Fake Joe Biden robocall tells New Hampshire Democrats not to vote on Tuesday

MicroWave@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world – 376 points –
Fake Joe Biden robocall tells New Hampshire Democrats not to vote on Tuesday
nbcnews.com

The call, an apparent imitation or digital manipulation of the president's voice, says, "Voting this Tuesday only enables the Republicans in their quest to elect Donald Trump again."

A prominent New Hampshire Democrat plans to file a complaint with the state attorney general over an apparent robocall that appears to encourage supporters of President Joe Biden not to vote in Tuesday’s presidential primary.

The voice in the message is familiar — even presidential — as it’s an apparent imitation or digital manipulation of Biden’s voice.

“What a bunch of malarkey,” the voice message begins, echoing a favorite term Biden has uttered before.

76

I feel like these types of things will be especially bad this year. They won't be able to catch those responsible fast enough to prevent impact on the primaries, but they should be looking to tie these to the Republicans, and disqualify them from the actual election. We know it's them. It's always them.

This kind of thing should be treated as sedition because it's a direct attempt to undermine democratic processes. People should be scared shitless to even think about fucking with an election.

Or if it's a foreign country it should be considered an act of war just as much as an airstrike.

I don't know about sedition, but there are already a ton of more specific laws regarding election interference. Things like deliberately telling voters the wrong date, location, or eligibility are usually covered.

The only thing new here is the highly convincing impersonation, which may (or may not) be covered by other laws.

Of note, this will almost entirely be state laws rather than federal. With a few restrictions, each state runs its own elections by its own rules. Which means the (criminal) charge in New Hampshire is different from the one in South Carolina, the one in Texas, etc. Rarely do the feds get involved.

That type of impersonation could be argued as civil fraud. Whoever did this deserves to catch RICO charges because what they're doing is basically racketeering.

imo its all that plus counts of impersonating a public official /identity theft

Why is it so hard for phone companies to stop this? They explicitly allow unverified numbers to just call whoever on their networks. Is there really no way to stop number spoofing?

The same reason 5-6 model years of Hyundais are worth $0 now

It would be a minuscule cost to the company and they’re not legally required to implement it

Except due to the FCCs complete regulatory capture, the telecoms have now completely ruined voice calls as a form of communication to the extent that nobody even picks up calls on their personal lines anymore.

Remember when you could answer the phone and reasonably expect it would be relevant to your life?

Indeed. I screen every call now and check the voicemails.

The same reason 5-6 model years of Hyundais are worth $0 now

What is this referencing?

Hyundai and Kia cut costs by excluding industry standard engine immobilizers in their vehicles.

Most cars have a chip in the key, which is read by the car when you insert it into the keyhole, to verify the key is legit. Even if you cut a new copy of the key, the engine won’t start without that chip. That’s an engine immobilizer. It also prevents people from just brute-forcing the keyway into turning, with something like a screwdriver. Because again, no chip means the car won’t start.

Hyundai and Kia decided to forego these, as a cost cutting measure. And now those Hyundais and Kia’s are virtually worthless (and nearly impossible to insure,) because car thieves know how easy they are to steal. In the past few years, as the methods have gotten posted on places like YouTube and TikTok, anyone with a screwdriver can go steal a Hyundai or Kia. And theft rates have skyrocketed, to the point that some insurance companies are outright refusing to issue policies for them because they know it’ll eventually be stolen.

As for why it was referenced here, my guess is that they were making a parallel about how the technology to prevent spoofed phone numbers already exists. But the companies have decided not to implement them, as a cost-cutting (and anti-competition) measure.

Currently, some phone carriers already offer caller verification. But that only works for internal numbers. For instance, an AT&T caller dialing another AT&T phone. But the companies have refused to cooperate, and allow competitors to access their internal verification systems. So for instance, if an AT&T customer calls a T-Mobile customer, both AT&T and T-Mobile can verify internal calls. But neither company wants to play nice with the other, so they refuse to verify each others’ numbers. So when a spammer spoofs a number, any kind of verification would only be effective if the spammer has the same carrier as the target.

Wooow. Holy shit. Those car makers really fucked up. Those class action suits should have mandates to replace the cars or install immobilizers.

I think that they did. My brother in law had an affected model, and I know he brought it in to get one installed. Not sure if he went out of pocket, but pretty sure it was covered.

