Trump wants to use the post office to control who votes by mail.: another sneak attack on the Constituion

 Trump wants to use the post office to control who votes by mail. It is: another sneak attack on the Constitution. One of Trump's plans to control federal elections in order to turn a loser into a winner for him is to target mail-in voting, a blatant sneak attack on the Constitution that puts control of elections in the hands of states instead of the federal government... The pretext for this extreme power grab is based on the totally unproven lie that there is " widespread fraud" in mail-in voting or that illegal migrants are voting.  MAGA has swallowed that BS hook, line, and sinker. without questioning. It works for them. 

There are reasons why this attack on mail-in voting has failed so far. It is an extremely popular voting method among both Democrats and Republicans. Not only is the pretext a lie with no proof, but it's also a sneak attack on another unconstitutional attempt to use his executive orders to gain federal access and control over voter rolls and who votes.  

Trump has already tried to get states to turn over the personal details of those on their lists. like driver's licenses and social security numbers. It is pretty obvious why this is important to Trump's turning a predicted election against him into a victory for him by such underhanded methods. Twenty states have refused. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/trump-administration-has-sued-more-20-states-refusing-turn-over-voter.  He has tried to force them to do so by depriving them of the federal funds they need, among other pressure tactics.

One reason Trump fears mail-in voters is to force in-person voting so he can intimidate with armed ICE at a swing polling place. If those who fear they will be harassed, they can vote by mail. They can also avoid in-person mailing by dropping ballots off in designated places, and that one does not even require stamps. Another reason is that it gives Trump access to more personal data than state lists contain, so he can target those who support him or oppose him with individualized suppression/support methods, from TV ads to targeted scare-tactic mail to attempts to kick off and challenge those with certain last names, especially Hispanic, off the lists that are unjustified.  Like Trump's unevidenced lawsuits (no proof, just theories), the attempt alone creates a burden on voters to fight it, even if he loses in court. 

He also tried to get the SAVE Act passed. It is better known as "show me your citizenship papers to get registered," and unrealistically limits what kinds of papers would be accepted. That act also included a clause prohibiting universal mail voting, requiring all mail voters to submit an application to receive a mail ballot. The SAVE Act was defeated in the Senate because it suppressed both Republican and Democratic votes. 

Here is why universal mail ballot systems are so secure and why Trump would love to get it under his thumb.

This anti-universal mail-ballot clause is essentially what the abuse of the post office would accomplish under Trump's executive order. Eight states, including Colorado and the  District of Columbia, have this universal system. For the horrified: everyone gets a ballot mailed to them; a potential cheater, FYI. Just getting a ballot sent to you because you appear on a state registration list does not mean it is counted in the vote totals, whether the ballot is returned by mail, dropped off at a secure official box, or at a polling station. That is, because county and state election officials only count ballots in totals from registered voters on their rolls when they scrutinize mail-in ballots they receive. They compare handwriting signatures on the ballots and other data with state data and a voter's signature on record at the state, gotten when the voter registered.  Modern computerization makes this possible.  No wonder Trump would like to get his hands on those state rolls. He could throw the entire election process into chaos and lo delay well after election day.   While this attempt to pass SAVE failed in Congress, he is trying to back door it with an executive order to have the post office only to accept a voter on  a FEDERAL voting roll to which he does not now have full access, nor is there a complete one with all data from all the states exist. 

So, let's try it another way: he proposes, by executive order, that the post office accept ballots only from those on federal voting lists, not only on state voting lists, but FEDERAl ones. Let's see how far that gets by judicial scrutiny.  My guess is he is not fooling the justices either: it is just another unconstitutional method he can use to subvert the outcome of elections he fears will not go his way.

ttps://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/postal-service-trump-attack-mail-voting-proposed-rule/

Here is where Colorado fits into Trump's unconstitutional subversion scheme:

Why both political parties attract ideological extremists? . It is the system . but it is not set up by the Constitution

Ever ask yourself why both political parties attract ideological extremists? It is the way the US system works. It is not set up by the Constitution but has developed over time and is set in sand by state and federal statutes and Supreme Court decisions. It does depend on the protections afforded by the First Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. It is unlike the parliamentary politics of Europe, where ideology is the identifying brand of political parties, and coalitions form the majority, and voters have a branded ideological menu to choose from. In the US, extremists in our representative two-party gerrymandered system have to coalesce at the primary stage and support the party with which they feel at home, or otherwise, they have no input into the system.

