America’s mid-term congressional elections on November 3rdwill mark the beginning of the final two years of the Trump administration and thus the nearing of a potentially historic moment of reckoning for that country’s estranged allies. The reckoning may seem like a long way ahead, but in what historians will see as just the blink of […]
Happy Tuesday! Here’s your Tuesday Tech Drop, the past week’s top stories from the intersection of technology and politics.
Dems want damning surveillance report
A pair of Democratic senators are accusing President Donald Trump’s administration of hiding a report that “details serious abuses of Americans’ rights under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.” Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Adam Schiff, D-Calif., are trying to pry loose a report they say the administration is legally required to make public after a FISA court opinion detailed abuses of the program in March.
Since retaking office, Trump has expanded the federal government’s arsenal of creepy surveillance tools en route to building what appears to be an unprecedented spy machine that can track Americans. It’s in that context that Democrats — with some GOP help — tanked a vote in June that would have extended the controversial FISA powers that give the government broad latitude to sweep up data, including information belonging to Americans.
In a letter to Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton and Attorney General Todd Blanche, the two Senate Democrats said the damning FISA report from on alleged surveillance abuses should have been released already — and demanded that it be released now so lawmakers can consider whether to extend FISA powers next year.
The administration has now had over seven months to declassify and release this opinion. It is time to stop violating the law and finally release this opinion. And if this administration won’t follow this simple statutory directive, it is unclear why Congress or the American people should trust this administration to follow any of the other legal limits to Section 702.
Artificial intelligence bots are increasingly gaining unauthorized access to people’s bank accounts, according to new reporting from Axios. The report homes in on concerns among bank officials about security in the age of AI.
A judge ordered Meta to pay $25 billion after the company lost a lawsuit alleging that the company broke New Mexico’s consumer protection laws and jeopardized its users after the Cambridge Analytica scandal nearly a decade ago. Meta has vowed to appeal the ruling.
After Mississippi’s Republican attorney general issued legal threats last week, the state’s Democratic Senate nominee, Scott Colom, deleted an ad using AI tools to mock his Republican opponent, Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith. I wrote about how it seems like Republicans are fretting over this race in a deep-red state.
Samuel Sey, a popular right-wing influencer known for supporting Trump’s racist anti-immigrant crackdown, reportedly has been detained by immigration officials and is now facing deportation after allegedly overstaying a temporary visa.
The good news is the Pentagon apparently has some guidelines around the development of AI tools to avoid the risk of escalating wars or harming civilians and troops. The bad news? Defense officials aren’t always adhering to these rules, according to a congressional report.
Anthropic says its AI tool accessed Georgia voting data typically only available to people who pay for it. The company and Georgia’s secretary of state said no individual voter records were accessed, but the intrusion marks yet another disturbing security breach involving AI. A new report explains why “the company’s statements about what its bot accessed raise more questions.”
An investigation from The New York Times suggests that Alpha School, the network of AI-fueled private schools that have been backed by the Trump administration and vow to offer a superior learning experience, is failing to live up to its promises.
Several MAGA influencers have recently been in Brazil and Serbia, hoping to sway elections in both countries — but the pro-authoritarian candidates they supported flamed out over the weekend. Now, especially when it comes to Brazil, Trump and a bunch of extremely online conservatives are pushing lies about the election being rigged, as my colleague Brandy Zydrozny explained.
If reporters can only maintain their access to the White House by staying in Donald Trump’s good graces, they will not be free to do their most vital work, and the public will be deprived of information that is essential to its democratic role as a check on corruption and despotism.
If Trump has his way, the press pool will eventually consist solely of enablers and courtiers, of whom there are already too many. They will not raise the pressing issues that the American people need Trump to address. We will not see how he reacts to tough questions — whether he answers them at all, gets angry, lies, attacks, changes the subject or gets flustered.
The founders put freedom of the press in the First Amendment to guarantee an independent and uncensored press that could fully inform the public and hold the government accountable.
And the threat of being targeted in the future is already distorting the reporting of news organizations. According to an ABC News lawyer, the network’s news division has been tempering its election coverage ahead of the midterms, for fear of retribution.
Trump most recently punished MS NOW, CNN and Politico by banning them from the White House. They sued, and a federal judge tentatively restored their access. But Trump is appealing. He is making a preposterous argument citing national security. The White House has continued to exclude CNN and Politico from pool duty on Air Force One. The Independent’s correspondent, Andrew Feinberg, was kicked off Air Force One on Thursday after he somehow infuriated the president the day before. And as Trump said last month, “There may be others to follow.”
These actions amount to an unconstitutional attack on the public’s right to trustworthy and undistorted reporting about the president and his policies.
