#THATpart - Twitter Hashtag

about 8 hours ago

when the @Uber Drivers are making 19 Euros( before the tip ) per hour and the ones in AMERICA ( as on we all not as in we-we as in the french ) make less than 15per hour #ThatPart should make u want to stay on strike until they pay a real living wage plus benefits & medical also!

chiradio's tweet photo. when the @Uber Drivers are making 19 Euros( before the tip ) per hour and the ones in AMERICA ( as on we all not as in we-we as in the french ) make less than 15per hour #ThatPart should make u want to stay on strike until they pay a real living wage plus benefits & medical also! https://t.co/WdTK1NDS0f

0

5

Shady Af Tenna Facts @himetenna

about 12 hours ago

@girlxgirlprince #ThatPart

1

0

96

Demon Chaser

@ChaserDemo81333

about 20 hours ago

#ThatPart Cracks in the Republic: Voting Machine Lawsuits, @IvankaTrump ’s IP, and the Quiet Dismantling of Election Safeguards In the wake of the contentious 2024 U.S. presidential election, a series of lawsuits and administrative decisions have raised alarm over the integrity of the nation’s electoral systems.Central to these concerns are allegations of voting machine malfunctions, the erosion of cybersecurity defenses,and a shadowy intersection between intellectual property acquisitions and election technology.Taken together, these elements reveal how the appearance of legality can mask the erosion of democratic guardrails — particularly when oversight agencies are neutralized from within. I. The Voting Machine Lawsuits: A Fracture in the System. Following the 2024 election, multiple lawsuits were filed challenging the reliability and security of voting machines. One of the most prominent emerged from Rockland County, New York, where a group called SMART Legislation alleged that votes for then-candidate #KamalaHarris were undercounted due to machine-based errors. The group demanded a hand recount of paper ballots, citing statistical anomalies and voter reports of discrepancies. At the center of the controversy are ExpressVote XL machines — ballot-marking devices that use barcodes to tabulate votes, raising concerns that voters cannot verify how their votes are actually recorded. In a parallel thread, the certification process for voting machines came under scrutiny. Pro V&V,an accredited lab responsible for certifying machines,was accused of making late-stage software changes without proper disclosure. Critics argue that such changes, made just before the election, could compromise transparency and accountability — particularly when the vendors and certifiers involved are shielded from public oversight. II. The Ivanka #Trump IP Angle: Legal Cover or Innocuous Trademark? While no direct connection has been proven between the Trump family and the voting machines used in the 2024 election, Ivanka Trump’s 2018 trademark filings in China warrant renewed attention. Among the categories registered under "Ivanka Trump Marks LLC"was the term “voting machines.” Although presented as a defensive branding strategy, such trademarks can serve other purposes — especially when used in foreign jurisdictions known for strategic industrial alignment with state interests. Hypothetically, if a U.S. political figure were to engage with foreign manufacturers through IP licensing or brand deals, this could create a legal channel for financial transactions and influence — without ever publicly disclosing ownership of voting hardware companies. If that foreign company were involved in the supply chain for voting machine components — such as memory chips or firmware — the door could be opened for subtle manipulation of machine behavior, entirely obscured behind intellectual property law and trade agreements. The result? Plausible deniability wrapped in legal contracts. III. The Hypothetical Blueprint: How to Rig an #Election Without Touching a Ballot. Let us consider the hypothetical: A head of state wishes to influence or rig elections in their favor. Rather than tampering with #ballots outright, they invest in a foreign company that supplies hardware for U.S. #voting machines, perhaps through trademark licensing. Simultaneously,they install loyalists into domestic agencies tasked with guarding #electionintegrity — the perfect storm of external influence and internal sabotage. This strategy would involve: Trademarking election-related technologies abroad to facilitate"legal"business relationships.Licensing IP or conducting transactions that obscure actual influence or control.Installing loyal operatives in #DHS, CISA, NSA,and Cyber Command to prevent audits, suppress #investigations, and control narratives. Gutting watchdog institutions like the Federal Election Commission (FEC), DOJ #CivilRights Division, and cybersecurity oversight boards. @AP