Neo nazis and white supremacists have found a home in MAGA. Socialists like Bernie Sanders caucus with Democrats even tho they are not the majority of the Dems. The quandary is where do libertarians and pragmatists, and those who care more about cultural, racial, religious identity, business advantages, or family affordability go who are not ideologically self-identifying or party or political leader loyal? Midterm and presidential elections are where the sorting eventually and finally takes place in one of our two parties

What is an ideological extremist, anyway? It depends on definitions and on where you sit on the political spectrum.

What is my definition of ideological extremism? Generally speaking, it is a view outside the mainstream with certain characteristics. Depending on how you search for the definition, it can mean many different things. I searched for extremism as just a common word in common usage. It can also mean someone who is way past radical. It can also depend on the eye of the beholder. Politically, some on the right like to claim that anything to the left of them is a communist, socialist, etc.(That is one I have seen posted even on a Facebook site that is supposed to not be about politics, and which prompted me to do this post.) Those on the left may claim that MAGA is a bunch of racist fascists, which may apply to some of their supporters, and a majority, I suspect, but not all.

There is one AI view that comes closest to mine, reproduced below.: By this definition, whether Democratic Socialists (those achieving a single-minded political goal using the democratic processes) are extremely probably not fully like those who want to overturn the system to get their way. Those on the right, like the memes I am seeing from MAGA, think Democratic Socialists like Sanders and Maldonado-Torres probably are extremists to them. They even have the word socialists in their party affilitation name though they also run as Democrats to get throiugh the primary system.. Democratic socialists' support of the working class permeates their rationales for public policy advocacy.. However, they advocate and work within the Democratic system as it has existed for the past 250 years in order to try to get their viewpoints heard and taken seriously. and many registered Democrats accept some part of their ideology, as witnessed by the success of Bernie Sanders and Mayor Zoran Mamdani,, who ran for office successfully under the Democratic Socialist banner. They and even some center-right independents caucus with Democrats in legislatures.

.

From a left-of-center viewpoint, advocates for a "unitary' form of government, putting legislative and judicial power in the hands of one powerful executive, or advancing White Christian nationalism, while attempting to rid the country of those of a particular race, like Hispanics, are extremist and fit this definition. They virtually turn a democracy into an autocracy using de facto means. Also fitting this definition, those who constructed Project 2025 and now run much of Trump's day-to-day operation are ideological extremists in my view. (Their technique was to turn as many Congresspeople, and administrative positions, and replace justices with loyalists to Trump himself, who would turn over their power to them voluntarily, which is what has happened.

There is another kind of extremism that has to do with the methods used to advance an extremist cause. The advocates of violent overthrow, such as J6, adjudicated crimes of violence against police officers, definitely are, both by ideology and methods, extremists, fully welcomed into the GOP MAGA by Trump. So are neo Nazi's, and even Trump called them some fine people, as he invited them into the MAGA tent after Charlottesville, 2017, though at times he has condemned them, too. Neo Nazi praised Trump and even saluted him in rallies before then..

Unlike the communist dictatorships like Russia of the past, in America, membership in a political party is a matter of both voter registration and acceptance of support from party leaders, or self-identification. It does not depend on a card signifying that the bearer has passed a litmus test. It is both self-identifying, like wearing a MAGA cap, or being supported by actions and words of allegiance to whatever the leader says it is, or being branded by adversaries, fairly or unfairly.

From my search in AI for the term" ideological extremism' that comes closest to my view, with some annotations and examples of how MAGA and Trump fit into that brand..as well as meet the definition of methods extremism.

