: 1
33
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+3 more 
posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:17 PM
link   


On Friday, the traditional day of the week for quietly releasing big news that will hopefully be ignored by the public—and also obscured by the Fort Lauderdale Airport shooting—the chief of Homeland Security announced that his office will be taking over US elections.

Source: 1/2

I knew this was coming.


This crap about cheese pizza and the Russians have sent the US into a tailspin. If in fact Hillary was supposed to win, this new motion to “federalize” the election process will ensure that in the future, mistakes do not lead to failure or sudden death.


“Citing increasingly sophisticated cyber bad actors and an election infrastructure that’s ‘vital to our national interests’, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson announced Friday that he’s designating U.S. election systems critical infrastructure…”

“’Given the vital role elections play in this country, it is clear that certain systems and assets of election infrastructure meet the definition of critical infrastructure, in fact and in law’,” Johnson said in a statement. He added: ‘Particularly in these times, this designation is simply the right and obvious thing to do’.”

“The determination came after months of review and despite opposition from many states worried that the designation would lead to increased federal regulation or oversight on the many decentralized and locally run voting systems across the country.

The takeover does not require presidential action or Congressional approval. The secretary of the DHS must consult with the assistant to the president for homeland security and counter-terrorism.


“Johnson said election infrastructure included storage facilities, polling places and vote tabulation locations, plus technology involved in the process, including voter registration databases, voting machines and other systems used to manage the election process and report and display results.”

Basically, they are institutionalizing the US election process. It’s a sneaky way to expand Homeland Security’s footprint in the US by setting up local regulatory offices. If any state refuses to accept the new system, both guns and lines will be drawn.

This next paragraph is BIG...



“The designation [of US elections as critical infrastructure] allows for information to be withheld from the public when state, local and private partners meet to discuss election infrastructure security — potentially injecting secrecy into an election process that’s traditionally and expressly a transparent process. U.S. officials say such closed door conversations allow for frank discussion that would prevent bad actors from learning about vulnerabilities. DHS would also be able to grant security clearances when appropriate and provide more detailed threat information to states.”

I know I lean to the conspiracy side of things, but the voting process should be as transparent as possible. Why can’t the NSA act outside of our traditional process, monitoring incoming threats from other countries?


If any tampering is to be done, it will happen in secret and left to appear as a natural occurrence to the ignorant masses. If you think we need to worry about Russia meddling in our election process, you may want to educate yourself.

Georgia Accuses Homeland Security Of Attempting To Hack State's Election Database

One article states:


Will Trump cancel it?

Obama is basically challenging him to do it—which would create one more firestorm in the press directed at Trump.


“See, the new president just stopped the DHS from protecting our sacred free elections. Trump is exhibiting more treasonous cooperation with his Russian masters…he’s leaving the door wide open for their secret invasion against our liberties…”

I wouldn't trust Obama to go quietly at this point. What we're witnessing now are the eventual goals of a totalitarian government being forced upon it's people at the wrong time.

It may be that we were never destined to go to war with Russia. Maybe the fabricated stories are being designed to allow the government to instill a more centralized and heavily monitored internet.


It's hard to tell...


Regardless, it will be interesting to see how Trump responds. It will test his integrity and character, though it will be tricky for him to deny Homeland Security the right. For some reason, Americans "feel" safer when things are removed from their control.

Luckily, Josh Earnest has assured me that certain systems (whatever that means), will still be maintained at the state and local level.

"What, like with a cloth or something?"


edit on 8-1-2017 by eisegesis because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:22 PM
link   
a reply to: eisegesis

In a Federal election? You don't say.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

You really don't understand the implications, do you?

Think of it this way.

A Bernie Sanders never wins. Ever.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: eisegesis

In a Federal election? You don't say.



It is not as simple and cut and dry as that silly.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Game over, man. Game over.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:33 PM
link   
It was clear to me the moment they gave it the name "Homeland"



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Woah. This is big.
So what's our next step? Any suggestions as to how to regain the rights we have enjoyed since the inception of our country?