For this reason, I am one of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed on Monday by the champions of the free press at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University and the Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic at Yale Law School. My fellow plaintiffs include Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch; Yale history professor Beverly Gage; and Benjamin Wittes, the editor-in-chief of Lawfare.
We all rely on newsgathering and reporting from members of the White House press corps. Our right to that information would be abridged if the only reporters left there were either toadies or too scared of losing access to ask tough questions and speak the truth.
Indeed, because of the chilling effect created by Trump’s threats, my rights (and yours) to trusted information from independent news organizations are already being violated.
The only way to truly protect our right to independent reporting is for the courts to deliver a ruling that prevents Trump or any other president from ever doing this again, to anyone.
And that is no small thing. The founders put freedom of the press in the First Amendment to guarantee an independent and uncensored press that could fully inform the public and hold the government accountable.
“The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right,” Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1787. “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.”
When the Supreme Court rejected the Nixon administration’s efforts to block newspapers from publishing the Pentagon Papers, Justice Hugo Black wrote, “In the First Amendment, the Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy. The press was to serve the governed, not the governors … Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.”
For over a century, every president has recognized the obligation to provide spaces nearby where the press can engage in First Amendment-protected newsgathering.
Both the practical and the constitutional necessities were obvious. Particularly in times of crisis, the pool’s presence as independent witnesses in the White House and on Air Force One — attesting to the president’s health and safety, for instance — is essential so the American people don’t just have to take the government’s word for it.
The lawsuit from the currently targeted news organizations is a good first step toward restoring the status quo. But the only way to truly protect our right to independent reporting is for the courts to deliver a ruling that prevents Trump or any other president from ever doing this again, to anyone.
As a press critic who believes that the most essential job of a political reporter is to hold the powerful accountable, I have criticized the White House press corps over the years — but only in practice, not in principle. Its members are the only outsiders whom Trump is required to admit into his bubble of sycophancy. They alone can ask him difficult questions, get him to respond to facts he would rather not acknowledge, and confront him with his lies. They alone can demand answers. And they do that on behalf of the American people, who have no such opportunity.
Trump’s new de facto policy — which he himself described as a “ban on the free press” — cannot be allowed to stand.
Last week, Israeli soldiers detained me for harvesting olives in a grove near Bethlehem. I was one of about 70 people — rabbis, American and Israeli Jews, and Palestinians — helping Palestinian farmers harvest trees their family has owned for generations.
My detention made headlines. But it’s not the story. The story is the ethnic cleansing of the West Bank.
The olive grove we were harvesting as part of the Protect the Harvest effort belongs to families from Nahalin, a Palestinian village south of Bethlehem in the West Bank. The villagers have not been able to harvest their olives for three years, because of attacks by Israeli settlers.
Brad Lander on a bus after he was detained during the olive harvest.Courtesy Brad Lander
In recent weeks across the West Bank, settlers have attacked Palestinian farmers, volunteers, European diplomats and a Washington Post journalist. In our case, though, when security guards from the adjacent settlement of Beitar Illit spotted us, they didn’t confront us themselves. Instead, they called the Israeli army, and soldiers detained us for harvesting olives on private Palestinian land at the invitation of its owners. In other words, we were doing nothing illegal nor anything that required coordination with the Israeli government.
Of the 70 folks I was detained alongside, the IDF soldiers held a Palestinian woman from the family who owns the land longest of all. Their message was clear: don’t try to harvest that land again.
What I saw in Nahalin is part of a broader pattern I have seen across the West Bank: settler violence and state power working hand in hand to dispossess Palestinians of their land and expel them from their homes.
In Mughayir, the sister village of my Brooklyn synagogue, families once farmed olives and dates and grazed flocks on land stretching down into the Jordan Valley. Today, the village has been stripped of nearly all of it — by a government order that uprooted its olive trees, by a permanently locked gate cutting it off from the main road and by attacks from nearby settler outposts. One older man was assaulted and pepper sprayed earlier this month by settlers, just for walking into one of his few remaining fields.
In Taibe, a shepherd showed me a video of settlers and soldiers raiding his compound at night, beating his family and taking 40 of his sheep on a newly arrived settler’s claim that they were his.
These are not isolated incidents. A recent report from Peace Now and Kerem Navot found that settler violence, combined with Israeli government policy, has made more than 1 million dunams — roughly 18% of the West Bank — inaccessible to Palestinians, and has displaced over 100 communities.
In Al-Walaja, in eastern Jerusalem, villagers have sought approval of a zoning plan for more than a decade. The Israeli authorities have refused to grant it without explanation — a recurring dynamic in Palestinian communities — only to then cite the missing zoning plan as an excuse to demolish their homes. Half the village is under demolition orders. Residents pay taxes to the Jerusalem municipality. But the main government service they receive is the bulldozer.