1. Ideological Extremism.

• Rejection of Democratic Norms: Holding beliefs that seek to undermine, overturn, or replace established liberal democratic systems, human rights, and freedoms.( Example: Project 2025 and the critically powerful positions of Stephen Miller, who is credited with the ICE overreach and mass deportation methods, and Russell Vought in the Trump administration, who authored the project))
• Intolerance: Advocating for rigid ideologies rooted in violence, hatred, or the negation of the fundamental rights of those who disagree. ( Example: cruel treatment and false imprisonment of a Hispanic undocumented immigrant with no criminal record, and without access to due process, and ICE killing American citizen protestors.)
• Radicalization: The escalation of a belief system that characterizes an "in-group" (e.g., a race, religion, or political faction) as superior, requiring the suppression or elimination of an "out-group. . (Example: The SAVE Act, defeated in the Senate, or Southern white state legislators gerrymandering African Americans out of the Congressional seats). Using paramilitary and cruel treatment of migrants to force them to self-deport, even if they have the legal right to remain. It appears that this is the point of the concentration camps set up by ICE (see methods of extremism below)

2. Methods Extremism

• Use of Force: While having unconventional beliefs is not illegal, an extremist crosses a line when they endorse or employ extreme measures—particularly violence, intimidation, or coercion—to realize their goals. (Example: The slush fund to reward those adjudicated as violent criminals who acted on January 6 in support ot Trump is a way to express approval and to keep them in his tent)

Why Democrat James Talarico has a chance to win in Texas:? He speaks their religious lanuage

Here is why I think Democrat James Talarico has a chance to win the Senate seat in Texas. He speaks with many Texans' religious language, which also contrasts his persona with Ken Paxton's immorality and corruption.

While I am not a Texan, I am a native of the state more Texas than Texas: Oklahoma.  It is from that perspective that I wrote in July 2025 on this blog that  JamesTalarico was a unique Democrat who spoke the religious language of many in both states. He brought that to the table and was onto a potentially winning message.. He put his politics in Christian religious terms, even when his support of public policy deviated from the orthodoxy of the evangelical right. His morality is in sharp contrast to Ken Paxton's, and with Paxton's defeat of incumbent Sen. John Cornyn, he dumped the Bush era into the dustbin of history.

The contrast of Talarico with Paxton could not be more dramatic:  The overwhelming win yesterday by Paxton in Texas gives Democrats an even better chance to brand the GOP as the MAGA party (the Bush era is demonstrably dead) and the party of corruption. Paxton's long and well-documented past of corruption was ignored as Texas Republicans followed the orders of Trump, who himself is blatantly corrupt, as his slush fund source and crypto gains are evidence. The question I have is, if Texas voters do not care about corruption, is that true of the rest of the GOP outside of Texas? The first test of that will be whether the GOP members of Congress put their OK stamp on the slush fund and the clause exempting Trump and his family from IRS scrutiny, or a significant number jump the Trump ship and vote to bury the most open, corrupt self-dealing and pocket lining attempt by a president in the history of the US.

My July 2025 post: There is a new messenger who speaks the language of many in red states...James Talarico, a state legislator in Texas. He is a devout Christian who actually reads the Bible and who puts his politics into how he sees it related to the religion that is the compass for his very fundamentalist belief. He sees as the most important message Jesus delivered: Love God with all your heart and treat your neighbor as you would like to be treated. That is not only a standard for his life as a preacher in training and the son of one, but he ties his beliefs to issues of the time.. He is a super articulate, young, and attractive spokesperson for his point of view.

Above all, Talarico is the polar opposite of the current leader of the GOP/MAGA movement, Donald Trump. Trump has no moral compass but is a self-serving, self-identified transactional person. That is his standard for life's decisions: to get the best deal to keep his power and wealth and gain more of both using his political office to do it. By inference, if people followed his unmoored, self-centered interest, they, too, will become richer and more powerful. Trump is a person who uses fear of his power to keep his followers and everyone he can in line, including cruelty and lack of empathy for how his policies harm "the least of these" and those trying to keep their daily lives above water.

MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: For those who want to put into perspective a profound amorality of the MAGA movement. Updated 5/8/2025

Trump's followers and some powerful cohorts think empathy is the sign of a failing society, but it is empathy that keeps community from lapsing into tribal chaos and dog-eat-dog conflict. It is the glue that keeps civilization from falling...the fate of nearly every civilization in history with a written record. Bravo, Talarico...you got my attention and admiration

.https://www.npr.org/2026/05/27/nx-s1-5835292/texas-senate-runoff-takeaways

Democrats need a winning one word or two that describes what they are about:. How about " being fair"

This November, Democrats will be mostly about: we are not Trump/MAGA. There will be those who are not this kind of GOP but would like to register their disgust with it.  When they cast a ballot, they have a choice, and if they cannot swallow Democrats either, they can either skip the line, stay home, or hold their noses. That may work in November 2026, but in 2028? How about getting a jump-start on both 2026 and 2028 and coming up with a theme that is both an implied attack on MAGA/Trump and also contains a positive message? And do it in one or two words: How about "being fair"?