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:39 PM
link   
That's my boy. Ron Paul. Im whatever he is



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
It was clear to me the moment they gave it the name "Homeland"


Well, they didn't want to call it the "Fatherland". That would raise eyebrows.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: eisegesis

Well that sucks dog crap.


If there was any agency I'd want to see gone, it'd be DHS.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:44 PM
link   
We really need standards across the country. 50 ways of doing the same thing different really causes some problems.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: eisegesis

I mean, it's a concern but it won't accomplish what they hope it will.

Information is free-flowing and more and more are getting their info thru other platforms than the MSM. The MSM already controls information and narratives. People just go around it.

Whistleblowers and those leaking to platforms like Wikileaks will still have that avenue. Actually, will increase along with alternative media.

I predict non-MSM platforms to have significant growth over the next fews years.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle
We really need standards across the country. 50 ways of doing the same thing different really causes some problems.


But, that was the whole idea, that the Founding Fathers had. The Federal Government stays out of the ways of the states, so each state could do its own thing.

Then, if you're living in some state that does things you don't like, you can move to another state, where you'll be happier, with things going the way you think they should.

When every state does things exactly the same way, there's no escape, no alternative system to try out.

Whatever was not explicitly put into the Constitution as the domain of the Federal Gov't, was automatically reserved to the state.

That's how you get "LIBERTY"....one of the main objectives in the pre-amble of the constitution.

LIBERTY means: you can go do it different if you want.

But, when the Feds say it's their way or the highway, there's no LIBERTY.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 09:03 PM
link   
This will make certain that only hand picked elites rule. If anything, this is an end to democracy, and the beginning to total control. Under the guise of protecting democracy, they will destroy whats left of it.
edit on 8-1-2017 by pirhanna because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 09:13 PM
link   
Is this contitutional-I doubt it
Could you challenge it in the Supreme Court-probably
Will anybody do so-probably not

Lord Monkton is correct whinging gets you no where somebody has to act



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: eisegesis

And as could be expected within the noise, you nailed another
gem within, eisegesis. Bumped for sure, and I hope the thread
takes hold.
In my HO of the transparency in which the DHS was born, much
less the lack of accountability it now enjoys.. I fully expect our
electoral process and next-to-last voice heard will fall under that
nice thick opaque blanket of "National Security"-- and will never
be questioned by a true patriot. Or a totally gullible buffoon. Like
some, I worry less about hacks from without than subterfuge from
inside. The latter is just too prevalent and obvious, if not provable.

I'll accept the * latter handle when I can get this Stephen King quote
out of my head after watching the last 30 years of US politics more
closely/skeptically:

[If it was the Constitution, I really wonder sometimes how
far off I1 we've deliberately been shanghaied?

PS Again, really good OP. Hope this takes off-- even on a Monday.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Why would the opposing party, on the eve of their departure, grant such authority to a new administration?



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Homeland security makes a big joke. What should happen is the Militia should be of watching.
They are actually civilians in arms and don't follow corporations.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 09:28 PM
link   
But, Homeland security does a lousy job of what they are doing now. Why would we want to give them even more work to do. They run the security at airports and when tested most times everything gets through.



posted on Jan, 8 2017 @ 09:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: Pyle
We really need standards across the country. 50 ways of doing the same thing different really causes some problems.


But, that was the whole idea, that the Founding Fathers had. The Federal Government stays out of the ways of the states, so each state could do its own thing.

Then, if you're living in some state that does things you don't like, you can move to another state, where you'll be happier, with things going the way you think they should.

When every state does things exactly the same way, there's no escape, no alternative system to try out.

Whatever was not explicitly put into the Constitution as the domain of the Federal Gov't, was automatically reserved to the state.

That's how you get "LIBERTY"....one of the main objectives in the pre-amble of the constitution.

LIBERTY means: you can go do it different if you want.

But, when the Feds say it's their way or the highway, there's no LIBERTY.




Having some basic standard across all 50 states isn't the same as giving control to the FED btw.




top topics



 
33
<<   2 >>

log in

join