I'm dubious that's all it is; for example, My '03 S10 has a purely mechanical key. In fact, if you have a GM vehicle with that little "chip" in the root of the blade...note that it's in a symmetrical key, so it could go in either way, and it's only got two pins. Because it's just a resistor. The car's security system is pretty much just an ohmmeter.

The fact that Hyundai and Kia chose not to include an industry standard anti-theft system, leading to them being piss easy to steal

I have my phone set to block all unknown number calls. I was getting around 40 calls per day.

I was getting around 40 calls per day.

How much porn did you watch? Lol

All the porn. But jokes aside, how caa watching porn make callers target you?

It's not about porn specifically, but at one point you gave your phone number to a company. Could have been for anything, usually it's for "verification" or 2fa on a new account on any number of types of service. Then that company turned around and sold your phone number to a data broker - or, worse, was hacked and the hacker then sold their ill gotten gains to said data broker. Who then sold that number to a different company, who then sold that number to a different company...

This is why knowing where your data gets around to is important. If your phone number can (and most assuredly does) get passed around town like a cheap hooker, imagine what kinds of transactions are being performed on, say, email addresses. Or social security numbers. Or passwords, or security question answers. Trusting the wrong data into the wrong hands, once, will mean that data is now permanently a matter of public record. Oh, Equifax leaked your phone number? Now every single illegal data broker in the entire world has a copy of that information in their database, there are 3800 additional copies in various hackers' personal data stores, and new copies are being sold to new people every day. Whoops, now Netflix leaked your email address, hackers already have your name and phone number to link to it from Equifax, oh no, that's a complete data profile. Someone can now just buy your data profile to either target you with ads or target you with scams, or worse. Oh no, you got got by one of the targeted scams and accidentally gave your SSN to a bad actor - well, hope you're already on the way to the courthouse because your identity is now unusable. Whoever you were previously is now dead. You've just made appearances in Pripyat, Brazil, Bangladesh and 13 locations in China in the last 8 minutes and made credit card purchases at each location, your 401k is now smoke and your bank accounts are throwing the emergency halt lever. You'll be lucky to recover anything at all after legally changing your name and SSN, which is a real bitch to do, and will only get more difficult over time as Republicans grow increasingly terrified of the existence of trans folks.

Anyway, yeah, moral of this story is, this is why some people are so vocal and up in arms about data privacy issues and laws, be careful who you give your data to because it can and will be used against you to great effect by multiple prongs of malicious actors, change your passwords frequently and for the love of god don't give out your SSN unless it's absolutely required and you know for a fact it's going directly to a governmental agency.

I usually don't go around giving my number, except to major services like Google, for MFA. I recently removed that though, I have hardware tokens... But I guess it's too late now.

And yeha, the last place I'd put my phone number would be a porn site, so that was my surprise. I thought maybe these sites had malware that tried to gather data from insecure cookies or something, but it would be pretty weird for a service like Google to add a phone number in a insecure cookie or local storage

Blocking spoofing isn't as simple as you might think. A LOT of legitimate phone traffic uses spoofing for VOIP calling.

In fact, back in 2005 the Madison River Telephone company (CenturyLink) tried blocking outgoing Vonage calls citing the CID spoofing, and the FCC stepped in and required that they allow it. It was the first real Net Neutrality ruling.

Oh, it’s not gonna be just robocall stuff. It’s gonna be a full-on inundation of deepfake videos, and they’re going to be pushing from one side way harder than the other.

Also, it allows you to say whatever you want and then claim it was a deep fake if someone calls you out. E.g. Roger Stone calling for the murder of Eric Stalwell and Jerry Nadler.

I don't think there are many things less democratic than disqualifying an entire party because of a few bad actors. The GOP could turn right around and do the same thing, "because Antifa". Dangerous, illiberal, antidemocratic, and union-ending.

Don't try and act like one side isn't a bunch of malicious, anti-democratic grifters. Democrats refuse to stand up to their dirty tricks and we continue to be buried in the feces Republicans are shoveling.

If I reverse the political parties, you sound just like a right-wing MAGA extremist on Gab. Dial down your bigotry and remember that you're in a country of diverse viewpoints and political beliefs. And that we ostensibly believe in democracy.

