Skip to content

Another brick in the wall

Thursday, February 13, 2020

Why am I totally not surprised by this:

’Sloppy’ Mobile Voting App Used in Four States Has ‘Elementary’ Security Flaws

MIT researchers say an attacker could intercept and alter votes, while making voters think their votes have been cast correctly, or trick the votes server into accepting connections from an attacker.

A mobile voting app being used in West Virginia and other states has elementary security flaws that would allow someone to see and intercept votes as they’re transmitted from mobile phones to the voting company’s server, new research reveals.

An attacker would also be able to alter the user’s vote and trick the user into believing their vote was transmitted accurately, researchers from the Massachusetts Technology Institute write in a paper released Thursday.

The app, called Voatz, also has problems with how it handles authentication between the voter’s mobile phone and the backend server, allowing an attacker to impersonate a user’s phone. Even more surprising, although the makers of Voatz have touted its use of blockchain technology to secure the transmission and storage of votes, the researchers found that the blockchain isn’t actually used in the way Voatz claims it is, thereby supplying no additional security to the system.

Read the whole article. The company involved has made a generic defense, the same defense that other companies that made faulty electronic voting machines have made. It seems pretty clear that they made only a passing effort at making their system secure. Almost like they were working for someone with an interest in hacking our elections. Hmmmm.

Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the internet knows beyond doubt that holding elections via the internet is an invitation to outside forces such as, (would you believe!) the Russians to interfere in our elections. The United States Senate Republicans have proven time and again that they are fine with outside interference.

The fact that states like West Virginia are buying into these systems can be explained in only one of two ways: 1) Election officials are monumentally stupid, or 2) the election officials involved have reason to believe that hackers will be on their side. Given Republican resistance to efforts to protect our elections, the preponderance of the evidence would indicate a clear choice between the two possibilities.

Sometimes the old ways are better. It is a no brainer that paper ballots, initially tabulated by machines that are in no way connected or capable of connection to the internet are the way to go. It may take a little longer to get official results, but it’s better than living another four years under the stable genius.

Filed in Creeping Totalitarianism, Dysfunction, Our Liberties Threatened, Republican Corruption | | Comments (0)

Another blast from the past

Monday, February 10, 2020

I’ve mentioned before that I keep a diary on my Ipad, in which I’ve tried, along with my own pathetically dull life, to chronicle the day to day developments related to the Orange menace. Four years ago the New Hampshire primary had just taken place, and I wrote this:

In other news, there’s no other news, except that the consensus seems to be that Rubio is history. As for Kasich, who came in second, he is now in Bush’s crosshairs. Kasich has no money, so it’s not clear there’s an upside for him in the future. It is interesting how they are forming a circular firing squad, with Trump lobbing projectiles from the outside. They’re scared to take him on, and when they try, they fall flat.

It just occurred to me that there were probably German diarists half laughing at Hitler when he was on his way up. It’s a dangerous time.

They’re still scared of him, and would rather have a Hitler than take him on.

Filed in Republicans, The Very Stable Genius | | Comments (0)

Going Full Fascist

Friday, February 7, 2020

I suppose this was inevitable.

For months, congressional Republicans have complained that the impeachment of Donald Trump was delaying important policy, repeating the mantra “get back to work.” Now that the impeachment process is over, they are instead pushing for new investigations in retaliation.

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham essentially admitted this plan on Fox News on Thursday, previewing Trump’s remarks set for the afternoon. “I think he’s gonna also talk about how just horribly he was treated and that maybe people should pay for that,” she said.

Full details on the targets at the link. They include the inevitable Hillary, Hunter Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff and the anonymous Whistleblower. The Treasury Department has already swiftly sent to the Senate committees precisely the sort of financial information on Biden that they withheld on Trump.

Thankfully, the House is in Democratic hands, but that won’t stop the Injustice Department from bringing phony criminal charges against Democrats.

If we win the election in November it is absolutely imperative that the people attempting to impose fascism pay a price. As an easy example, Rand Paul, who has repeatedly attempted to out the whistleblower should be shown the inside of a prison cell, as his conduct is and was criminal. Bill Barr can be his cell mate. Those pushing fascism must be made to pay a price. It is at least marginally possible that none of this would have happened if Nixon had spent some time behind bars, and the precedent of exempting Republicans from the legal consequences of their crimes had not been set.

If we lose the election, then our only hope is for the sane states to reopen the question of secession. The country will be fully fascist if four more years of Trump are imposed upon us. 

Filed in Creeping Totalitarianism | | Comments (0)

Oh, Please dear god that doesn’t exist, grant my prayer!

