The Trump administration is pushing politically motivated investigations of candidates and states just before the elections, accompanied by attention-grabbing headlines!
BT (Before Trump), there was an unwritten rule that politicians followed: no “bombshells” in the last 60 days before an election. But, as usual, Trump throws historic precedents out the window.
Most Maricopa County voters flagged as potential noncitizens by an error-prone federal system are citizens after all, according to county detectives.
Rachel Mitchell, the county’s top prosecutor, said on Monday her office had completed a monthslong investigation into 60 suspected noncitizens who had cast ballots in prior elections.
Of those, she said 52 were citizens, and eight were not. Mitchell, a Republican, said all but one of the noncitizen voters appeared to have been erroneously registered while renewing their driver’s licenses.
[...]
Her announcement comes after Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap, a Republican, referred 207 individuals to county and state prosecutors for review in the spring. He identified the potential noncitizens on the county’s voter roll while attempting to confirm the citizenship status of 61,681 voters impacted by a longstanding state record-keeping error.
The database that flagged the voters as noncitizens — called Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE — has repeatedly proven to be unreliable. Maintained by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, SAVE was originally used to check immigrants’ eligibility for public benefits but was revamped and expanded last year to be used as a mass voter verification tool. However, it has produced false positives in several states.
So to put this in perspective: out of 2,589,827 voters in the district the feds identified 207 unqualified voters, but a review only found 8 who voted illegally. Or 0.00032%! And for those 8 no charges were announced, and the county attorney attributed the registrations to a flaw in the driver's-license registration process.
But the Trump adminstration have also broken the traditional 60 days break in new attack ads or false claims.
‘There’s lots of reasons to suspect this is politically motivated,’ one expert says
Roll Call
By Michael Macagnone
October 13, 2026
A search of Rep. Ilhan Omar’s home has sent shockwaves through electoral politics weeks before the midterms, as experts said it appeared to flout longstanding norms meant to keep prosecutors out of elections.
While the Minnesota Democrat herself has been on a glide path to reelection in a deep-blue district, some worry it could set a wider precedent for how the Trump administration handles investigations of other politicians.
Homeland Security Investigations agents carried out a federal search warrant of her D.C. home on Monday, according to Omar and officials. It comes as Republicans face an uphill battle to retain control of the House and after President Donald Trump has criticized Omar for years and publicly accused her of immigration fraud.
The timing of the search raises serious questions, according to several experts. David Sklansky, a professor at Stanford Law School and former federal prosecutor, said the search, even though it was conducted by Homeland Security officials, may have run afoul of two Justice Department policies, one formal and one informal.
DOJ brings 'voting by aliens' cases at an unprecedented rate
Noncitizen voting prosecutions a 'tier one' priority for Trump White House, official says
Recent spate of cases a small fraction of votes cast
WASHINGTON, Sept 23 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump’s administration is ramping up criminal prosecutions of noncitizens accused of voting in US elections as he presses claims of widespread election fraud ahead of the November midterms.
Lies, lies, and more lies to justify whatever Trump has planned for the elections!
Here in Connecticut, we are not exempt from Trump’s wrath.
Yesterday, Stephanie Thomas, Connecticut’s Secretary of the State, held a press conference to respond to reports that Connecticut would be one of nine states the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials intend to investigate in the coming weeks for election fraud. Thomas, who had neither confirmed nor denied the report’s validity or spoken to DHS officials, said she held the conference to assure Connecticut voters that elections will proceed as usual.
“Every time there’s a news report, voters are getting impacted,” said Thomas. “They’re confused. They’re scared. So whether the news report is true or not, what I am addressing to Connecticut voters is that we will have an election, that there are many people, many agencies working to make sure that it is a secure election on many fronts, and that if something should happen, we have the people and the tools to address it.”
According to a DHS memo obtained by CNN, starting today, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) personnel will begin a “coordinated criminal voter fraud surge initiative to pursue investigative leads, conduct field interviews, and support timely prosecutorial review.” HSI, which falls under the umbrella of ICE, employs over 7,100 special agents, who are primarily tasked with investigating human trafficking, narcotics smuggling, financial and cybercrime and IP theft. The memo reportedly states that HSI personnel will continue these investigations until mid-October. In addition to Connecticut, HSI will reportedly be investigating New York, Pennsylvania, Washington, Wisconsin, Missouri, Georgia, California and Nevada.
Did you know that in Germany in the 1930s they had a box to check off that said "Jew"? Now the Trump administration will have a box to check off... "Trans!"
A double-edged sword!
Back around 2010, when we were trying to pass the gender-inclusive non-discrimination bill and we replied that we had no idea of the number of trans people in Connecticut, we thought that lack of data was a bad thing. But now, that may seem like a good thing. Why? Because someone like Trump could misuse the data.
The Trump administration is proposing sweeping changes to the rules governing the 2030 US Census, including a requirement that could make questions about biological sex mandatory for respondents, a change critics say could effectively force transgender people to disclose their trans status to the federal government.
The Pink News
by Sian Thompson
Sept 17, 2026
The proposal, published by the Census Bureau on September 10, would prohibit questions about race, ethnicity and sexual orientation from appearing on the short-form decennial census. At the same time, it would allow questions about biological sex, date of birth and household relationships to be included for the purpose of verifying the population count. The proposed rule is part of a much broader overhaul of the decennial census.
News outlet The Needle argued the practical impact would leave trans people with limited options: disclose sex assigned at birth, lie, or refuse to take part. It wrote: “By requiring trans people to identify themselves by their sex assigned at birth, and with a looming threat of prosecution for noncompliance, the Trump Administration is compelling every trans person to out themselves to the Federal Government.”
The Needle also claimed: “This is an attempt to weaponise the Census to make a list of every trans person in the United States.”
Leave it to Trump to make the census racist! I don't know about you, but I will go with what is on my birth certificate. But we are not the only ones Trump is attacking!
U.S. Census Bureau plans to use a questionnaire with a citizenship question as part of its practice test for the 2030 census could jeopardize the once-a-decade head count and scare away immigrants from participating, congressional Democrats warned Thursday.
Democrats on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform urged the Census Bureau to drop plans to use the American Community Survey form, which includes the citizenship question, and instead use a traditional census questionnaire that omits it. The on-the-ground tests in Huntsville, Alabama, and Spartanburg, S.C., start next month.
“The Trump Administration is risking millions of taxpayer dollars to pursue policies which could fatally compromise the 2030 count before it even begins,” they wrote in a letter to acting Census Bureau Director George Cook and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, whose department oversees the statistical agency.
Okay, the Constitution says a census shall "be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons..." and "...within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct." Nowhere does it say only "citizens" shall be counted. But the Republicans are trying to weave their transphobia and xenophobia into the count. NPR from last year wrote;
A Trump administration official on Friday signaled a potential rollback of the racial and ethnic categories approved for the 2030 census and other future federal government forms.
Supporters of those categories fear that any last-minute modifications to the U.S. government's standards for data about race and ethnicity could hurt the accuracy of census data and other future statistics used for redrawing voting districts, enforcing civil rights protections and guiding policymaking.
Legislators run on data. How many (they want to know the voting block this will affect... vote both for and against), how much, etc.
The "Project 2025" policy agenda released by The Heritage Foundation, the conservative, D.C.-based think tank, called for a Republican administration to "thoroughly review any changes" to census race and ethnicity questions because of "concerns among conservatives that the data under Biden Administration proposals could be skewed to bolster progressive political agendas."
"...could be skewed to bolster progressive political agendas." Um... like, yeah, we will actually see the size of the minority populations. But if the questions are asked, will it raise the fear in minority populations of being tracked, like in Germany in the 1930s?
You see... "How many?" Without being counted, we will never know. But if it is asked, minorities might not be counted. Either way, the Republicans win.
No, I am not talking about newer laws like the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 or the Insurrection Act of 1807. Those don't really address polling places. But even before those, there was:
The Act of February 25, 1865, commonly called the “Troops at the Polls” Act.