The word ostensibly is exactly the problem here. It means "portrayed as, but not actually."

So yes, the exact problem is that one party ostensibly believes in democracy.

This isn't conservatives vs progressive policies anymore. Until the GOP guts the MAGA rot from their ranks, they have lost all respect for democracy.

4 more...
4 more...

A "few bad actors" including the entire party leadership.

You say they "could turn around" as if they haven't been actively doing this for ages. The treaty is being broken by conservatives, and they do it proudly and with gusto. How long are the rest of reasonable people supposed to stand back and let the country be destroyed by these monsters?

What you want is for the non-conservatives to surrender. You want all the reasonable, sane people that want a better society to roll over and give up and let the ones who desire slavery and genocide back into power. This isn't the left versus the right -- this is the rising tide of fascism against everyone else. You are leaping forward to chasten the victims of the violence for their fantasy about some turnabout while not being clear in your condemnation of the aggressors shows a lack of moral fortitude.

A few bad apples indeed, because they have spoiled the bunch.

Yes, please read my mind and tell me what I want!

Actually, you're wrong in every regard. I want the extremists out of the GOP, and I want it to live up to its name. Additionally, your reading comprehension of what I wrote is way off base:

The GOP could turn right around and do the same thing, "because Antifa". Dangerous, illiberal, antidemocratic, and union-ending.

This was in response to the following:

They won’t be able to catch those responsible fast enough to prevent impact on the primaries, but they should be looking to tie these to the Republicans, and disqualify them from the actual election. We know it’s them. It’s always them.

I'm not talking about the Republican Party making an about-face on their current trajectory. I'm saying that as they are, they would love to use the exact same logic to disqualify the Democrats from being in the election. We have seen the weaponization of politics since 2016 only escalate, and it's clear that whatever tactics one party uses, the other will feel free to engage in as well. Best not to open that can of worms in the first place.

I'll say it again more clearly. Disqualifying an entire political party from participating in the elections is dangerous, illiberal, antidemocratic, and will result in civil war and the end of the United States. If you say that you want that, then you aren't thinking very hard about what you're saying.

Oh god forbid they investigate the source of this election tampering and, when it inevitably is discovered that a Republican was behind it, that Republican be punished in an appropriate way.

You made the decision entirely on your own that the other guy doesn't give a shit about the truth. But since he's clearly not a conservative, that's a bogus assumption -- non-conservatives care about the truth, he's just rightly confident that the GOP is actively trying to undermine democracy and is rightly saying that people who try to undefine the republic do not deserve its seats of power. That's why he's so sure an investigation will tie this to the perpetrators.

The Republicans you yearn for haven't existed since a conservative murdered Lincoln. Stop pining for a return to a better past that never really existed in the first place. Conservatism is the same toxic impulse as nostalgia.

  • I don't know where you get the idea that I don't think the other guy cares about the truth.

  • The assumption that non-conservatives inherently care for the truth is narrow-minded and provably false, just as the assumption that all conservatives inherently don't care for the truth is.

  • Being "rightly confident" without evidence is mighty foolish, and, might I add, arrogant.

  • Who's pining? I'm comfortable with being a centrist Republican for now, although I'll definitely be rethinking my party affiliation if Trump wins the primaries. That said, you leftists have made even the Democratic party highly unwelcoming to centrists and moderates like myself. I'm starting to wonder if we need a third party. We can call it "The Reasonable Party", and it would reject extremists from the right and the left.

I don't get the joke. Where are these alleged leftists who have any significant sway over the dems?

The only reason to identify yourself as a "centrist republican" over a dem in this day and age is because you hold a bunch of weird, conservative, bigoted views that you don't care to admit or because you're totally deluded about what these parties have stood for for the last few decades.

There's no platform in the modern republicans but MAGA and hate. It's been that way, one way or another, since at least Nixon. And while the dems have hardly held an uninterrupted tenure as being the camp for progressives, liberals, and practical socialists, there's no doubt they're the party of everyone who isn't fucking insane right now.

I don't respect your half-baked politics. You're identifying yourself as Republican on some weird-ass personal pride, as best I can tell, and you should stop.

I don't get the joke. Where are these alleged leftists who have any significant sway over the dems?

You've got to be living under a rock to not see it. I'm not saying they have as much influence as the MAGA crowd have over the GOP, but still, it's undeniably there.