Monday, February 3, 2020

Ask my better half, this has been one of my fantasies, and now it may come true:

Two Swedish lawmakers have nominated 17-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg for the 2020 Nobel Peace Prize. According to the Associated Press, Jens Holm and Hakan Svenneling—members of Sweden’s Left Party—argue that Thunberg’s pursuit of climate change legislation on a global level, in the face of stubborn and powerful world leadership, is “an act of peace.”

Thunberg has received all kinds of accolades for her work to highlight the issue of climate change and pressure world leaders to prioritize the environment. She has spoken in front of thousands, including directly to world leaders at the U.N. this past September. Like most people in the public eye, Thunberg has had to weather the bullying of our country’s commander in chief, but as Thunberg has shown nothing if not integrity, she has easily disposed of the tiny-handed tyrant every time.

Timing is everything here. I don’t know precisely when these awards are handed out, but if there were a god, and she actually cared to dispense divine justice, she would time that award to be announced just as the networks are calling November’s election for the Democrat. Or maybe the next day. Whatever would irritate the orange one the most.

Of course if there were a loving god looking after us, the orange one would be in jail. Still, we can always hope.

Filed in The Very Stable Genius | | Comments (0)

Looking on the bright side

Friday, January 31, 2020

Today the Senate took a prelimary vote that all but declares that, as Richard Nixon said, “when the president does it, that means it is not illegal”. Of course, there’s an asterisk attached, in that the president in question must be a Republican. But this was wholly expected and we must now hope that the Democrats can get there act together and keep this outrage front and center during the coming campaign.

For my own part, I take some small solace in the following. On Monday I wrote a post in which I asserted with confidence what I thought at the time was conventional wisdom: that of course the Republicans would not allow witnesses, for the following reasons:

A. No matter what, the Republicans are going to vote to acquit Trump. This is an absolute given.

B. Allowing testimony would simply make them look worse than they already look and would cost them even more votes in the November election.

The very next day, the New London Day, the New York Times, and the Boston Globe, each of which is delivered to my door each day, all bore headlines to the effect that it was really looking like enough Republicans would vote for witnesses to make it a reality. For a while there I was worried. I’m not always right, but I certainly compare favorably to David Brooks, Bill Kristol, and a host of other highly paid pundits. (But then, who doesn’t).

Anyway, I started composing a follow up post in my mind, acknowledging that I had been wrong. But by the next morning, all was well. I don’t recall if all three papers had similar headlines this time, but it was now clear that Moscow Mitch would prevail, just as was always clear to anyone actually watching. It remained to be seen whether they’d play catch and release with Susan Collins, who will vote for acquittal in any event. So, I breathed easier, knowing I would not have to confess error. So that’s the bright side to today’s vote, from my point of view. 

While composing this post in my mind, I ran across this post at my guilty little pleasure site, the Palmer Report. As I’ve said before, they usually have their facts right, but you can’t place bets on the conclusions they draw from those facts. But their conclusions are not always wrong, and this pretty much tracks the logic of what I said in my own post, so I reproduce it here.

The Republican Senate was never, ever going to convict and remove Donald Trump unless he became so toxically unpopular, the Republican Senators selfishly concluded that their own personal odds of reelection would be improved by ousting Trump. Instead, the Republicans made the calculation that their own careers are better off by acquitting Trump. If anyone in the Resistance thought this was ever going to come down to Republicans “growing a spine” or “not growing a spine,” that’s just not how any of this works. For the Republicans, it was always about math.

It is now up to the Democrats that run against these Trump enablers to constantly remind their constituents that their opponents refused to listen to witnesses and cast a vote for acquittal in the full knowledge that Trump was guilty. Look for Joe Manchin, Krysten Sinema, and/or Doug Jones to make that harder by voting to acquit and rendering it a bi-partisan vote. For Jones, in particular, the vote will make no sense, as he can’t run a campaign without out of state money, and that will dry up if he votes to acquit. But Democrats live in the fantasy world in which they vote against the wishes of their base because doing so will win them more votes from Fox deadheads than they will lose by turning off their own voters. It’s a proven strategy in this fantasy world, but it’s one that never works in the world the rest of us inhabit.

Filed in Politics | | Comments (0)

Just a reminder

Wednesday, January 29, 2020

This is one of several articles I’ve seen later pushing the meme that Republicans are hoping for a Bernie Sanders candidacy. It may very well be true.

It is worthwhile remembering that four years ago Democrats thought that beating Donald Trump would be a no-brainer. Remember Hillary spending her time campaigning in Georgia, trying to pad her inevitable electoral college victory? Call me a cockeyed optimist, but I don’t think the Republicans are any smarter than the Democrats.

