Election Law

A New Mexico court is ordering Meta to pay $25 billion in a civil lawsuit for allowing Cambridge Analytica access to user data during the 2016 election. The company was working for the Trump campaign. It used that information to help the Trump campaign more effectively target potential voters.

Meta hit with $25 billion penalty over Cambridge Analytica data lawsuit– www.washingtonexaminer.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

A New Mexico court ordered Meta, the parent company of Facebook, to pay a $25 billion penalty over data privacy violations connected to the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

The whopping penalty comes more than eight years after the stories of the data-harvesting scandal first broke and sparked political uproar in the United States. Politicians and social media users have raised concerns since the 2018 reports first broke about the United Kingdom-based firm improperly scraping up Facebook profiles without user consent, leading to multiple lawsuits and legal battles.

Tech Billionaire John Doerr Funnels Millions to Democrats Through New ‘Dark Money’ Group– readsludge.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

John Doerr, the billionaire tech venture capitalist whose firm Kleiner Perkins is heavily invested in artificial intelligence, has set up a new “dark money” group that gave more than $10 million in grants last year to Democratic Party network groups, including $7.5 million to the nonprofits aligned with Senate and House Democratic leadership, according to a tax filing reviewed by Sludge.

The donations came as TechNet, the industry lobbying group where Doerr is a co-founder and was an executive council member for over 25 years, pushed Congress to pass a federal framework on AI of narrow, “risk-based” rules that would preempt state laws. In 2023, Doerr told a Senate AI forum convened by Sen. Chuck Schumer that proposals to change antitrust rules were chilling the venture capital industry by making it harder for startups to be acquired.

Senate Democrats Block Stock Trading Ban With Voter ID Provision › American Greatness– amgreatness.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

Senate Democrats on Wednesday blocked legislation that would have banned members of Congress from trading stocks while also imposing a voter identification requirement.

The Senate voted 53-47 along party lines, leaving the “Stop Insider Trading Act” seven votes short of the 60 needed to advance.

The House had previously approved the legislation with support from Republicans and 13 Democrats. Wednesday’s Senate vote effectively ends the measure’s chances of reaching President Donald Trump’s desk before the Nov. 3 midterm elections.

While the legislation sought to prohibit lawmakers from trading individual stocks, Democratic opposition centered largely on Republicans’ inclusion of a voter ID provision.

Republicans have separately sought passage of the SAVE America Act, legislation that would establish voter identification requirements. Democratic opposition has prevented that measure from advancing, prompting Republicans to attach voter ID provisions to other legislation.

The Senate vote puts Democrats on record opposing a measure that combined two priorities Republicans have promoted ahead of the midterms: restricting congressional stock trading and strengthening identification requirements for voting.

The House’s passage of the legislation, including votes from 13 Democrats, demonstrated some bipartisan support for banning congressional stock trading. But the addition of the voter ID provision helped ensure the legislation could not secure the Democratic votes necessary to overcome the Senate’s 60-vote threshold.

 

DOJ Announces Federal Indictments Against 10 Foreign Nationals Accused of Illegal Voting in Minnesota and Judicial Misconduct Complaint– amgreatness.com
News Source

EXCERPT:

The Department of Justice on Wednesday announced federal indictments against ten foreign nationals accused of illegally registering and voting in Minnesota elections, while also filing a judicial misconduct complaint against nearly the entire federal bench in the deep blue state.

Attorney General Todd Blanche said a federal grand jury returned the indictments alleging nine counts of illegal voting by an alien and nine counts of falsely claiming U.S. citizenship to register to vote.

“Today’s charges allege that ten foreign nationals committed voter fraud in Minnesota, one voting illegally as recently as this August’s primary,” said AG Blanche. “The law is clear, only American citizens may vote in American elections, and enforcing this law is fundamental to our democracy. That should not be a partisan concept.”