The only reason to identify yourself as a "centrist republican" over a dem in this day and age is because you hold a bunch of weird, conservative, bigoted views that you don't care to admit or because you're totally deluded about what these parties have stood for for the last few decades.

I identify myself as a centrist Republican because I am registered as a Republican and I am politically centrist. There's no more to it than that.

I don't respect your half-baked politics. You're identifying yourself as Republican on some weird-ass personal pride, as best I can tell, and you should stop.

Centrism/moderatism is commonly derided by partisans on both sides, so I'm used to it. I assure you, however, that there is nothing "half-baked" about it. I am not wishy-washy or uncommitted to the political causes that I believe in. I am simply not as religious about it as you are. I can accept good points made by both sides and am more focused on being an American than I am on my political party.

No, it's definitionally half-baked.

My views aren't extreme or radical. They are principles. I believe in certain first principles and my understanding of the world flows from them. Principles such as the state having an imperative to become more effective and efficient over time, which defines my progressivism. Principles about the state having an obligation to not infringe in certain fundamental liberties held by all people, which define my liberalism. Principles like the state needing to exist to serve a just outcome for as many people as possible, which defines my socialism.

In some cases, there are tension between these principles. When that happens, you have to debate and investigate and come up with an answer about what is right and what is wrong. But being a "moderate" means you aren't committed to your principles. It is half-baked. It means abandoning that debate and instead taking a middle road. It means you only follow your principles sometimes. And people who only sometimes follow their principles are not respectable.

You're the one living in an alternate reality. The dems are the party of radical compromise. They're a party that has no choice but to only act with consensus because they have no power without it. That's why Biden is the current POTUS; he's the compromise king. Based on everything that you claim to believe in, the dems are your party. But you identify Republican. So either you're just plain wrong about what the parties are, or you have some secret terrible belief that is incompatible with the party of compromise. There is not one defensible belief a person can have which would get them ostracized from the dem caucus -- the only beliefs that would get you case out from that tent are ones of overt bigotry or total idiocy.

No, it's definitionally half-baked.

By whose definition?

But being a "moderate" means you aren't committed to your principles. It is half-baked. It means abandoning that debate and instead taking a middle road. It means you only follow your principles sometimes. And people who only sometimes follow their principles are not respectable.

In other words, you have no idea what the politics of moderates or centrists actually are. It's okay to acknowledge your ignorance; one can only gain knowledge by being honest about that which one doesn't know.

So either you're just plain wrong about what the parties are, or you have some secret terrible belief that is incompatible with the party of compromise. There is not one defensible belief a person can have which would get them ostracized from the dem caucus -- the only beliefs that would get you case out from that tent are ones of overt bigotry or total idiocy.

Or, in this case, being a centrist.

Centrism is the opposite of your views, which are that a belief that isn't religiously devoted to one side or the other must be "half-baked". Ironically, this type of extremism is something you have in common with the MAGA folks.

I'll leave you to your political extremism. I want no part of it.

You literally know not one of my positions yet are comfortable calling me an extremist. You can go ahead and stop pretending to be on the moral high-ground because you clearly aren't.

I'm here telling you your positions are welcome and can be included among the dems. They already are the "reasonable party" you so desire. You remain totally mum on what the politics you hold are that lead to your ostracism -- I'll go ahead and assume it's something pretty fucking hateful based on that. Because the alternative is that you care so deeply about the label you picked for yourself that you don't care at all about what that label means to literally eveyone else. It's a stupid, stubborn, and arrogant stance that the Republican party doesn't know what they stand for as well as you, some guy.

The Republicans are the no-compromise party. Your "centrism" is unwelcome with them. Come into the light and maybe you can help make the world better. If not, understand that people like me will believe you when you tell them who you are.

You, as a Democrat, have made it perfectly clear that none of my beliefs are welcome in your party. However, for now, the Republicans welcome some of my beliefs. But when Trump is nominated, I will reconsider.

Good day to you.

1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...

Okay, tell us who you think is behind these robocalls.

My guess is Russia. Either way, the comment I was replying to wasn't differentiating between the people sending these calls and Republicans in general.

No, launch them from a trebuchet into a volcano.

Republicunts had over 150 years since we smashed their asses in during the civil war to act right.