Al-Walaja in eastern JerusalemCourtesy Brad Lander
In the Jordan Valley near Jericho, I saw the ruins of what were, until recently, the Bedouin communities of Mu’arrajat and Ras Ein al-Auja, where hundreds of families lived. After the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks on Israel, settlers began a campaign of harassment that escalated to an attack on the village elementary school. Residents pleaded to soldiers for protection, and they were told it would be provided — but only during the day. So one night, settlers — no, let’s call them terrorists — came and burned the homes, one by one. When the pogrom was over, every house was destroyed, and every family gone.
The term for that is ethnic cleansing.
A young Bedouin woman named Aliya, who lived through it, told me the story. She now lives with her family in a refugee compound without running water. Despite it all, she’s studying remotely for her master’s degree. It should not take the arrest of a U.S. congressional candidate or a group of rabbis to bring attention to her story. But American media provides little opportunity for Palestinians’ voices to be heard.
The West BankCourtesy Brad Lander
None of the Palestinians I met in the West Bank can vote in this week’s Israeli elections, even though the resulting government controls their lives. I devoutly hope Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s party loses, and that a new government will take steps to rein in settler terrorism like this. But neither prospective coalition is promising to stop settlement construction, end ongoing occupation and apartheid or protect the human rights of Palestinians — much less recognize a Palestinian state.
Here in the United States, though, the midterm elections do offer an opportunity to demand change. We are not bystanders to ethnic cleansing in Israel and Palestine: our tax dollars help underwrite it.
In Congress, I will work to end U.S. military aid to Israel while it violates international law and Palestinian human rights. I will support the Stop the Settlements bill to ban trade and impose sanctions on companies who build and bankroll the settlements — something U.K. Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband recently announced. I will support recognition of a Palestinian state as U.S. policy. I will work with a broad coalition of American Jewish and Muslim groups that don’t always agree with one another, but who are committed to ending the occupation.
Before I left the West Bank, I spoke with a group of Palestinian high school students at the Talitha Kumi school in Beit Jala. Most speak Arabic, Hebrew, German and excellent English. They experience injustice on a daily basis. Their families can’t vote, but still they told me about their Model UN. They were glad to learn I’m Jewish, and they thanked me for being there. They want a free Palestine, but they also believe in democracy and want to live peacefully alongside Israelis.
Brad Lander with a group of Palestinian high school students at the Talitha Kumi school in Beit Jala.Courtesy Brad Lander
There are, to be sure, many complex issues in resolving the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.
But don’t let anyone tell you these young people are raised on hatred. That they deserve freedom and opportunity any less than your kids or mine. That it is in any way “democratic” that their families can’t vote. That stealing their land is consistent with Jewish values. That it’s a good use of our tax dollars to fund their subordination. Or that we can’t find partners for peace.
Recently, Kim Yo-jong, the younger sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, warned that Pyongyang could take strong retaliatory measures if Seoul continues activities it considers provocative. To casual observers, this may appear to be just another routine exchange of verbal threats between the two Koreas. However, a closer examination of the current situation suggests […]
Why are Europeans turning towards authoritarian and populist demagogues?
Last week, one study by two European think tanks said one-in-three Europeans would vote authoritarian or support a populist party. Among the reasons are the perceived elitism in the traditional left and right-leaning parties.
The centre appears to be eroding, leaving people who are struggling with high inflation, energy, and uncertain futures looking for answers elsewhere.
Opinion polling from the Pew Research Center also found that 69 percent of the French population is dissatisfied with democracy, Italy 62 percent, Poland 47 percent and Spain 68 percent.
All are facing upcoming elections.
Another study, out on Tuesday (27 October), by the US-based Action for Democracy, drew similar conclusions and found that shaky allegiances between far-right parties in Europe are creating the scaffolding for possible future leadership under an authoritarian bent.
I say shaky because populist far-right parties have a notorious track record of finding common ground but then falling apart later.
This article continues, but the full version is available only to EUobserver.com subscribers. Visit account.euobserver.com/membership
For months, desperate civilians remaining in the southern Ukrainian city of Oleshky have been blockaded inside, as Russia severed food and medicine supplies to the city amid constant shelling, food shop closures, and reports of looting; many of the city's elderly and less mobile residents have been forced
Political campaigns are supposed to be tough, but we have to draw a line between challenging an opponent’s record and weaponizing someone’s traumatic childhood.
Rep. Mark Takano criticized President Donald Trump for suggesting that the settlement of Camp Lejeune veterans' toxic exposure claims could depend on the outcome of the midterm elections.
Kylian Mbappé aún está a tiempo de ganar el título de “amigo de China del 2026” si se apunta a un curso de reeducación, método muy del gusto del maoísmo (1949-1978), y se retracta por echarse unas risas a cuenta del meme que fusiona su rostro con el de Mao Zedong.