0

49

matthew ☆ @WereLikeTheView

1 day ago

@MissMooWiddit #thatpart

0

2

0

599

kitty ೃ⁀➷ @slepingcutie

1 day ago

#thatpart

0

104

Stevie Tru Luv @G_Nations

1 day ago

Say it again .1% #ThatPart

Hoop Herald

@TheHoopHerald

2 days ago

Whenever someone tells you a player is a no brainer NBA player Remember, this monster has had a hell of a time sticking in the League Impossible to fathom how good the 0.1% is

24

293

11

55

123K

0

34

Adam T. Hooker 🟤🏀🟡 @coachhooker

1 day ago

@CoachLeo_ “Bully coaches that shafted you on scheduling” 😂 #ThatPart

0

1

0

267

Changing Methods

@ChangingMethods

1 day ago

Sergio has an important message for you to start your day! #message #thatpart #life #vibes #Sergio #irish #important #PSA #everyone #youmatter #power #love #fyp #viral #trending #shorts #youtubeshorts #youtube #subscribe #blessings #GoneBallistic https://t.co/1a7tHd4WAr

0

2

0

247

𝐀𝐋𝐈 ! @aliyahcoreee

1 day ago

@beayayapz #thatpart

1

2

0

28

Demon Chaser

@ChaserDemo81333

2 days ago

#ThatPart Cracks in the Republic: Voting Machine Lawsuits, Ivanka Trump’s IP, and the Quiet Dismantling of Election Safeguards In the wake of the contentious 2024 U.S. presidential election, a series of lawsuits and administrative decisions have raised alarm over the integrity of the nation’s electoral systems. Central to these concerns are allegations of voting machine malfunctions, the erosion of cybersecurity defenses, and a shadowy intersection between intellectual property acquisitions and election technology. Taken together, these elements reveal how the appearance of legality can mask the erosion of democratic guardrails — particularly when oversight agencies are neutralized from within. I. The Voting Machine Lawsuits: A Fracture in the System. Following the 2024 election, multiple lawsuits were filed challenging the reliability and security of voting machines. One of the most prominent emerged from Rockland County, New York, where a group called SMART Legislation alleged that votes for then-candidate Kamala Harris were undercounted due to machine-based errors. The group demanded a hand recount of paper ballots, citing statistical anomalies and voter reports of discrepancies. At the center of the controversy are ExpressVote XL machines — ballot-marking devices that use barcodes to tabulate votes, raising concerns that voters cannot verify how their votes are actually recorded. In a parallel thread, the certification process for voting machines came under scrutiny. Pro V&V, an accredited lab responsible for certifying machines, was accused of making late-stage software changes without proper disclosure. Critics argue that such changes, made just before the election, could compromise transparency and accountability — particularly when the vendors and certifiers involved are shielded from public oversight. II. The Ivanka Trump IP Angle: Legal Cover or Innocuous Trademark? While no direct connection has been proven between the Trump family and the voting machines used in the 2024 election, Ivanka Trump’s 2018 trademark filings in China warrant renewed attention. Among the categories registered under "Ivanka Trump Marks LLC" was the term “voting machines.” Although presented as a defensive branding strategy, such trademarks can serve other purposes — especially when used in foreign jurisdictions known for strategic industrial alignment with state interests. Hypothetically, if a U.S. political figure were to engage with foreign manufacturers through IP licensing or brand deals, this could create a legal channel for financial transactions and influence — without ever publicly disclosing ownership of voting hardware companies. If that foreign company were involved in the supply chain for voting machine components — such as memory chips or firmware — the door could be opened for subtle manipulation of machine behavior, entirely obscured behind intellectual property law and trade agreements. The result? Plausible deniability wrapped in legal contracts. III. The Hypothetical Blueprint: How to Rig an Election Without Touching a Ballot. Let us consider the hypothetical: A head of state wishes to influence or rig elections in their favor. Rather than tampering with ballots outright, they invest in a foreign company that supplies hardware for U.S. voting machines, perhaps through trademark licensing. Simultaneously, they install loyalists into domestic agencies tasked with guarding election integrity — the perfect storm of external influence and internal sabotage. This strategy would involve: Trademarking election-related technologies abroad to facilitate "legal" business relationships. Licensing IP or conducting transactions that obscure actual influence or control. Installing loyal operatives in DHS, CISA,NSA, and Cyber Command to prevent audits,suppress investigations, and control narratives. Gutting watchdog institutions like the Federal Election Commission (FEC),DOJ Civil Rights Division, and cybersecurity oversight boards. @AP