A polling place is the one room in America where the government has to wait outside.
Congress wrote this rule in the middle of the Civil War, and it has stayed on the books for 161 years because every generation since understood the danger. Federal law makes it a crime for any officer of the military, or any person in the civil service of the United States, to order, bring, keep, or control troops or armed men at any place where a general or special election is held. The only exception covers force needed to repel armed enemies of the United States. Break that law and you face up to five years in prison and a permanent ban from holding federal office.
Read those words again. Armed men in the civil service of the United States. That is ICE.
In 1909 Congress went back and removed a second exception that had allowed troops to “keep the peace at the polls.” Lawmakers deleted it because they understood that a president who wants soldiers at the ballot box will always find a disturbance to point at. They closed the loophole on purpose, and it has stayed closed for 117 years.
So, if the "Donald" sends troops, he will be breaking a 161-year-old law that was designed to prevent just that!
It's all about headlines, not the truth. It was blasted across the front pages and led the news broadcasts. But it was all fake... designed to grab headlines. What does that say about the bill he is trying to push?
But the claim was fake... just another attempt to grab headlines.
Officials in California, Nevada, New Jersey and Pennsylvania all disputed the allegation.
Snopes
Jack Izzo
July 28, 2026
Claim:
More than 250,000 non-U.S. citizens are registered to vote across California, Nevada, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
Rating:
False
Context
The Department of Homeland Security did not provide any evidence supporting its claim, as with many other allegations of widespread voter fraud by President Donald Trump and his administration.
With a trust rating of 34%, nobody but his loyal MAGA followers, who kiss his feet, believes him anymore.
It's worth noting that the claim was about the alleged number of registrations, not number of ballots cast, and that the department used the phrase "there may be as many as" to describe its numbers. DHS provided no evidence supporting its conclusion, and Snopes could not reproduce the findings.
The percentage of those believers is about the same as the percentage of voters who support Trump in election polls.
As a striking Fox News poll suggests the GOP midterm position is deteriorating, a voting rights expert walks us through what Trump is really gearing up to attempt this fall—and how to defeat it.
The New Republic
Greg Sargent
July 24, 2026
Greg Sargent: This is The Daily Blast from The New Republic, produced and presented by the DSR Network. I’m your host, Greg Sargent.
Donald Trump exploded at Senate GOP leader John Thune during a Wednesday rally, demanding that Republicans pass voter suppression legislation immediately. This prompted an angry response from Thune, which in turn triggered MAGA rage in response. It’s no accident that this comes amid new polls showing the GOP midterm position deteriorating, including in a major Fox News survey. Trump thinks voter suppression can save the party. This is all coming to a head because the House just passed something, and the pressure on the Senate is getting brutal.
This whole situation has gotten weird and complex, so to really understand it, we’re talking to the great voting rights reporter Ari Berman of Mother Jones. Ari, always good to have you on.
[...]
Sargent: So basically, what this is starting to look like is the House is passing $10 billion to use to essentially try to get states to pass by themselves, in their state legislatures, these things in the SAVE Act.
Voter suppression mechanisms like ending vote by mail, requiring proof of citizenship. You’d do all these things through the states, and the House would try and incentivize that.
Berman: Yeah, they’re basically paying states to do voter suppression. That’s the simplest way I can explain what the House is doing.
Also the clock is running out! There is only 98 days until the elections begins and many states their elections start in October.
So you know that the courts will block it saying it is too close to the elections to require everyone to get IDs. Also other states have said the requiring a passport or a birth certificate amounts to a poll tax.
Sargent: Yeah. It looks as if Donald Trump has just gotten it into his head that if he can get this passed, it saves the midterms for Republicans. He’s just simply not capable of grasping the situation at a very fundamental level, as he so often is not, right?
Berman: Number one, every time that Trump is about to lose or on the verge of losing, he starts blaming the mechanics of voting for his loss. We saw this in 2020 with mail voting. We’re seeing it again now with the SAVE America Act.
Secondly—and this is my real concern about all of this, Greg—is that I believe he’s using the SAVE America Act as a pretext to challenge the legitimacy of the midterms. So if it does not pass, which it won’t pass, he’s going to say, we don’t have the SAVE America Act, therefore the elections were rigged, therefore I have no choice but to challenge the legitimacy of the midterms. And he’s going to point to that crazy speech he gave and say, I laid out all the evidence—even though he laid out no evidence, but he’s going to say, I laid out all the evidence, the elections were rigged, the Congress didn’t act on this, therefore I have no choice but to issue a national emergency executive order, or seize voting machines, or take some kind of dramatic intervention to mess with the midterms.
I worry what Trump will do when he is boxed it and realizes the election is lost and this time he might actually be convicted and impeached.
Was last night's speech the groundwork for claims in November—acting as a pretext to justify using federal force, the military, or law enforcement to interfere with the upcoming 2026 midterm elections?
“Tonight’s address from President Trump was a tantrum of sinister innuendo, conspiracy theories, and misdirection. Americans who tuned in tonight heard no new concrete or proven claims about foreign interference in our elections. There is unanimous agreement within the intelligence community that foreign adversaries did not succeed in interfering with the vote in the 2020 election. President Trump and his allies have filed dozens of lawsuits, launched countless investigations, and even sparked an insurrection to try to find voter fraud in the 2020 election. They have failed to do so every single time because none exists.
“Unfortunately, these lies are no longer about one election President Trump lost six years ago. Since retaking the White House, President Trump has moved National Guard troops into our cities, repeatedly floated the possibility of deploying ICE agents at polling locations, and said the Postal Service won’t deliver mail-in ballots in states that don’t turn over sensitive information to his administration. Tonight’s speech is his latest effort to exert partisan control over the 2026 elections because he knows Republicans can’t win on their own record.
“Should President Trump try to interfere in November’s election through illegal, un-American means, I believe he will fail. I will support every effort to defend our democracy, and I will not stop working to ensure every eligible vote will be counted.”
“Tonight’s unhinged speech is the beginning of Trump’s attempt to overthrow the 2026 midterm election and to smear and criminalize noncitizens. This is what our insecure, delusional President does: if he doesn’t like the outcome of an election, he does everything in his power to subvert it. While these debunked claims by Trump and his cronies may seem laughable, they are a dire threat to democracy in America. The January 6th insurrection showed the country and the world that Republicans in Congress lack the spine to stand up to Trump’s authoritarianism. Now is the time for communities nationwide to mobilize against a federal takeover of elections, ICE at polling sites, and Trump’s pathetic lies. Whether through filing lawsuits, educating voters, volunteering at polling sites, holding the media accountable, or other tactics, we all have a role to play in preserving our right to vote in the face of Trump’s ongoing assault on democracy.”
Democrats, meanwhile, accused Trump of attempting to sow doubts about the security of the upcoming November midterms which will decide control of Congress for the remainder of his presidency.
"Let's be clear - in America, voters choose their leaders, not the other way around," top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer posted on social media after the speech.
"Democrats will fight like hell to make sure every American voter can cast their ballot freely, without obstruction or interference from Donald Trump," he added.
Looking at Trump’s track record, I think they may be right... He is laying the groundwork for calling out the troops, even though doing so is strictly against the law.
Federal Criminal Statutes (Title 18), 18 U.S.C. § 592 (Troops at Polls): This statute makes it a federal crime—punishable by up to five years in prison—for any civil, military, or naval officer of the United States to order, bring, or keep troops or "armed men" at any polling place during an election.
18 U.S.C. § 593 (Interference by Armed Forces): This statute makes it a federal crime for any member of the U.S. military to use force, threats, intimidation, or advice to prevent any qualified voter from casting their ballot, or to interfere with an election officer performing their duties.
18 U.S.C. § 595 (Interference by Administrative Employees): This law prohibits any person employed in an administrative position by the federal government (which includes federal law enforcement agencies like ICE, the FBI, or DHS) from using their official authority to interfere with or affect a federal election.