That is still not enough because the credibility of such a theme depends on what and how Democrats plan to do about it. For 2026, since all politics are local, each Senate or Congressional race may be tailored to local needs and gripes. However, in 2028, Democrats had better have their act together on public policy issues, which seem fair to more than just those who register with their party.  Exactly, for example, are you going to get lower prices, less corruption, and less chaos fairly? 

I proposed using "fairness" as a theme almost a year ago. Since then, there has been a lot of political water under the bridge that makes it even more relevant today.  It is even more true today as both an attack on MAGA and a vision of a positive value around which public policy and a party platform can be shaped.  It is about bringing fairness back to America.

Public policy words like cost, chaos, and corruption fit neatly into both an attack and a vision of the future.   It is especially true as the self-dealing pocket-stuffing Trump and family ask to be exempted from IRS scrutiny and laws in their outrageous slush fund proposal to reward criminal activity committee on their behalf, from J6ers to Tina Peters, a county clerk. The stigmatizing of concentration camps of those who MAGA see as undesirables in our country, whether they had followed the law or skirted it while otherwise leading exemplary lives, is n not fair, and it is related to an administration peppered with white Christian nationalists who see themselves as superior to others.   When one group strives to repress another group, racial, religious, or cultural, that is not fair, but the chaos it creates results in conflicts on steroids and a feeling that everything is short-term, depending on the news cycle and Trump's midnight tweets. When golden ballrooms and triumphal arches dominate Trump's view of prosperity for himself, while so many he governs see the affordability of everyday living decline, as evidenced by the price tags, it is not fair.  When the ultra-rich and the corrupt determine public policy, it creates an unfair advantage, and those who are neither corrupt nor ultra-rich are not treated fairly because their voices are dismissed by a corrupt ruler.  When one party tries to suppress the turnout of the other, that is not fair. Thankfully, the SAVE Act went down in flames, as had the attempts to unseat African American congresspeople in South Carolina and in Alabama on 5/26/26 through racial gerrymandering. https://www.vote.o   rg/save-act/

Democrats could use the value of fairness to specific proposals: Following the rule of law instead of the rule of one who thinks executive orders are issues, the laws that are not enforced are a beginning.  The rule of law enforced without fear or favor is one way to achieve fairness.  That includes restoring the independence of the DoJ and the checks and balances of Congress.  The Voting Rights Act they support is another means of restoring fairness.  A tax policy in which everyone pays their fair share is, well, "fair". Those are just the beginnings of a fairness platform that looks not to the past but to a way forward. An immigration policy that provides due process and protections of constitutional rights and secure borders at the same time is also fair..  There is another way "fair" could be worked in: anti-corruption and anti-gerrymandering could be "fairplay";  

Here is what I wrote in this blog a year ago.

June, 2025: Once upon a time, I thought Americans valued fairness.  It was a value people embraced.  I will make the leap of assuming that it is still a value held by more voters than by those who are completely self-absorbed and self-promoting. What about a good gut cry:  "It ain't fair" and proposing a " fair deal for all".  The implication that "all" means rich who need to chip in their fair share and ordinary people, who are just hard-working people, trying to make ends meet, caring for others or themselves and their families, who are very disadvantaged, sick, aged, uneducated, or victims of racial or cultural discrimination. 

Packaging is always a challenge, but I recently heard about a way to do it. Whatever you think of former Rep. David Jolly, who morphed from a Florida Republican Congressman to an independent and finally to a Democrat to run for Florida governor, or even if you think he has no chance to win, he has a way with words 6/6/ and 6/7, 2025. He had two short phrases in a recent CBS interview that hit home to me, and he repeated them on other media: He is for Democratic values that "fight for an economy for all and a party that lifts up everyone," providing a context for the economic fairness and cultural issues he then fleshed out in short soundbites of issues relevant to Florida. 

Perhaps I am a cockeyed optimist, but Democrats I think understand that the goal of the anti DEI application of the radical MAGAs is to roll back the civil rights movement and it is not fair to all, tax policies that give great deals to the very rich at the expense of the very poor are not fair to all, or propose tariff policies that screw the budget conscious families to satisfy some notion of a power grabbing president, are also just not fair.