I’m not a Bernie bro. I’m still on the almost any Democrat but Biden wagon (though I prefer him to Tulsi), because he can’t seem to avoid laying traps for himself like this one:

Dozens of scientists have endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-Vt.) sweeping plan to combat global climate change after fellow Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden declared that “not a single solitary scientist thinks it can work.”

The former vice president derided Sanders’ proposed $16.3 trillion Green New Deal during a campaign stop last week in New Hampshire, adding that “you can not get to zero emissions by 2030. It’s impossible.”

Sanders swung back over the weekend, telling a crowd in Iowa that he would soon unveil “a long list of scientists” who back his plan. The Sanders campaign delivered on Tuesday, releasing a letter of support signed by 57 science professors and researchers from around the country.

“The Green New Deal you are proposing is not only possible, but it must be done if we want to save the planet for ourselves, our children, grandchildren, and future generations,” the letter signed by the scientists said. “Not only does your Green New Deal follow the [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s] timeline for action, but the solutions you are proposing to solve our climate crisis are realistic, necessary, and backed by science. We must protect the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the planet we call home.”

This is a Biden specialty: subverting himself. He practically invited this sort of retaliation, which does him more harm than he did to Sanders with his original remark. We can expect more of this during a general campaign, and we can expect the media to pounce on, and amplify, every such blunder, while giving Trump the comparatively free ride they gave him in 2016. (What percent of voters ever even heard of Trump University, to name only one of Trump’s frauds, prior to November of 2016)

I should add that while we cannot know that Sanders would or would not be the Democrat most easily beaten by Trump, we can know that unlike the Trump who supposedly could not win in 2016, the networks will not give him (or any other Democrat, including Biden) billions of dollars in free publicity, will not cover his rallies from start to finish, will not give him endless appearances on Morning Joe, and will present a united front against his policies, which, I will say again, are nothing more than warmed over 1960s liberalism. But the fact is, they did the same to Hillary, and she won by three million votes despite offering nothing of substance to the American people.

Filed in Politics | | Comments (0)

A shock: Republicans continue to be Republicans

Monday, January 27, 2020

I have been totally bewildered by the raft of blog posts and news articles proclaiming that John Bolton’s book excerpt changes everything! Even if it did, the Republicans would find a way to ignore it. For once, though, they’re telling the truth when they say it adds nothing to the case. There is already ample evidence in the record establishing that Trump held American aid hostage to his own interests. Bolton’s testimony would merely confirm that. It was also laughable to speculate that somehow this would increase the pressure on Republicans to allow testimony at the impeachment trial. Consider the following:

A. No matter what, the Republicans are going to vote to acquit Trump. This is an absolute given.

B. Allowing testimony would simply make them look worse than they already look and would cost them even more votes in the November election.

Therefore, it follows as the night the day that they will vote against hearing from witnesses. This was always a given, and it remains so. They don’t want to hear more evidence, because they know that any additional evidence will simply make Trump’s guilt, already proven beyond a reasonable doubt, so much more obvious that even some Fox viewers might see through the bullshit.It is truly amazing that some somewhat leftish bloggers have joined the media, which is forever expecting that principled Republican to appear out of nowhere, in speculating that this development will make the slightest bit of difference.

Filed in Republicans | | Comments (1)

Today’s downer

Sunday, January 26, 2020

You see a lot of blog post, op ed pieces, etc., like this one, in which the question is asked, more or less: how will history treat Trump and his enablers. The unspoken assumption in most of them is that history will be written from a perspective more or less in line with today’s. But that’s not how it works.

This history of the Civil War and it’s aftermath was written by Southern apologists for about a hundred years. It was gospel, for instance, that the Johnson Impeachers and the “Radical” Republicans were the bad guys, while it became a given that the president who handed the South back to the confederates was unfairly impeached and deserved to be acquitted. I just finished The Impeachers, by Brenda Wineapple, and wasn’t I surprised (sadly, no) to find that Edmund Ross, one of John F. Kennedy’s ghostwriter’s Profiles in Courage for casting the deciding vote against impeachment, not only kept a horror show in office, but probably took a bribe for doing so. 

Wasn’t I also a bit surprised, when I read Dante’s Divine Comedy, to find that it was Brutus, the guy who tried to save the Roman Republic, such as it was, in the innermost circle of hell rather than Caesar. He made a comeback when Shakespeare got his hands on him, but, again, that’s how it works.

History is written by the winners.