But as we have seen in the past, Trump is willing to act and ignore the law. We also have the Posse Comitatus Act, which expressly limits the federal government's ability to use military personnel for domestic law enforcement.
In an Ipsos/Reuters poll, 69% of respondents said they were "very or somewhat concerned" about attempts to overturn official election results. Notice that it doesn’t say people are worried about standard election interference, but rather about overturning the election itself!
Fraud isn’t the only concern that Americans have about elections, though. In fact, all three polls found that more people are worried about disenfranchisement than fraud. In the Ipsos/Reuters poll, 57% said they were very or somewhat concerned about eligible voters being prevented from voting, and 44% of respondents to the YouGov/CBS News poll identified that as a major problem. And according to Marist, 58% of adults think it’s likely that many people will show up to vote in 2026 and be told they’re not eligible.
If nothing else, the consensus among political analysts, election experts, and lawmakers is that Trump’s speech last night has only served to increase anxiety and deepen divisions regarding the security and integrity of the upcoming elections.
Pure and simple... it is nothing more than an attempt at voter intimidation! Trump is threatening to send federal agents to voting places. You want to bet that if he does, it will be to minority districts that tend to vote Democrat?
As Nevada’s secretary of state, I will not let this administration intimidate voters.
MS Now
By Cisco Aguilar
June 6, 2026
As the midterms approach, election officials across the country are preparing for a dangerous possibility: the deployment of immigration agents and other federal law enforcement officials to America’s polls.
Any stationing of federal law enforcement at polling sites is a heavy-handed attempt to intimidate voters. It runs counter to our founding principles, including that all of us are created equal, and that promise is fulfilled at the ballot box. When we cast our ballots, it doesn’t matter who you are, what you believe in or the amount of money in your bank account. They all count the same — one person, one vote.
Trump is running scared, rigging voting districts by gerrymandering, and trying to make it hard to vote for low-income workers who work multiple jobs to make ends meet and can't take time off to vote.
The challenge we now face is anti-democratic forces running amok. President Trump and his anti-democracy allies seek to weaken our democracy to improve their chances of winning elections. They have repeatedly suggested deploying ICE agents to voting locations for that purpose — to sow discord and confusion. Whether or not these deployments occur, the mere suggestion is enough to create fear, chaos and doubt. This is particularly true in states like Nevada that were built by, and continue to grow because of, the contributions of immigrants.
Democracy only works when voters feel safe enough to participate. If voters are afraid to vote, many will stay home, and that is exactly what anti-democratic officials want. Rather than answer to the people, these extremists seek to pick and choose their voters.
He wants to scare voters away with the fear of violence!
Armed federal agents have absolutely no business near election sites.
The Brennan Center for Justice
Jasleen Singh, Kendall Verhovek
March 31, 2026
Ahead of the 2026 midterms, Trump administration allies have floated the possibility that federal immigration agents could interfere at polling sites this fall, a scenario that would violate federal and state laws.
Longtime Trump supporter Steve Bannon said last week that the deployment of ICE agents to airports is “perfect training for the fall of 2026.” Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin said during his confirmation hearing to lead the Department of Homeland Security that ICE could be sent to polling places in the event of a “specific threat.”
The White House and a top DHS official previously said there are no plans to deploy ICE agents to polling sites. Those assurances, however, do little to ease concerns over voter intimidation and chilling voter turnout because of these persistent calls.
Part of the push to deploy ICE agents to polling sites stems from the administration’s insistence, without evidence, that noncitizens are voting in droves. Noncitizen voting is already illegal and vanishingly rare, and states have multiple checks in place that ensure only American citizens vote.
[...]
Can the president send ICE agents to polling places?
No. Elections are special. There are specific federal and state laws that make this kind of action unlawful.
Sending ICE or any other armed federal agents to the polls is illegal because federal law bans federal officers from interfering in elections. It’s also illegal because federal law bans troops and armed federal agents from being deployed anywhere an “election is held.” While that law was passed in 1865, surely in today’s elections, that means wherever votes are cast and counted, including, polling places, vote-counting facilities, and drop boxes. And any kind of voter intimidation, including by federal agents, is illegal under both federal and state law regardless of where it happens.
You know that Trump and company know this... this is established law. I would imagine that this is covered in law school. So, the only reason Trump is saying this is to keep voters away from the polls.
A federal judge has declined to halt President Donald Trump’s executive order creating a federal voter list and limiting mail voting, clearing the way for potential sweeping changes in how American elections are run shortly before this year’s midterm elections.
U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee in Washington, late Wednesday rejected the request by Democrats and civil rights groups that had argued Trump’s order would likely be found unconstitutional because the states and Congress, not the president, have the power to set election rules. Nichols agreed with the Republican Trump administration’s contention that it was too early to block the order because it has yet to be implemented.
Nichols’ ruling leaves the door open for further challenges when the Trump administration moves to implement the president’s directive. A separate lawsuit seeking to block the executive order is underway in Boston. No matter how rapidly the administration acts, no voting changes are expected during primary elections, which continue into next month.
I want to point out that even the ultra-conservative Heritage Foundation documents only roughly 1,500 to 1,600 proven instances of election fraud collected over several decades! That is out of roughly 204 million voters!
Even as Democratic officials fight the effort in court, the Trump administration has run millions of voter registrations through government databases to determine their eligibility in a process that critics worry could end up purging valid voters from the rolls before the November elections.
At least 67 million registrations, primarily from Republican-controlled states, have gone through a beefed-up verification program at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and tens of thousands of those have been flagged as potential noncitizens or people who have died. Some states allow only a month for people to prove their eligibility and others suspend it immediately.
The scanning of state voter rolls at the national level is part of a broader effort by Republican President Donald Trump to federalize certain election functions and promote his messaging that elections are marred by noncitizen voting, even though instances of that are rare. Voting and civil rights advocates say the DHS system is error-prone and can mistakenly flag people who are eligible to vote.
Somehow I don't want Trump and his cronies to have my Social Security... I don't want the databases tied together! It give way too much power to Trump and his fascists tendencies! Autocracies love centralized
There have a number of improprieties that has been suggested that DOGE did with the SS database! Such as hand over sensitive personal data to an outside conservative advocacy group looking to "overturn election results" in certain states!
Trump has been trying to overhaul U.S. elections, including calling for a federal list of verified voters, and his Department of Justice has pushed states to hand over unredacted voter information for mass checks through the DHS program known as SAVE.
The Justice Department has sued states that refuse, saying the government is trying to ensure that they are complying with federal law and have accurate voter lists. States already take a number of steps to maintain the accuracy of their voter rolls.
SAVE, short for Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, was created under an immigration law mandating that DHS help federal, state and local agencies prevent government benefits from going to noncitizens. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, an arm of DHS, said more than 1,300 agencies use it.
Remember, they have only found under 2,000 undocumented immigrants on the rolls! Yet, they want all this personal data on over 200 million voters. A centralized database like that will be a prime target for hackers!
It will also create massive problems with database matching. For example, some records might still use a woman's maiden name, leading to a database mismatch that could cause her to be tossed off the voter rolls! The same is true for trans voters, we might have a name and gender mismatch and also be prevented from voting!
Human rights organizations say this effort is designed to give the administration these lists so they can force states to purge voters—disproportionately targeting naturalized citizens, minorities, and women—just before major elections, as these groups tend to vote progressive. Critics argue the administration's motive is to feed data to partisan operations, and that this is an attempt to federalize the voting system and centralize election power in Washington. Just like Russia, China, and North Korea!
In the Joseph Heller's 1961 novel Catch 22 do you remember it?
The Rule:A pilot can be grounded if they are insane.
The Catch: If a pilot asks to be relieved, it proves they are sane (concerned for their safety) and thus ineligible for a mental health exemption.
The Result: If he flies, he’s crazy. If he asks to stop, he’s sane, so he must keep flying.