 Democrats' messaging to date has not been put into clear, sharp words.  Democrats have backed into it by decrying each issue as it comes up as bad for ordinary people. It has become a predictable background noise. Democrats should reverse the order and state the value up front, rather than delivering it as a conclusion before getting into the brain-numbing weeds of public policy issues and data, as cable talkers, those at political rallies, town halls, and sound-bite interviewees often do.

 Democrats have a history of the New Deal, the war on poverty, and promoting consumer and environmental protections that attempt to bring fairness in public policies to more than just the rich.  Why not resurrect the slogan from a true populist president, Harry S. Truman: "a fair deal". It's roots go deep in Democratic party traditions and Truman's version was as timely then as it is today, if more so."President Truman's Fair Deal ensured the survival of social security, preserved the American welfare system, and prioritized civil rights legislation." Truman's Fair Deal | Overview, History & Significance - Lesson | Study.com    It just needs to be packaged a bit differently, as a value applied to our modern times. It is both an implied attack on MAGA and a positive message about what Democrats stand for today, with appeal across party lines.

The truth is, the MAGA core group will never be moved off whatever appeals to them, including dog-whistles and attempts by Trump to execute unconstitutional policies that favor one race or economic power over another. There are voters out there who still value being fair or who count themselves as victims of the MAGA unfairness policies. Democrats do still have to make sure those being hurt know who to blame, but that is a subpoint, not the theme alone.  It needs to be put in the context of fairness.

 

Simplistic thinking, fear mongering, of libs being communists answered in simple English: It's Democracy vs Fascism

 I suppose the inference that libs are to be feared because they are communists. The gist of my response is that our family has a personal history of experiencing hands-on, so that they did not grow up to be communists or fascists, but were dedicated to democracy. My response to the meme."Members of our family ...I noticed a new meme with a hammer and sickle raised as a fear symptom with the caption of "Don't let your children grow up to be communists". I suppose the inference that libs are to be feared because they are communists. The gist of my response is that our family has a personal history of experiencing hands-on, so that they did not grow up to be communists or fascists, but were dedicated to democracy. where citizens determine the present and future of their country.

My response to the meme.

"Members of our family ...

Dr. Mike fled communist Yugoslavia...knows the difference firsthand.

I had witnessed firsthand how communists consolidated power in East Berlin, there as an exchange student in 1957. What I learned..fascists and communists used the same techniques to control their subjects...destruction of democracy. The communist model failed as an economic system and died with the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Western Europe, however, kept some social programs like healthcare and free college tuition, and social security, along with capitalism. I have grandchildren who live in Austria and in the US. What they fear most is the fascism, like Putin's, that controls Russia and Russian aggression in Ukraine. What the no kings movement shows many fear Trump ..whose unitary govt.no checks and balances,

anti-civil rights ...who thinks his executive orders are the law to be followed. If not, he will use his power to punish those who do not follow. He is being supported by powerful economic captains of tech.. This is the classic definition of fascism. Rich capitalistists and rule by a person and not by laws. Our children and grandchildren are smart enough to know and are smart enough with firsthand experience not to grow up as either communists or fascists. They support democracy as practiced in both Europe and the first 250 years in America, where citizens have the power to determine the present and future of their country.

Why a small revolt is shaping up in the GOP Congressional caucus: The primary season is over and more

 These next 6 months should be very interesting in the House of Representatives. Is a revolt brewing in the GOP that could cause Trump grief and lead to more bipartisanship? Likely. -

The primary season is over, and those seeking re-election will be freer to depart from Trump on a few issues that truly bother even their MAGA supporters in their own districts. They do not need to fear the threat of Trump "primaring them" if they do not vote 100% witth him. Trump is a lame duck in 2028 and looking ahead, a head a 90% favorable may be enough to establish their bona fide while voting against a few Trump-supported issues.

-Those retiring may want to consider their legacy and be clear on the record where they were in 2026 if they disagree with some of Trump's policies.

-With polls showing real anger over affordability issues, incumbent votes on the record will make them very vulnerable to attack ads. ..such as GOP Rep. X vote to take away your health care, or vote for tariffs ot cause your groceries and other purchases to rise in cost, etc. Particularly sensitive will be what no GOP rep wants on their voting record: that they voted for the slush fund or against the War Powers Act. Watch them try to do whatever parliamentary trick to avoid having to vote on these issues and have their vote on record.