With a week left till the midterm elections, Democrats are on edge.
Every day brings some new reason for concern. The Department of Justice files last-minute challenges to election procedures in severalstates. National Guard members are photographed in front of a ballot drop box in Washington, D.C. President Donald Trump casts doubt on the results of a Brazilian election that his ally lost, using his old election denial playbook.
It’s no wonder, then, that an AP-NORC poll earlier this month found a 20-point drop in the percentage of Democrats who were confident that votes would be counted accurately since 2022.
In this environment, then, a social media post in which a Democrat alleges that a touchscreen voting machine flipped her vote to a Republican candidate is likely to catch fire online. This time, it came from Stella Parton, sister of the late musical legend Dolly, who said she had to tap three times to correct her vote for senator in Tennessee. “Don’t let them rig this election,” she wrote.
We’ve been here before. Pretty much every election cycle, someone has a bad experience with a touchscreen voting machine and it goes viral — especially if it’s a voter from the party that is out of power.
I get it. There’s something about touchscreens that’s inherently stressful as it is. My text messages are always just a few letters off, I accidentally got Diet Coke at the newfangled soda machine, and my car stereo keeps playing the wrong song when I’m on the highway. Those are bad enough. But to think I might fat-finger my way into voting for the wrong candidate is far worse.
It’s a leap, though, to go from that to the idea that this is proof of rigging the election. In fact, it would be one of the dumber ways to try that.
This particular conspiracy theory has always struck me as silly.
Just think about it. Why would a machine that has been hacked to change the outcome of an election show you that it’s doing it?Wouldn’t it make sense for the machine to pretend it’s counting your vote and then record something else? I know I’m supposed to fact-check this sort of thing with more high-minded logic, but this particular conspiracy theory has always struck me as silly. The problem here is that the screen isn’t calibrated correctly, which is an easy fix.
The other reason it bothers me is that there is an actual problem with touchscreen voting machines, and it gets a fraction of the attention of these viral “vote switching” posts.
The problem is that there are some touchscreen voting machines where your vote is stored electronically — and nowhere else. That means if it was hacked somehow, there would be no way to prove it. Thankfully, election officials realized a few years ago that this was a bad idea, and nearly all touchscreen voting machines now come with a paper receipt. If you notice that your paper receipt doesn’t match your intended vote, you can tell a poll worker right then and there. The receipts can also be manually checked during a recount or election audit later.
Problem solved — almost. According to data compiled by Verified Voting, only 1.3% of voting machines are touchscreens without a paper receipt. (The technical term is direct-recording electronic voting machine without a voter-verified paper audit trail, or DRE without VVPAT.) The remainder exists because voting machines are expensive, and they’re usually paid for at the local level.
Still, most states have replaced these machines already. There may be a couple lurking in a rural county somewhere, but there’s really only one state that still has a lot of them in use: Louisiana.
In fact, every single voting machine in Louisiana is a DRE without a paper receipt. To their credit, state lawmakers seem to have recognized the problem and passed laws to replace the machines, but it’s been a slow-moving process with an uncertain price tag. Still, it should be a massive source of embarrassment to the state that they haven’t fixed this yet.
So the next time you see a viral video claiming that votes are being changed, you can be reassured that it’s just a poorly calibrated touchscreen and can’t change the outcome of the election thanks to those paper receipts.
Unless, of course, it’s in Louisiana.
This is a preview of MS NOW’s Project 47 Newsletter. As President Trump continues implementing his ambitious agenda, get expert analysis on the administration’s latest actions and how others are pushing back sent straight to your inbox every Tuesday. Sign up now.
Missiles make headlines. But Saudi Arabia’s quieter legal revolution matters more to investors. When missiles hit Riyadh’s airport this month, foreign executives asked the obvious question: Is it safe to go? A more useful question for investors is a duller one: If something goes wrong, can I enforce my contract? On that question, Saudi Arabia has quietly changed more in the past decade than in the previous 50 years and this is the change most likely to keep capital in the Kingdom through the cur
Watching the mass protests unfold across France, one wonders who is not trying to exploit the social unrest there. The cliche that France since 1789 and later 1968 is a country used to demonstrations and revolutions does not vindicate the student protesters, who were joined by union members and public sector workers to protest the country’s worsening educational provision and cost-of-living crisis. But the scenes of riots and looting and the masked men clashing with police could be telling a dif
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in Viramontes v. Cook County regarding the constitutionality of state and local bans on AR-15 semiautomatic rifles.
Ohio Republican gubernatorial nominee Vivek Ramaswamy faced widespread condemnation from both Democrats and fellow Republicans for releasing a television advertisement featuring the mother of Democratic candidate Dr. Amy Acton, a move that critics compared to the unethical tactics of Sen. Joseph McCarthy.
Login