Well, Trump and his allies are trying to create a real-life Catch-22—and it’s buried in the voting bill known as the SAVE Act. A bill that could effectively strip many of us of our right to vote.
I’ve written before about how a similar law in Kansas disenfranchised over 30,000 women—many of whom, after getting married, never updated their birth certificates. The AARP said that the SAVE Act would:
Key Takeaways:
A proposed federal bill would require proof of citizenship when registering to vote and photo ID at the polls, making voting tougher for many older adults
Millions lack easy access to passports or birth certificates, and older adults face added complications from name changes, moves or expired IDs
The changes could complicate mail-in voting and create new avenues for identity theft
And yet, despite all of this, Republicans continue pushing it forward and with Trump leading the charge.
And for transgender people, it creates a nightmare scenario.
Under the SAVE Act, a voter must provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship and is limited to a passport, birth certificate, or naturalization papers.
So imagine this: A trans person is born in Ohio, now lives in Connecticut, and has updated their driver’s license to reflect their correct gender. But their birth certificate still shows their old gender marker.
When they go to register or vote, what happens? Their documents don’t match.
And without a passport or a birth certifiate, they’re srewed!
People like me face another issue: an expired passport that reflects our true gender can’t be used—because it must be valid. As if your citizenship somehow expires along with your passport.
Why?
The federal government argues that your appearance or location may change over time. But that doesn’t hold up... passports do not contain your residence? And another thing, your looks can change over the 15 year life of your passport but on day one after the 15 years your photo us not valid? That doesn't make sense.
This whole SAVE America Act is nothing more that an attempt to disenfranchise voters! And the trans community is swept up in a new Catch 22!
President Trump on Friday indicated he will issue an executive order seeking to require voters to present proof of citizenship if the Senate does not pass the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act, which passed in the House this week.
“There will be Voter I.D. for the Midterm Elections, whether approved by Congress or not!” Trump wrote on Truth Social around 4:30 p.m. EST. “Also, the People of our Country are insisting on Citizenship, and No Mail-In Ballots, with exceptions for Military, Disability, Illness, or Travel.”
[...]
“This is an issue that must be fought, and must be fought, NOW!” Trump wrote in a lengthy post on Truth Social. “If we can’t get it through Congress, there are Legal reasons why this SCAM is not permitted. I will be presenting them shortly, in the form of an Executive Order.”
He accused Democrats of being “horrible, disingenuous CHEATERS” who have “all sorts of reasons why it shouldn’t be passed, and then boldly laugh in the backrooms after their ridiculous presentations.”
You all have probably have heard of the Heritage Foundation, you know, the ones who did Project 2025. Well here is what they found.
“Heritage has just added seven more fraud cases from Alabama, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Texas, to the database. “With the addition of these seven cases, the database now holds 1,567 proven instances of election fraud, and we are tracking almost 300 additional potential cases that are in the investigative or prosecutorial stage by law enforcement.”
Wow! 1,567 cases! But out out how many? A 100 million?
AP News reported Wisconsin found 46 cases of suspected fraud!
AP News also reported: "A review of Iowa’s voter rolls last year found a fraction of that number — 35 people who are not U.S. citizens — were among more than 1.6 million Iowa voters who cast ballot in the 2024 election, and there were 277 noncitizens registered to vote out of nearly 2.3 million."
The Austin-American Statesman wrote: Texas Secretary of State Jane Nelson announced this week that a new review of Texas' voter registration rolls matched against a federal citizenship database identified that more than 2,700 possible non-citizens among the 18.6 million people eligible to vote.
Voter fraud is Trump's big lie!
But many Republicans are pushing it in the Big Lie, WABI writes about Susan Collins of Maine,
Senator Susan Collins recently announced her support for the Save America Act. If passed, the bill would create stricter voter ID law requiring individuals to provide documented proof of citizenship when registering to vote and to show a photo ID before voting.
The bill passed the house last Wednesday and now makes its way to the senate.
When asked about her support for the legislation, Collins says passing the bill would ensure confidence in election results. Critics argue it would disenfranchise millions of voters.
Did you know that Kansas passed their version of the SAVE America Act... and it had the desired affect, disenfranchising tens of thousands of voters, denying their right voters to vote.
‘We’ve been proactive to make sure we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders to lead this country.’
Hun? What? What does she mean by "the right people voting"? Yup, that is what SAVE America Act does. blocking "the wrong people" from voting! The ACLU wrote back in 2018 what the Kansas law did to voters!
The federal trial over a Kansas law requiring people to show citizenship documents like a birth certificate or passport when registering to vote begins on March 6 in Kansas City. The American Civil Liberties Union will represent the League of Women Voters and several individuals whose voting rights were violated. Kris Kobach — the secretary of state of Kansas, chief architect of the law, and the defendant in the lawsuit — will represent himself.
From 2013 to 2016, more than 35,000 Kansans were blocked from registering because of Kobach’s documentary proof-of-citizenship law — approximately 14 percent of new registrants. Many Kansans, including several of our clients, went to the polls on Election Day in 2014 with every reason to believe that they were registered, only to be told, “Sorry, you haven’t proven that you’re a U.S. citizen.”
We filed suit in 2016, charging that Kobach’s law undermines the fundamental right to vote and violates the National Voter Registration Act. In a preliminary ruling for the 10th Circuit, Judge Jerome Holmes, who was appointed by George W. Bush, found that the law had caused the “mass denial of a fundamental constitutional right.”
What does she mean by "the right people"? In 2020 the ACLU showed us the answer in 2018. In Kansas, over 35,000 citizens (14% of new registrants) were blocked from voting because they didn't have a birth certificate or passport handy at the DMV.
Judge Jerome Holmes, a George W. Bush appointee, called it a “mass denial of a fundamental constitutional right.” Even though the Supreme Court effectively killed the Kansas law in 2020, the Trump administration is using that exact same failed logic for this federal bill.
The Republican Strategy for 2026
Gerrymandering, the SAVE Act, and threats of using ICE at polling places are all parts of the same machine. It is designed for one thing: a Republican win on November 3, 2026. Their motto seems to be: "If you can't win honestly... cheat!."
There are a number of bills before Congress this session that would change the way we vote. One set of bills expands voting rights, while another set imposes limits. Can you guess which party introduced each set?
Bill #1: Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (SAVE Act) – H.R. 22
Bill #2: Freedom to Vote Act
Bill #3: American Confidence in Elections Act (ACE Act)
Bill #4: Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act
Bill #5: Same Day Registration Act (S. 2820)
Bill #6: SAVE VOTERS Act
Bill #7: Right to Vote Act
Bill #8: Fair Representation Act
First thought: There are a number of voter bills!
Bill
Goal
Party
SAVE Act (H.R. 22)
Restrict / safeguard voting
Republican
Freedom to Vote Act
Expand voting access
Democrat
ACE Act
Restrict / safeguard voting
Republican
MEGA Act
Restrict / safeguard voting
Republican
Same Day Registration Act (S. 2820)
Expand voting access
Democrat
SAVE VOTERS Act
Expand voting access
Democrat
Right to Vote Act
Expand voting access
Democrat
Fair Representation Act
Expand voting access
Democrat
Notice something?
Republican bills → focus on restricting voting or tightening rules
Democratic bills → focus on expanding access and protecting voter rights
Republicans’ restrictive bills build on the false narrative pushed by some in their party that the 2020 election was “stolen.”
House Republicans are proposing sweeping changes to the nation's voting laws, a long-shot priority for President Donald Trump that would impose stricter requirements, including some before Americans vote in the midterm elections in the fall.
The package released Thursday reflects a number of the party's most sought-after election changes, including requirements for photo IDs before people can vote and proof of citizenship, both to be put in place in 2027. Others, including prohibitions on universal vote-by-mail and ranked choice voting — two voting methods that have proved popular in some states — would happen immediately. The Republican president continues to insist that the 2020 election he lost to Democrat Joe Biden was rigged.