-Those who were defeated in primaries this spring because of Trump's endorsement of their opponents may feel either freer to make a statement about their legacy or even to take a bit of revenge.

That may explain why now there is a small revolt brewing in the GOP House caucus against the ballroom/arch, and the slush fund to benefit Trump allies guilty of crimes of J6 and others. The Epstein cover-up will still be a hot item among some MAGA. Especially angering is the clause in the slush fund that grants immunity from IRS actions for Trump himself or his family now and after he no longer remains in the White House. That should be a real outrage, if there ever was one.(Corruption on stilts)

Making the link between the cost of Trump's corruption to the cost of living for everyday people

 One of the strangest results about Democrats beginning to attack the Trump regime and MAGA for being corrupt is that either MAGA brushes the attack off as just words or frankly does not care, just so it serves their own purpose. Corruption is the abuse of taxpayer money and the Achilles heel of autocrats, which Trump fancies himself to be, with a loyal MAGA following cheering him on.   One effective way Democrats could use would be to link the size and scope of Trump's corruption, as his outrageous "anti-weaponization" slush fund would do, to something that is bugging most Americans...the cost of health care. Corruption does have an impact on the lives of everyday Americans. Here is what that 1.8 billion dollar slush fund could have been used for instead of using taxpayer money to pay off those Trump believes were victims of Biden's weaponization of the DOJ (a laugh when considering Trump's directing the DOJ to file frivolous, poorly evidenced charges against his political adversaries). 

From KFF..org (the Kaiser Family Foundation )via an AI inquiry. Allocating $1.8 billion to provide health insurance would directly cover full health insurance premiums for roughly 330,000 individual Americans or subsidize existing health plans for up to 1.8 million people. This figure represents the estimated scale of the recent $1.8 billion federal legal settlement fund, which policymakers note could alternatively absorb a significant portion of national health coverage costs.

https://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2026/05/j6-convicted-insurrectionists-got.html Why Trump's slush is a crock of ....

J6 convicted insurrectionists got " mistreated by the legal system". What a crock. Update 5/23/2026

 The Trump slush fund is now getting the go-ahead by the Duma, like the GOP-dominated Congress of Trump yes, congresspeople to put a billion,7k . of taxpayer money for whatever use the Trump regime wants...including compensating January 6 insurrectionists for "being mistreated by the justice system" and "weaponized" by the DOJ or the IRS. Not only would this slush fund benefit J6 criminals and the Trump family, it is a crock of doo doo. Define being" mistreated.". Define weaponization. One of the key legitimate treatments of the legal system is that evidence counts, that actual laws were broken when both grand and trial, a jury of peers...find them guilty. Did any of the Jan6 found guilty idi not receive due process or ignore the rules of evidence, and did the jury system function correctly? Did the ones found guility appealed it and did they lose? ywa. So prove there was mistreatment, JD Vance, who claimed the slush fund use. Here is what "mistreatment" means:. How about the Trump strategy of revenge that uses a DOJ that files flimsy charges without any evidence of probable cause just to cost their revenge targets to defend themselves expensively. These charges are often tossed out by a judge because of a lack of evidence or the flimsy DOJ legal case, and they can't even make it through a grand jury finding of probable cause. How about using that slush fund to compensate for the revenge treatment by the Trump-run DOJ against his political enemies that are frivolous and do not make it even to the early stages of the trial system...

A clear cut case of mistreatment by the legal system: Abrego Garcia's a case in point, but by the Trump adminstration N

The final insult of the slush fund establishment: Protects Trump and family from IRS prosecution.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/19/trump-irs-settlement-tax-returns

https://www.themountaineer.com/news/national/vance-defends-dojs-nearly-1-8b-weaponization-fund/article_09fe2270-3f58-56bb-b299-bb64dc99c98e.html

https://abcnews.com/US/list-individuals-including-lisa-cook-targeted-trump-administration/story?id=124968309

Why has the big lie, 2020 election was stolen, lived on for 6 years?

 From my Facebook post 5/19/2026:

Andrew Weissmann noted in his just-released book " Liar's Kingdom, " which focused on the claims of fraud in the 2020 election, and made a statement about it on TV that particularly got my attention. Every judge who looked at such claims brought their courts of the 2020 steal, dismissed the cases, and could find no probable cause in the evidence presented to even permit the case to go on.