If Putin succeeds in using his tool to destroy the American republic, we can look forward to a history in which Trump overshadows Lincoln and Washington, and his enablers, both within his administration and in the obsequious Senate, are considered heroes, while Adam Schiff will become another Thaddeus Stevens, who for a hundred years was considered a villain.

This year’s election will likely make all the difference. All the more reason for us to back whoever the eventual nominee might be, even if (shudder) his initials are JB.

Filed in History | | Comments (1)

Pompeo melts down

Friday, January 24, 2020

It has been a given, and still is, that the Republicans will acquit the genius, but if recent events are any indication, it may also be the case that they see the walls pressing in upon them, no matter what they do.

Today, we all learned that there’s a tape in which Trump’s obvious lie about not knowing Lev Parnas is convincingly disproven and in which Trump appears to be ordering that Ambassador Yovanovitch be physically harmed, if not killed. Mike Pompeo had an interview on NPR with reporter Mary Louise Kelly that he walked out on because Kelly asked him a non-Fox like question: what specifically did you do to protect Yovanovitch. He followed that up as follows:

Here’s what Kelly says happened after the interview: “I was taken to the Secretary’s private living room where he was waiting and where he shouted at me for about same amount of time as the interview itself. He was not happy to have been questioned about Ukraine … He used the F-word in that sentence and many others.” Pompeo then told Kelly that “People will hear about this,” whatever that’s supposed to mean.

So now we’ve got the Secretary of State taking a reporter into a private room, screaming and cursing at her for an extended period, shoving a map in her face, and threatening some form of retaliation against her – all because she dared to ask him a question he didn’t like during an interview. Not only has Pompeo snapped, he now appears to be an immediate danger to himself and others. Law enforcement should take him into custody immediately.

That kind of behavior would appear to be that of a person in panic mode. I’m not an optimist when it comes to political trends in this country, but this does give one reason to hope that Pompeo’s behavior is reflective of a certain level of consternation in Republican ranks generally.

Filed in Republicans | | Comments (0)

A few thoughts on our glorious constitution

Monday, January 20, 2020

One of the more ridiculous arguments put forward by the genius’s defenders is that the Democrats are trying to overturn the will of the people and the election of 2016. Let’s set aside the fact that if that argument held water, any impeachment would be off the table, rendering the impeachment clause a dead letter. 

This argument comes from the same people who worship at the altar of original intent. So it’s only fair they be reminded that the Founders never intended for there to be presidential elections in the first place. Article 2, Clause 2, which has never been repealed, states as follows:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The Founders assumed, in yet another example of their extremely finite wisdom, that the legislature itself would choose the electors, or some other wise men (choice of pronoun definitely intentional), that choice being infinitely wiser than any choice of the majority of the unwashed, as the recent history of electoral college winners/popular vote losers has proven. It is a fact that any legislature so minded could exercise that prerogative today. Presumably, except perhaps in the reddest of states, the voters would have something to say about that the next time those legislators sought re-election, but it remains a fact that it would be perfectly constitutional. Of late, there have been attempts to apportion electors by gerrymandered congressional districts in order to give the bulk of a state’s electoral votes to a Republican instead of all of them to the Democrat that won the popular vote. They tried that in Pennsylvania, but it didn’t pass. The above quoted constitutional provision is also the basis for the ongoing attempt for states representing a majority of electoral votes to form a compact to cast those votes for the nationwide popular vote winner, regardless of the outcome in any of the individual states in the compact. The latter, being a good idea, will never pass, and if it does, the Supreme Court, as presently constituted, will likely find a way to render it unconstitutional in those instances where it results in a Democratic victory.

If you want to get small d democratic about it, convicting Trump would vindicate the real results of the 2016 election.

A little off the main point, but imagine an alternate American history in which the electoral college had functioned as the Founders envisioned. It is extremely unlikely that a system dominated by what would probably have been an increasingly corrupt selection process, manipulated to serve the interests of the moneyed interests, both South and North, would have produced an Abraham Lincoln, or that a Republican Party (as it then was), could have taken power. On the plus side, there would have been no Civil War. On the minus side, black people would still be in some form of slavery, even if it was no longer so denominated, and it is quite likely that by now there would be no representative democracy for the present day Republican Party to destroy. Here’s something that slaveholder Thomas Jefferson said that we should always keep in mind when the sainted Founders are discussed:

Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the ark of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. …They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human.

He got that right, anyway. The flaws in the constitution are responsible for the decay of our Republic, and the inability of the majority to change that constitution, an inability built into the document, will frustrate any attempt to stave off that decay.

Filed in Decline, Lawyer stuff | | Comments (0)