"Americans should be confident their elections are being run with integrity — including commonsense voter ID requirements, clean voter rolls, and citizenship verification," said Rep. Bryan Steil, chairman of the House Administration Committee, in a statement.
Every word is bull!
I repeat: There is no evidence of widespread or outcome-changing voter fraud in U.S. federal elections.
The Department of Justice (under Republican and Democratic administrations)
State election officials from both parties
Courts, including judges appointed by Republicans
Independent election audits and recounts
But facts don't count with the Republicans!
The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law wrote about how the changes will effect low income and minorities back in 2011 and 2019.
The Brennan Center submits written testimony for the Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights hearing: “New State Voting Laws: Barriers to the Ballot?”
The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law thanks the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights for providing the opportunity to present testimony at this important hearing, and in particular, discuss the consequences of strict voter identification requirements.
[...]
II. Photo ID Requirements for Voters Negatively Impact Voting
The best available empirical evidence shows that significant percentages of voting-age American citizens do not possess valid, government-issued photo identification.
Regardless of whether new photo ID laws are constitutional, they are certainly bad policy. Statutes obliging American citizens to obtain and produce government-issued photo ID before being permitted to vote threaten to disenfranchise millions of Americans. The seminal study on this issue, Citizens Without Proof—a report based upon a nationwide survey by the National Opinion Research Corporation sponsored by the Brennan Center in late 2006—found that 11% of voting-age American citizens do not have current, government-issued photo IDs.[11] That represents more than 21 million individuals. Any policy that would operate to completely bar or limit access to a population of this size from the polls must be viewed with scrutiny and compels demand for a well‑supported rationale for its implementation.
The goal of the Republicans is to disenfranchise likely Democrat voters!
In another Brennan Center for Justice article they write how it affects minorities,
There is a large and growing pile of evidence that strict voter ID laws disproportionately impact voters of color.
Using county-level turnout data around the country, researchers demonstrated that the racial turnout gap grew when states enacted strict voter ID laws.
Researchers have also looked specifically at the turnout of individuals in North Carolina without proper identification, and they found that the enactment of the law reduced turnout. The turnout effects continued even after the strict voter ID law was repealed.
Another study shows that voters in Texas who would be barred from voting absent the state’s “Reasonable Impediments Declaration” (a court-ordered remedy allowing voters without proper IDs to participate) are disproportionately Black and Latino. The study argues that its “findings indicate that strict identification laws will stop a disproportionately minority, otherwise willing set of registered voters from voting.”
An article using a similar methodology and administrative records found that voters of color in Michigan were more likely to show up to the polls without proper identification.
Yet another study used survey data to demonstrate that voters of color in states across the country lacked access to the needed IDs to vote in their state.
While some studies have argued that voter IDs have little effect on overall turnout, it is clear that voters of color are less likely to have the IDs needed to participate.
Restrictions on Sunday voting — such as those proposed last year in Georgia and Texas — would fall disproportionately on voters of color.
Our research showed that voters of color were substantially more likely to vote on Sundays in Georgia than white voters.
Another study argues that these Sunday voters do not seamlessly transition to other days after cuts are made. For example, when Sunday voting was outlawed in Florida in 2012, Black voters who voted on Sunday in 2008 were especially likely to abstain from voting.
These restrictive bills are not neutral policies; they are likely to disenfranchise groups that traditionally vote Democratic, including minorities and low-income citizens. In contrast, Democratic bills aim to expand access and reduce these barriers.
These bills are designed for one thing, and only one thing... to get Republicans elected!
It is split right along party line... giving the feds all of our voter information, Social Security number, address and all the other personal data in the voter files! It is a witch hunt!
The feds in their hunt for non-existent wide spread voter fraud is conducting a witch hunt where they want to root out fraud by digging through all the voters data. You are guilty unless proven otherwise. In Connecticut they have sued to block the request.
Connecticut’s elected officials split along party lines in their response to the announcement yesterday that the Justice Department has filed a federal lawsuit against Connecticut after the state did not turn over its full voter registration list.
The department has filed suit against 23 states and the District of Columbia for not supplying the information.
“Any state that fails to meet this basic obligation of transparency can expect to see us in court,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi wrote.
State Republicans welcomed the action.
“Good,” wrote Sen. Ron Sampson of Wolcott and Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding of Brookfield.
A little side note: Every trans bill before the state legislature Sen. Sampson voted against, he also introduced a bill to ban insurance from paying for our healthcare.
The two cited an ongoing state investigation into alleged ballot fraud in Bridgeport as justification for the federal demands.
Yup, two out of millions! It is a regular crime wave of voter fraud! That is how the Republicans work they take an incident and blow it way out of proportion!
Senate President Martin Looney, D-New Haven, and Majority Leader Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, countered that there was no legal basis for the information demand and the administration appeared to be compiling a national citizen database.
“Once again, the Trump administration is using threats and coercion to try to collect Connecticut voters’ private data that it has no legal basis for requesting, and which we can only surmise has no beneficial motive for using,” they wrote. “Connecticut will fight for our citizens’ right to privacy, and we will not surrender to the countless election deniers and conspiracy theorists who inhabit the Trump administration.”
I'll tell what the feds will finds, people who have moved and forgot to cancel their voter registration, so now the feds want to start criminal investigation in to them!
And I want to point out, that it is state rights to oversee the state's elections not the federal government! The Attorney General Pamela Bondi no legal authority over the states!
Republicans are seeking to overturn new congressional district lines that could result in five additional Democratic seats after voters approved the map last week.
NBC News
Nov. 13, 2025
By Adam Edelman
The Justice Department on Thursday joined a Republican-led lawsuit that seeks to block a new Democratic-drawn congressional map in California that voters approved last week.
The redrawn district lines could allow Democrats to pick up an additional five House seats in next year’s midterm elections. The Trump administration’s involvement in the case escalates the battle and adds another political layer to the ongoing redistricting efforts that are playing out across the country.
In a complaint filed in federal court Thursday, the Justice Department effectively joined a suit filed last week by the California Republican Party that challenges California’s new map.
In their complaints, the DOJ and the California GOP allege that the new maps approved by voters amount to a “racial gerrymander” that they say violates the U.S. Constitution. The suit claims that California Democrats considered race when proposing the redrawn map in ways that advantage Hispanic voters.
Okay... what about Texas? Or because it is a Republican state they can do what they want?
Voters’ approval of a ballot measure — known as the “Election Rigging Response Act,” or Proposition 50 — earlier this month allows California Democrats to circumvent an independent commission that controls the redistricting process in the state and implement a more partisan map.
Did you get that? Voter approved it! Not the legislature... the voters!
PBS News writes that there is big money behind the redistricting, from the billionaires!
The national implications of California’s ballot measure were clear in both the money it attracted and the high-profile figures who became involved. Tens of millions of dollars flowed into the race, including a $5 million donation to opponents from the Congressional Leadership Fund, the super political action committee tied to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.
Now get this... The Washington Post reported that no other states that redistricted are being sued! They are all Republican states!
Three Republican-led states — Texas, along with Missouri and North Carolina — have not faced federal legal action after revamping district lines following Trump’s call for new maps to expand GOP numbers in the House. Civil rights advocates have argued that the new boundaries in Texas and Missouri illegally disadvantage minority communities at the ballot box.
Everything Trump touches it turn s to trash including the Department of Justice.
These was a good segment on PBS News Hour about gerrymandering on Monday night.
How GOP-led redistricting efforts may disenfranchise Black voters
By Geoff Bennett & Jonah Anderson
Republicans in North Carolina moved forward with a plan to redraw the state’s congressional map and eliminate its only swing district. It's part of a GOP push to maintain control of Congress through maps that have the effect of diluting Black political power and diminishing the voting strength of communities of color. Geoff Bennett discussed more with Janai Nelson of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.
Geoff Bennett:
Republican lawmakers in North Carolina moved forward with a proposal today to redraw their state's congressional map in a way that would eliminate its only swing district.