The lie has been the Trump administration's stated rationale for the plan to rig the 2026 November midterm elections so they could win while losing the popular will as well as the treatment of January 6 participants to pay them off, pardon, and stick a middle finger at jury trials and due legal process.

The next question I ask is why this lie (stop the steal) has lived on and now fuels the Trump plan to rig the results of the November 2026 midterm elections.

Trump's plan is no secret: ICE at every polling place in potentially swing districts where those looking Hispanic could be intimidated, grabbing the election ballots, destroying their integrity when in the hands of partisans, and the extreme gerrymandering boundary drawings.

Trump loyalists nod their heads in support of the lie when challenged because either they blindly believe it because it came out of the mouth ot Trump or because they approve of what Trump wants, too.:Tte result

Trump is seeking to win despite the dismal polls, when they should have lost.

More thoughts not in the Facebook post.

Weissmann answers a question of why those who lie in pursuit of a political position can get away with it, while those who defame or defraud a person or a consumer when they know they are lying can face a jury and either jail or a large financial penalty or restitution. I always assumed the reason was the First Amendment, and it is under that umbrella that a marketplace of ideas is where winners are chosen by voters. The problem is that voters themselves may not have access or knowledge of an intentional lie to make that kind of intelligent decision, and even opponents do not have the ammunition to call them out. I also believe that there are those who, for other reasons, ignore evidence even when they know it is a lie because they have self-serving reasons and motivations to use it to accomplish other goals driven by. racial, social conformity, or economic self-interest. That issue has festered in my mind, though Weissmann tackled it and gave me pause to reconsider just passing it off as "the value of the marketplace of ideas" and people exercising their First Amendment rights. He presents some solutions to that seeming contradiction in the second half of the book..which I have yet to fully digest, but get the gist and skimmed. That part is the best grist for the law student, law professor, or the legislation drafting mill.

I was the administrator of a district attorney's consumer fraud office for nearly seven years, followed by a position in the city administration that also made me an elections official for nearly seven years. Freedom of political speech, and civil, and/or criminal consumer fraud consumed me for much of my professional years. Although I'm not a lawyer, I made an impact in that position, setting priorities and advocating for fair treatment in voting and the consumer marketplace. As AI technology and the ability to manipulate photos and videos become common, the question of lying in the political marketplace of ideas is no longer nagging, but it has an urgency to be considered and addressed. Weissmann's book is very important and timely. Weissmann drew on how other Western democracies split hairs about walking the fine line between free speech and doing harm with lies to the system or to citizens. It was not without a smile that I read his description of how Brazil treated political lies as similar to the truth-in-advertising approach in consumer protection. The penalties were to "disbar" or deny the one found guilty from running for office for x years. (US impeachment and a guilty verdict disbars forever. In the meantime, lies can be exposed by investigative reporters and congressional hearings, which explains why the midterms and who is in the majority in Congress are such high stakes to both sides in November.

On Gov Polis' granting clemency to Tina Peters sets a dangerous precedence for federal control of elections

 We have a challenge to save free and fair elections if we want to preserve democracy., Trump has other plans. Trump believes that his control over the election outcomes can be accomplished by empowering his supporters to control who gets to vote and who has the keys to tabulating the outcome of the vote across the nation. Governor Polis sets a dangerous precedent in granting clemency to Tina Peters just as Trump schemes to control the outcome of the 2026 November midterm elections. 

 Included in these Trump plans are to grab voter rolls information from states he and the GOP can use to suppress or promote the outcome, and to use federal forces to seize control of machines used by citizens to vote and the tabulation of results. This is no secret.  Trump made Tina Peters the test case and the cause celibre.  Polis just granted Trump a win and a template for how this power-preserving president thinks he can control the 2026 midterm outcome since the Colorado governor caved into Trump's demands to "free Tina Peters". Polis claimed Trump's threats did not influence his clemency grant, but it certainly appears that way and appearance counts in Trump's world.

