Oregon’s voting portal lets anyone log into an Oregon resident’s voter account using only his name and birthday — and once logged into a voter’s account, it appears that a bad actor could use the online tool to cast the ballots of overseas voters by email. For that matter, the system doesn’t appear to protect against someone fraudulently casting ballots in the names of domestic voters by claiming to be overseas.

Oregon’s online elections portal, “MyVote,” lets anyone access residents’ registration information by entering a resident’s first and last name and birthday — which are often available online. From there, a fraudster could hypothetically mark a resident’s ballot, claim he is an overseas voter, and then submit the resident’s marked ballot by fax or email, according to whistleblower Cara Tapken, an Oregon resident, who showed The Federalist how the portal works.

The Loophole

After logging into the service, operated by Democrat Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade, one can access a voter’s address and party affiliation, along with an online ballot-marking tool that can be used to fill out a ballot for the resident, Tapken showed The Federalist. In at least some cases, the site asks for the resident’s zip code (which is visible on the voter information page) before allowing access to the ballot-marking system.

Screenshot of the screen leading to Oregon’s online ballot-marking tool. Courtesy of Cara Tapken

This tool is supposed to be limited to overseas or disabled voters,

The Pennsylvania Department of State refused to provide The Federalist with important communications, plans, and other material related to its work with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

The Federalist filed a Right To Know Request (RTKR) with the Pennsylvania Department of State on July 25 seeking “communications between PA DOS and CISA beginning from March 1, 2024 – present day.”

The request was made in light of The Federalist’s previous reporting that uncovered the state’s partnership with CISA to “mitigate threats” to elections, including speech it deems “misinformation.” CISA has been described as the “nerve center” of government censorship operations. The state would provide no additional details to The Federalist about what the collaboration would look like aside from indicating that it would include sharing “intelligence among the included government agencies.” The state never clarified what “intelligence” was being referred to nor what would be done with that information.

Notably, one email obtained by The Federalist in its RTRK response shows Secretary of State Al Schmidt (in an email to a slew of individuals, including those associated with CISA) talking about a meeting that occurred in which there were discussions on how to improve “information sharing.”

(What the “information” is remains unknown because the state stonewalled and then refused to turn over any substantive material about its ongoing work with a censorship agency that has targeted free speech over the years.)

The department first told The Federalist on Aug. 1 that it required 30 days to complete the

Americans’ trust in the media is in the tank — and the hack-tivist “journalists” who have spent years contributing to the trend are not taking it well.

On Tuesday, former CNN political reporter Chris Cillizza lamented findings published in a recent Gallup survey that show Americans’ overall confidence in “mass media” has been in decline for years. The analysis indicated that in 2024, just 12 percent of Republicans, 27 percent of independents, and 54 percent of Democrats “say they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media” to report the news “fully, accurately, and fairly.”

Overall, in 2024, 36 percent of respondents said they have “no trust at all” in media, while 33 percent expressed having “not very much” trust and confidence.

“Devastating. And a massive problem for a healthy democracy,” Cillizza whined on X alongside a photo of results from the Gallup analysis. Cillizza also indicated yesterday that he believes the controversy surrounding “60 Minutes” allegedly distorting its sit-down interview with Kamala Harris is “dumb.”

Cillizza’s melodramatic performance may sit well with his legacy media cohorts. But for anyone who’s been paying attention to the past decade of press coverage, it’s all smoke and mirrors.

When talking heads like Cillizza claim Americans’ waning trust is “devastating” for “democracy,” what they’re actually espousing is their fear that the media is losing its ability to control what information the public is allowed to receive and how it’s portrayed.

For years, these self-professed “news” outlets have dominated the information