The mid-decade redistricting is part of a nationwide push by President Trump and his Republican allies to help the GOP maintain control of Congress in next year's elections, often through maps that have the effect of diluting Black political power and diminishing the voting strength of communities of color.
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court appeared willing to issue a ruling that could further that effort during arguments in a Louisiana redistricting case.
NAACP Legal Defense Fund president Janai Nelson argued the case before the court in defense of Louisiana voters, and she joins us now.
Thanks for being with us.
Janai Nelson, President and Director-Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense Fund: Thank you. Happy to be here.
[...]
Geoff Bennett:
And, as we mentioned, North Carolina Republicans are moving forward with this plan to effectively oust one of the state's three Black members of Congress by carving up an area of Eastern North Carolina in this congressional map, and this district happens to have a large Black population.
So how does that square with what constitutes racial dilution under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act?
Janai Nelson:
Well, it's pretty squarely a violation of the act, as far as I can tell. It is using Black voters as a means for gaining political power or partisan control.
And while the Supreme Court did say in another case, Rucho v. Common Cause, that it will not entertain any partisan gerrymandering claims, racial gerrymandering is still unlawful and it's still justiciable by the court, meaning that those claims are still viable before the court.
And I can't imagine how this map in North Carolina can achieve its partisan goals lawfully in the way that they're trying to do it now without violating the rights of Black voters. And that's why we really need section 2, because Section 2 protects voters from being exploited by politicians or people who simply want to perpetuate discrimination.
Let's face it, the Republicans are sweettalking the judges... no we are not doing this because of diluting the Black vote but we are doing it because of political reasons! It just happens that the Democratic voters are Black.
It all boils down to will the justices believe the song and dance.
What party started the gerrymandering wars? The Republicans with a plea from Trump!
What party is sitting on seating a duly elected Congresswoman from Arizona? The Republicans, Johnson is holding up the seating Adelita Grijalva, a Democrat from Arizona because she will break the tie vote to release the Epstein papers!
What party is trying to strip the Voting Rights Act of 1965?
The case centers on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the key provision of the law that broadly prohibits discrimination in voting practices on the basis of race or creed.
Politico
By Zach Montellaro and Andrew Howard
10/15/2025
The Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear arguments in a case that could gut the Voting Rights Act by barring states from considering the racial makeup of voting populations when drawing district lines — an outcome that stands to change the course of next year’s midterm elections.
In adopting that approach, the justices could upend decades of court decisions holding that states may — and sometimes must — use race-conscious redistricting to protect the voting power of minorities.
Some conservatives argue that any consideration of race in drawing district lines is cynical, discriminatory and unconstitutional. Advocates for minority voters warn a “colorblind” interpretation of the Voting Rights Act would erode Black, brown and Asian representation in American politics and kick off another round of redistricting amid an already chaotic cycle of mid-decade redraws ahead of 2026.
Did you get that argument? Banning discriminations is itself discriminatory! Talk about circular reasoning!
Some conservatives argue that any consideration of race in drawing district lines is cynical, discriminatory and unconstitutional. Advocates for minority voters warn a “colorblind” interpretation of the Voting Rights Act would erode Black, brown and Asian representation in American politics and kick off another round of redistricting amid an already chaotic cycle of mid-decade redraws ahead of 2026.
So in other words it will make gerrymandering districts to break up black communities legal!
If the justices decide that lawmakers cannot consider race in drafting maps, redistricting could result in congressional seats flipping from blue to red throughout the country.
The New York Times
By Abbie VanSickle
Oct. 15, 2025
The Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear arguments in a challenge to Louisiana’s congressional map, a legal battle over whether states can use race as a factor in drawing electoral lines.
The dispute centers on whether Louisiana lawmakers ran afoul of the Constitution when they adopted a new electoral map in 2024, creating the state’s second majority-Black district.
But the case could have much broader implications for the law and for politics, potentially gutting the remaining pillar of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which the Supreme Court’s conservative majority has sharply curtailed in recent years. If the justices decide that lawmakers cannot consider race in drafting maps, redistricting could result in congressional seats flipping from blue to red throughout the country.
You see the racist Republicans are worried, they are becoming the minority so they want to break up the "Black vote." Thety have been chipping away at the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Back from day one the Republicans have fought it!
1965: South Carolina v. Katzenbach (Unconstitutional intrusions on states' rights)
2013: Shelby County v. Holder (Formula that determined which jurisdictions needed preclearance)
2021: Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee (Set limits plaintiffs challenging state or local rules under Section 2)
2023: Allen v. Milligan (The question was whether the state illegally diluted Black voting strength by having only one majority‐Black district even though Black voters could form a second fairly compact majority‐Black district.)
And now we have...
The legal battle can be traced back to the 2020 census, which showed an increase in Louisiana’s population of Black adults. While Black Louisianans made up about a third of the state’s population, there was only one majority-Black congressional district out of six districts.
Bring back, bring back, bring back my Jim Crow laws to me! (Yeah, yeah, I know. But what do you want at 6AM when I'm writing this!)
There is no doubt the Republican party is a party of racists! The Republican party is a party of fascists! The Republican party is a party for the party and not the people!
Do you know what RICO is? Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, it is a law that was designed to go after mob bosses.
Lets face it, the goal of the Republican party is to have a one party country like Russia, China, North Korea. By gerrymandering districts, by putting unreasonable limits on voting; voter IDs, banning mail-in and absentee voting, and limiting voting hours and early voting.
As President Donald Trump threatens legal action against his adversaries, particularly after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, he’s repeatedly talked about using one federal law: the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO.
Trump wants to bring racketeering charges against left-wing groups he’s accused of promoting violence. Some influential Republicans agree with him and have been pushing to include rioting as one of the crimes that falls under the racketeering statute, a decades-old law once aimed at cracking down on organized crime.
[...]
Trump this week said he was discussing with Attorney General Pam Bondi using RICO to bring racketeering charges against left-wing groups. Last month, the president also called for a RICO investigation of a specific person: liberal billionaire George Soros, one of the nation’s biggest funders of Democratic causes and candidates.
I know that this is now an overused word but it fits... Weaponizing the DoJ!
Ask yourself this question... Trump knows that there isn't a case, so why is he pursuing it? Everything Trump does is for his gain... not the party's gain, not the country's gain but only for Trump's political or financial gains.
Democratic strategist Jamal Simmons said Monday that he was “absolutely” worried that President Trump will “unleash the Justice Department on the Democratic Party.”
“The question then becomes the president’s deputy chief of staff came out today, and called the Democratic Party an ‘extremist organization,’ after the president said that he was going to take action against extremist organizations,” Simmons told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on “The Source,” in a clip highlighted by Mediaite.
“So, the question arises in my mind, is the president of the United States going to outlaw the Democratic Party? Is that where we’re headed? Is the president of the United States going to unleash the Justice Department on the Democratic Party?” he added.
Is this where we are heading as a country? A Fascist one party regime? Reading the comments on Yahoo about this article it the conservative love the idea and think that it is the greatest thing since chopped liver.
“Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment. It’s a crime. For far too long, we’ve watched the radical left normalize threats, call for assassinations, and cheer on political violence. That era is over,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a post on the social platform X Tuesday.
I don't know about you but I have seen one post from the left calling for violence. In tomorrow's 11AM blog I about how Trump & company pulled a report that contradicts his rhetoric.
In a quest to bolster a long-running claim from President Trump concerning undocumented immigrants illegally voting, the Justice Department is seeking detailed voter roll data from over 30 states.
The New York Times
By Devlin Barrett and Nick Corasaniti
September 9, 2025
The Justice Department is compiling the largest set of national voter roll data it has ever collected, buttressing an effort by President Trump and his supporters to try to prove long-running, unsubstantiated claims that droves of undocumented immigrants have voted illegally, according to people familiar with the matter.
