What do you do when you’re the dictatorial leader of an oppressive government regime looking to maintain power while simultaneously preserving the facade of free and open elections? Well, if you’re the Obama administration then you look for avenues to nationalize state-run elections.
But you can’t just seize control of infrastructure that has been successfully run at the state level for a couple hundred years…that kind of stuff only happens in Venezuela and we’re better than that. No, you need a catalyst for this kind of blatant power grab.
“Coincidentally”, a catalyst just like the FBI’s warning a couple of days ago about “foreign hackers [read Putin] penetrating state election systems.” Then, once you’ve defined the super villain, all you need is a couple of political cronies to go on a fear mongering tour to whip the electorate into a frenzy. And wouldn’t you know it…Harry Reid recently did just that by sending a letter to the FBI voicing his “concerns” that the “Russian government” may be looking to tamper with the upcoming presidential election. Per the New York Times, Harry Reid’s letter to the FBI included the following:
“I have recently become concerned that the threat of the Russian government tampering in our presidential election is more extensive than widely known and may include the intent to falsify official election results.”
The combination of all these things might be just enough to scare the American electorate into forfeiting another chunk of their individual sovereignty to the elite political class in Washington DC while plunging us one step closer to the inevitable end game of “fundamentally transforming” our constitutional democracy into a police state.
Per the Washington Examiner, this sort of scenario is precisely what Department of Homeland Security Secretary, Jeh Johnson, discussed at an event hosted by The Christian Science Monitor earlier this month.
“We should carefully consider whether our election system, our election process, is critical infrastructure like the financial sector, like the power grid.”
“There’s a vital national interest in our election process, so I do think we need to consider whether it should be considered by my department and others critical infrastructure.”
“There’s no one federal election system. There are some 9,000 jurisdictions involved in the election process.”
As an added little benefit, seizing control of state election infrastructure makes it so much easier to move toward the ultimate end game of standardized federal voting laws. Fighting intense legal battles in multiple states on voter ID laws and the rights of convicted felons to vote is just too tedious and the costs of expensive lawyers keeps adding up for Soros (see “Soros Emerges As Mastermind Behind Plan To “Enlarge Electorate By At Least 10 Million Voters”).
So how is “critical infrastructure” defined and exactly how is it managed? Well the Department of Homeland Security has a whole website dedicated to that topic.
The nation’s critical infrastructure provides the essential services that underpin American society and serve as the backbone of our nation’s economy, security, and health. We know it as the power we use in our homes, the water we drink, the transportation that moves us, the stores we shop in, and the communication systems we rely on to stay in touch with friends and family.
Overall, there are 16 critical infrastructure sectors that compose the assets, systems, and networks, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States that their incapacitation or destruction would have a debilitating effect on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination thereof. The National Protection and Programs Directorate’s Office of Infrastructure Protection (IP) leads the coordinated national effort to manage risks to the nation’s critical infrastructure and enhance the security and resilience of America’s physical and cyber infrastructure. Read more about how IP leads this national effort.
And why shouldn’t we trust political appointees to run federal elections? They’ve proven themselves time and again to be impartial, disinterested parties, right? Well there is that one time when the IRS targeted Tea Party groups but that was just one time. We’re sure that would never happen again…