The Colorado Secretary of State, Jena Griswold, had refused to turn over the voter information Trump had demanded and stood by the prosecution and outcome of the Peters case in the face of Trump's attempt to federalize elections, despite Constitutional provisions to the contrary. The fear is that Trump would use those rolls and the information provided to support or suppress voter turnout and results in the midterms of November 2026 to keep his control of Congress.  ​Trump administration again requests sensitive Colorado voter data, state declines | Colorado Newsline and then sued the state of Colorado.

Peters was found guilty by a jury that she gave those codes and access to a  MAGA volunteer to the voting tallying machine in defiance of state rules and state criminal law designed to. keep that from happening. She took her orders from Trump et al to "secure " the machines he issued via media. She did not take her orders from her oath to follow state laws and election procedure rules. Unlike the January 6 pardons of crimes committed under federal law, crimes committed under state laws are not subject to federal crime-related pardons.

The attempt by Trump to grab control of elections is no secret..and neither are the details of plans to do so on behalf of the GOP dominated by MAGA. Such actions Peters tried cannot go unpunished if we sincerely care about election integrity.  The issue is whether she was too harshly punished.  There was no issue about whether the jury trial and the sentencing guidelines the judge used were incorrect, or whether the findings in a trial that she committed the felony were procedurally wrong. She was found guilty of violating state laws by a correct jury, and Polis' actions did not change that fact. She had already served half of her 9 year sentence.

 At stake is the issue that the Trump argument for federal control over state voting laws is bogus, that the 2020 election was stolen. That is a false pretext. It has been 6 years, plenty of time,  for MAGA  to provide proof that it happened, and zero evidence has been found. That would have changed the outcome. Instead, this "stop the steal" pretext is not driven by a pious concern over vote integrity, but it is a strategy by Trump et al to have the party in power, his, to control the outcome of the vote count. .

 At issue is that Polis caved into threats by Trump et al to cut federal funding to federal programs for Colorado citizens if Peters were not freed.  Polis denied that it was why he "freed Peters", but it most certainly looks like it and sets a dangerous precedent that other states could also cave in and follow in the face of their resistance to the Trump power grab.

It is a warning to those of us who care about state control of elections as a way to counter a wannabe dictator from using underhanded tactics to thwart the outcome of elections he fears may not go his way.  

Felicia Muftic is a former Denver elections official

https://www.cpr.org/2026/05/15/tina-peters-sentence-shortened-jared-polis/  Excellent in-depth story and Polis' reasoning of why

​Trump administration again requests sensitive Colorado voter data, state declines | Colorado Newsline

Case is currently pending in federal court, with a decision awaited on a motion to dismiss filed by the state...per AI​

Trump threatened Colorado funding as ‘punishment’ oa  ver Tina Peters, judge finds - Democracy Docket   Snap funds defunding threatened

Beware of Novel Claims of 2020 Election Fraud | Brennan Center for Justice  On evidence of 2020 election fraud 

Is America in decline? If it is, Trump engineered it.

 

Feed posts

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Facebook

Shared with Public

From Felicia Muftic's post May 15, 2026 on Facebook.

Trump's flattery of Xi got him a response: America is in decline. If Xi was referring to America's power in foreign affairs, the ability to shape the world in ways that benefit America's national interests, Xi has a point....Except we were not in decline, but we have been weakened on purpose by a president who engineered our decline. America First, isolationism, ticking off our once allies and best friends, threatening to invade and grab their properties, imposing tariffs on our biggest trading partners, de facto knee-capping NATO, and Article 5, cozying up to the world's tyrants like Putin, has resulted in the loss of the USA's ability to influence what we once called the"free world". Trump no longer wants to join together with our largest trading partners in mutual defense and economic strength. Our allies from Japan to Anzac now fear he is going to trade off Taiwan to get XI's help in digging Trump himself out of his Iran blunder. Ukraine is surviving without Trump. and has revolutionized modern drone warfare with the financial assistance of the EU, freed by the demise of the stumbling block, Hungary's Orban, and Germany is now rearming itself... The US military alone could not effect regime change in Iran, which has dug in underground. And the result, Iran may never feel it has to agree to any nuclear deal. They still have the Hormuz card to play.

The result is that the world no longer dances to a tune they once liked coming from America, and is learning to live on its own tune, not ours. They do not trust us. In Europe, polls show over 60 to 70 percent of EU and UK citizens despise, dislike, and disapprove of Trump. and any of their politicians who would like to cozy up to Trump would face political death. If that is the America First you desired, it is what you got.