The effort to essentially establish a national voting database, involving more than 30 states, has elicited serious concerns among voting rights experts because it is led by allies of the president, who as recently as this January refused to acknowledge Joseph R. Biden Jr. fairly won the 2020 election. It has also raised worries that those same officials could use the data to revive lies of a stolen election, or try to discredit future election results.
The initiative has proceeded along two tracks, one at the Justice Department’s civil rights division and another at its criminal division, seeking data about individual voters across the country, including names and addresses, in a move that experts say may violate the law. It is a significant break from decades of practice by Republican and Democratic administrations, which believed that doing so was federal overreach and ripe for abuse.
I wrote about this Wednesday but today I am looking at the harm this can cause.
Nearly every state has resisted turning over voter files with private, personally identifiable information on voters like driver’s license numbers or Social Security numbers. Last week, a local judge blocked South Carolina from releasing private voter information to the Justice Department.
This is sometime that the KGB, or the old East German Stasi did!
The Republican states are doing high-fives, the Democratic states are all going no-way this smacks too much as Big Brother!
Justin R. Erickson, the general counsel for Minnesota’s secretary of state, raised fears that the data would be used to further the administration’s own priorities. In a letter last month to the Justice Department, he wrote, “Equally concerning is the possibility that the D.O.J. will use the data inappropriately and the fact that the D.O.J. does not appear to have complied with the necessary legal requirements to obtain or use data on several million people.”
This is all to this is all the perpetuate the Republican "Big Lie" about election fraud... meanwhile they create this massive database on the citizens...
The Trump administration is pressing state officials to provide sensitive information about voters.
Brennan Institute
By Kaylie Martinez-Ochoa, Eileen O'Connor, & Patrick Berry
August 28, 2025
Since May, the Justice Department has sent letters or emails to at least 26 states requesting details about voters, election officials, and election administration processes, with 22 states receiving specific requests for statewide voter registration lists. These inquiries from the DOJ’s Civil Rights and Criminal Divisions range from requests to access voter registration lists to questions about states’ list-maintenance procedures, which are steps states take to ensure that voters who become ineligible, such as those who move to another state, are removed from the rolls.
While these kinds of mass requests to states are uncommon, they are not unprecedented. For example, during the first Trump administration, the Civil Rights Division sent letters to all 44 states covered by the National Voter Registration Act asking for information about compliance with a section of that law.
This time, however, the Civil Rights Division is asking for troves of confidential voter information by demanding full copies of states’ computerized voter registration lists, including drivers’ license numbers and partial social security numbers. As we detail in a separate analysis, the collection of this sensitive information by the federal government leads to serious privacy and security concerns and may violate state and federal laws.
First, the federal government does not play any role in maintaining voter rolls. States and local governments run our elections, and as part of this responsibility, state and local election officials maintain voter files, which includes adding newly registered voters and removing voters who become ineligible (for example, because they move). The DOJ’s demands for the voter files are one element of the attempted federal takeover of federal elections. If its requests succeed, the department could amass a federal database of personal information about every registered voter in the country. The Trump administration may use such a database to further promote false claims about election fraud, target political opponents, or attempt to force states to remove voters from the rolls based on incomplete information. This vast collection of personal information could also easily be disclosed or misused by unauthorized individuals and become a prime target for hackers.
Second, the DOJ’s demands are not justified as an attempt to enforce federal voting laws. Instead, President Trump’s March 2025 executive order on elections — which is currently facing a number of legal challenges — directs the federal government to collect voter files from all the states. Under the Civil Rights Act of 1960, which the DOJ’s August letters cite as the basis for its demand for the voter files, the department is permitted to request records “relating to any application, registration, payment of poll tax, or other act requisite to voting in such election.” However, the law requires that the DOJ provide a “basis and purpose” for the request. Many of its letters to states do not appear to satisfy this requirement.
There are no laws, no Congressional funding, no budget has been approved, nor any legal authority...
Further, many states have laws that would prohibit them from disclosing some of this sensitive voter information, which a few states have noted when responding to federal officials. The DOJ would need to obtain a federal court order to force states to violate their own privacy laws, and it has failed to do so.
The executive branch has no authority to run our elections, nor any authority to compile a massive database of voters’ personal information. The DOJ’s efforts threaten individuals’ privacy and constitute yet another way in which the federal government is seeking to interfere with states’ constitutionally mandated power to conduct elections
We are well on road to a fascist, authoritarianism government under Herr Trump.
That is what it looks like. You sign a petition and the next thing you know you got policed on your front door where all your neighbors can see the police cars. To me that sounds a lot like the governor is trying to prevent people from signing a petition for a ballot question.
Isaac Menasche remembers being at the Cape Coral farmer’s market last year when someone asked him if he’d sign a petition to get Florida’s abortion amendment on the ballot.
He said yes — and he told a law enforcement officer as much when one showed up at the door of his Lee County home earlier this week.
Menasche said he was surprised when the plainclothes officer twice asked if it was really Menasche who had signed the petition. The officer said he was looking into potential petition fraud.
Though the officer was professional and courteous, Menasche, who has had little interaction with police in his life, said the encounter left him shaken.
“I’m not a person who is going out there protesting for abortion,” Menasche said. “I just felt strongly and I took the opportunity when the person asked me, to say yeah, I’ll sign that petition.”
Voter intimidation! Pure and simple!
The officer’s visit appears to be part of a broad — and unusual — effort by Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration to inspect thousands of already verified and validated petitions for Amendment 4 in the final two months before Election Day. The amendment would overturn Florida’s six-week abortion ban by proposing to protect abortion access in Florida until viability.
And that would be a slap in the face to DeSantis. How dare they vote against him!
Castellanos said she felt intimidated by having a law enforcement officer come to her door. And she said she was “surprised but not surprised” when she learned it was about Amendment 4. She said she thinks if Florida could do away with abortion entirely, it would.
Last year, DeSantis, a Republican, signed into a law a ban on abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. In response, pro-choice campaigners gathered and submitted nearly one million signatures to place on the ballot Amendment 4, a referendum that would overturn the ban and restore reproductive rights in the state.
Now Florida's Department of State is claiming it suspects fraud in the signature-gathering process. In an email to county election officials, the department's Brad McVay requested that they hand over their already-verified petitions so that the signatures can be reexamined, claiming without evidence that those who circulated the petitions "represent known or suspected fraudsters," Tampa Bay television station WTVT reported.
All the signatures have been verified already by the state’s Secretary of State as being valid! This is all about the Republican “Big Lie” about voter fraud. It is like Joseph Goebbels, Nazi propaganda minister said that if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth and that is what the Republicans are doing with election fraud. There hasn’t been found any election fraud but the Republicans use the lie to pass draconian election laws.
Florida Democrats are calling for investigations into two state agencies, alleging they are attempting to interfere with a ballot measure aimed at expanding abortion access that is set to appear on the November ballot.
Posted on the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration’s website, you’ll now find this lengthy information page, warning voters, “Amendment 4 threatens women’s safety.”
The page claims the amendment that seeks to expand abortion access in the state would lead to unregulated and unsafe abortions, and that it fails to define terms like “patient health,” “health care provider,” and “viability.”
Monday, the agency went a step further, posting this video on social media, defending Florida’s current abortion laws.
“We’re going to be looking at every legal and legislative means possible to make sure the people of this state have an opportunity to vote for Amendment 4 without intimidation and government intrusion,” Nikki Fried, Chair of the Florida Democratic Party, said.
Wait A Minute! Is that legal for a state agency to make a lie that that?
“This should really shock everybody. That we are using government money, our taxpayer dollars, is not only illegal, but again this goes way above anything that we have even seen under a DeSantis administration,” Fried said.
Couple that with getting a knock on the door by the police and it all boils down to voter intimidation. Florida Politics reports,
Undermining the will of voters and stomping over their democratic freedoms.'
Is Gov. Ron DeSantis going too far in trying to defeat an amendment to restore abortion access?
That’s what one group says.