They can't. Too bad so sad.

You do realize that the Republican Party didn't exist in the Confederacy? It was originally founded in the United States just before the civil war and was the party that actually won the war and ended slavery. In fact, until the mid-20th century, the Democratic party was the conservative party of the United States and was responsible for instituting the Jim Crow laws.

Spiritual succession is a thing.

I don't see many confederate flags north of the mason Dixon line.

I also don't see any on democrat's porches or vehicles. Weird..

5 more...
5 more...

It starts... This will be the year to decide if we can have functioning information systems and safe, democratic elections in the emerging age of easy AI manipulation.

It's a bad sign that there are no widely, commercially available free tools (from governments or otherwise) to help us confirm the validity of these things. We likely need something as ubiquitous as "googling" to stand against the incoming avalanche of truly fake information.

There will be elections across the globe this year to truly test humanity. I'm hopeful, but I fear we aren't close to ready. Think about what you would do if you suspected a political manipulation was AI generated today? That's one aspect, and you're on Lemmy so you're likely a bit more capable with technology generally (and you probably still don't know what to do). Now, think about your grandmother in Milwaukee... what will she do?

Someone should do this for Trump - his dumbass supporters would probably fall for it.

There’s nothing you could make a fake Trump say that could be worse than what he has already said. Conservatives like the fact that he’s a piece of shit. It gives them permission to be pieces of shit, too.

It doesn't have to be worse; it just has to reach a different conclusion. In this example, you don't need to convince a Trump voter to abandon him, just not vote for him.

To be clear, I don't support such a move. I'm just discussing the effectiveness of a strategy.

Have Trump say he has decided to support abortion and gay marriage. There will be enough outrage from the simpletons that it might sway a few.

In my experience, they are more likely to convince themselves that they've always supported those, and it's the "demonrats" that opposed it.

Or else they'll dismiss it as saying what people want to hear, and that when he said the opposite is when he was being honest.

Trump supporters rarely care about actual policy.

Not all of us Republicans are conservative.

You’ve clearly noticed the overwhelming number of conservatives who are pieces of shit, and instead of acknowledging that the movement itself is rotting, you asked, “how can I make this about me?” I can’t decide if you’re just virtue signaling, or trying to deflect the conversation into some rhetorical nonsense about offending the reasonable conservatives.

Don't worry, I am not easily offended. Nor am I conservative.

1 more...
1 more...

These traitors should be prosecuted just like Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman did when they did the same type of traitorous bullshit.

According to Wikipedia they didn't even get jail time. Weak sauce.

It's unlikely that it's a United States citizen making these robocalls. Anyone stupid enough to break multiple federal and state laws doing this would be indoctrinated enough to think Trump would win without their help.

My money is on foreign interference.

See when I asked my lawyer friend if we could do something like this to suppress Republican votes she said it would be multiple kinds of illegal! I guess I didn't ask enough about "would I be caught and punished?"

Ironic how the reverse will never happen. Only the right-wing benefit from less people voting. It's such a shit asymmetry.

Ironically, past examples actually give Republicans an edge when more people vote. When people who don't normally follow or discuss politics vote, they're more likely to vote GOP than an educated person.

But yes, a Democrat is less likely to break federal laws in general, such as a stunt like this.

This is the best summary I could come up with:


MANCHESTER, N.H. — A prominent New Hampshire Democrat plans to file a complaint with the state attorney general over an apparent robocall that appears to encourage supporters of President Joe Biden not to vote in Tuesday’s presidential primary.

Biden’s name does not appear on Tuesday’s ballot, a consequence of state elections officials setting the date of the primary ahead of South Carolina’s on Feb. 3, the first sanctioned contest of the 2024 nominating race under new Democratic National Committee rules.

“I want them to be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible because this is an attack on democracy,” said Sullivan, an attorney, who believes the call could violate several laws.

She said she also plans to engage federal law enforcement in addition to the state attorney general’s office.

Sullivan served as party chair in 2002, when a so-called phone-jamming effort was carried out during a hotly contested U.S. Senate race.

The Biden campaign, which says it is not involved in the write-in effort in New Hampshire, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.


The original article contains 621 words, the summary contains 175 words. Saved 72%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

This is some nasty work. I didn't factor in AI being used like this.