“Gov. DeSantis is using his election police to intimidate voters who dare to have beliefs that differ from his. This opens the door towards making voters and all Floridians feel unsafe for voicing their constitutionally protected opinions on important issues like abortion,” says All Voting is Local Action’s Florida State Director Brad Ashwell.
“It’s been clear from day one that the purpose of the election police was to harass voters who don’t have the same viewpoints as the governor. By going after a petition for Amendment 4, which is already on the ballot, Gov. DeSantis is undermining the will of voters and stomping over their democratic freedoms for his own political gain,” Ashwell adds.
That’s the Republican way… gerrymandering, closing of polling places in liberal enclave, stricter voter ID laws that make it hard for minorities to get their required IDs, making it hard to get mail-in ballot, and removing ballot drop boxes in minority districts. And now this!
Vote Blue for liberty! Vote Blue to stop the attacks on voter rights!
Did you watch the debate last night? So what did you think about the debate?
Aliens eating Cats
I watched about half of it and I couldn't stand Trump lies after lies... so I turned it off just after the "childless cat lady's cats were eaten by some really, really, bad Haitian undocumented immigrants.
Former president dealt further blow after combative ABC News encounter as Taylor Swift formally announces she is endorsing his rival Kamala Harris
The Independent
By Joe Sommerlad, Gustaf Kilander, and Mike Bedigan
September 11, 2024
Donald Trump appeared to fall apart in his first head-to-head debate with Kamala Harris in Philadelphia on Tuesday evening, providing rambling answers on illegal immigration, abortion and the economy and taking the bait whenever he was goaded by his opponent.
The candidates shared an unexpected handshake as they took to the stage, with Harris introducing herself and catching the Republican off guard.
When the debate got underway, Trump went off on wild, yet familiar tangents about his rally crowd sizes, the whereabouts of Joe Biden and recently debunked claims accusing Haitian immigrants of stealing and eating domestic pets in Springfield, Ohio.
Harris, meanwhile, used her time to cycle through Trump’s legacy of racist attacks, professional falings and his culpability for the Capitol riot.
Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump met on Tuesday for their first and perhaps only debate, a square-off that could have a significant impact on the Nov. 5 election as polls show a tight race.
Here are takeaways from the debate:
RILING HER RIVAL
Harris made a point to get under Trump's skin, as her campaign had forecast - and it worked.
She urged viewers to attend a Trump rally, where she said Trump would say bizarre things such as windmills cause cancer (something he has, in fact, said) and where, she taunted, attendees would leave out of exhaustion and boredom (something they have, in fact, done.)
Trump, who prides himself on the crowds he draws, was clearly riled.
"My rallies, we have the biggest rallies, the most incredible rallies in the history of politics," he said. He accused Harris of busing in attendees to her rallies.
Trump then falsely claimed that immigrants in the country illegally were killing and eating people's pets in the city of Springfield, Ohio, an unsubstantiated assertion that has circulated on social media and been amplified by Trump's vice presidential running mate JD Vance.
WEAPONIZED' JUSTICE
Trump and Harris accused each other of conspiring to "weaponize" the Justice Department in a bid to go after their enemies.
Trump said the indictments he faces for conspiring to overturn his 2020 election loss and for his mishandling of classified documents - as well as his conviction for forging documents related to hush money payments to a porn star - are all the result of a conspiracy cooked up by Harris and Biden. There is no evidence for that assertion.
Harris shot back by pointing out that Trump has promised to prosecute his enemies if he wins a second term.
"Understand this is someone who has openly said he would terminate, I'm quoting, terminate the Constitution," Harris said.
Kamala Harris and Donald Trump discuss they would break through the stalemate and reach a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas.
Jerusalem Post
By HANNAH SARISOHN
SEPTEMBER 11, 2024
Almost an hour into the presidential debate on Tuesday night, debate moderators David Muir and Lindsey Davis asked Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump how they would break through the stalemate and reach a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas.
Harris answered first, saying, "let's understand how we got here. On October 7, Hamas, a terrorist organization, slaughtered 1200 Israelis, many of them young people, who were simply attending a concert. Women were horribly raped."
"And so absolutely I said then, I say now, Israel has a right to defend itself. We would," she said. "How it does so matters, because it is also true, far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed; children, mothers. What we know is that this war must end. It must end immediately."
[…]
When it was Trump's turn to answer the question on Israel, he began by talking about Russia, saying President Putin would've never gone into Ukraine if he were president.
Trump then repeated a claim he said last week when addressing the Republican Jewish Coalition, that Israel would not exist under Harris.
"But when she mentions Israel, all of a sudden, she hates Israel. She wouldn't even meet with Netanyahu when he went to Congress to make a very important speech. She refused to be there because she was at a sorority party of hers. She went to go to the sorority party," Trump said. "She hates Israel. If she's president, I believe that Israel will not exist within two years from now, and I've been pretty good at predictions."
While Harris's microphone was off, she could be seen mouthing, "oh, come on," as Trump said this.
Now I have to add this “Oh, come on,” for those who don’t remember when Trump wanted to pull out of NATO.
The Democratic and Republican candidates traded plenty of accusations. Do they hold up to factual scrutiny?
Aljazeer
September 11, 2024
Democratic nominee Kamala Harris and her Republican rival Donald Trump met face to face for the first time in Tuesday’s presidential debate in Philadelphia.
During the debate, they exchanged various accusations; here, we fact-check the candidates’ claims.
Harris ‘wouldn’t even meet’ Netanyahu
Trump: Harris “wouldn’t even meet with” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “when he went to Congress to make a very important speech. She refused to be there because she was at a sorority party of hers.”
Half true.
This needs context. Harris did skip Netanyahu’s speech to a joint session of the US Congress on July 24. She was busy making a previously scheduled keynote speech to the Zeta Phi Beta sorority.
However, Harris met Netanyahu face-to-face the following day. After that meeting, she doubled down on support for Israel, committing to its defence, but also referred to the growing death toll of the war in Gaza, in which more than 41,000 people have been killed, and said she would not stay silent.
[…]
Trump misleads about military equipment in Afghanistan
Trump: The US “left $85bn worth of brand new, beautiful military equipment behind” in Afghanistan.
False.
The figure is far lower than Trump stated. When the Taliban toppled Afghanistan’s civilian government in 2021, it inherited military hardware the US gave to the government.
However, an independent inspector general report told Congress that only about $7bn of US-funded equipment remained in the Taliban’s hands. According to the report, “The US military removed or destroyed nearly all major equipment used by US troops in Afghanistan throughout the drawdown period in 2021.”
[…]
Additional ‘Trump sales tax’ of $4,000
Harris: “Economists have said that the Trump sales tax would actually result for middle-class families in about $4,000 more a year because of his policies and his ideas about what should be the backs of middle-class people paying for tax cuts for billionaires.”
Half true.
Trump has repeatedly proposed wide-ranging tariffs on foreign goods, including an across-the-board tariff of 10 percent to 20 percent and a 60 percent levy on goods from China. Although tariffs are imposed separately from the tax system, consumers would feel their effect much the same way as taxes.
However, the specific dollar impact on consumers varies. Two estimates we found generally support Harris’s $4,000 figure; two show a smaller, though still significant, impact.
US Vice President Kamala Harris and former president Donald Trump have faced off in a high-stakes televised debate in Philadelphia.
Over the course of 90 minutes, the candidates sparred over key issues including immigration, foreign policy, and the US economy.
Harris said: "I am actually the only person on this stage who has a plan that is about lifting up the middle class and working people of America... His plan is to do what he has done before, which is to provide a tax cut for billionaires and big corporations which will result in five trillion dollars to America's deficit."
Trump said: "Look, we've had a terrible economy because inflation has, which is really known as a country buster, breaks up countries. We have inflation like very few people have ever seen before... I created one of the greatest economies in the history of our country. I'll do it again, and even better."
Update: 9/12 @ 8AMIn the poll everyone but one agreed that VP Harris won the debate, one person thought it was a draw. A draw? What debate did you watch.