During a press conference with Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, Blanche said the defendants illegally Voted in the November 2022 and 2024 General Election and as recently as the August 2026 Primary Election.

The defendants come from Liberia, Lithuania, Ghana, Germany, Bosnia, Brazil, Canada, and South Africa. Notably, one defendant, Joshua Frederick Kofi Edzie, is accused of voting illegally in the August 2026 primary.

Blanche told reporters that since President Trump returned to office, the Justice Department has prosecuted more than 90 people with voter related offenses, including 50 aliens in just the past five weeks. He added that there are currently hundreds of voter fraud cases being investigated across the country.  Blanche contrasted that with the merely 13 cases that were investigated during the Biden years.

“That’s much different from what we’re doing,” Blanche said. “We’re focused on accountability and restoring trust in our elections.”

Blanche also announced that the Justice Department just filed the judicial misconduct complaint with 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, accusing all but one of the Minnesota judges of  violating various judicial canons, including speaking to the media during active lawsuits.

“Specifically, the former chief judge spoke on the record to the New York Times about the immigration [enforcement] surge late last year and early this year in Minneapolis,” Blanche told reporters.

The AG was referring to Judge Patrick Schiltz, the former chief judge of the U.S. District Court for Minnesota, who gave a 90-minute interview to the Times in which he described the administration’s handling of Operation Metro Surge as a “grave threat to the rule of law.”

Six other members of Minnesota’s federal bench also agreed to speak with the Times, Blanche said, accusing them of violating their ethical duties.

The Justice Department argues that the Times article demonstrated that the judges had an animosity toward the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), undermining the impartiality of the federal court in Minnesota.

“These judges should be ordered to recuse from any matters involving DHS because the public reasonably questions their impartiality in cases involving immigration,” said Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward in the formal complaint.

DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin emphasized that the Trump administration will not allow the votes of American citizens to be cancelled out by illegal votes.

“Our message to aliens who vote in American elections is clear: we will find you, arrest you, and you will face the consequences, including criminal charges and deportation,” Mullin stated. “Under President Trump’s leadership, this administration will never allow the votes of American citizens to be cancelled out by non-citizens illegally voting in our elections. Only American citizens should be electing American leaders.”

The defendants and their charges include:

Bhator Konah Bryant, 61, a Liberian national: on one count of making a false claim of citizenship in order to vote. She is alleged to have falsely claimed United States citizenship when registering to vote on October 18, 2024. The defendant had her initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Elsa M. Bullard on September 29, 2026.

Edvile Vaidoto Edmunds, 59, a Lithuanian national: on one count of voting by alien. She is alleged to have voted illegally as an alien in Minnesota on November 8, 2022. The defendant had her initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Elsa M. Bullard on September 29, 2026.

Joshua Frederick Kofi Edzie, 63, a Ghanian national: on two counts of making a false claim of citizenship in order to vote and one count of voting by alien. He is alleged to have voted illegally as an alien in Minnesota on August 11, 2026, and falsely claimed United States citizenship in order to vote on October 23, 2024 and August 11, 2026. The defendant had his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Elsa M. Bullard on September 28, 2026.

Alan Barbu Kargbo, 48, a Liberian national: on one count of making a false claim of citizenship in order to vote and one count of voting by alien. He is alleged to have voted illegally as an alien in Minnesota and falsely claimed United States citizenship in order to vote on November 5, 2024. The defendant had his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Elsa M. Bullard on September 28, 2026.

Paul Kras, 78, a German national: on one count of voting by alien. He is alleged to have voted illegally as an alien in Minnesota on November 5, 2024. The defendant had his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Elsa M. Bullard on September 29, 2026.

Fadil Rasim Ozegovic, 58, a Bosnian national: on one count of making a false claim of citizenship in order to vote and one count of voting by alien. He is alleged to have voted illegally as an alien in Minnesota and falsely claimed United States citizenship in order to vote on November 5, 2024. The defendant had his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Elsa M. Bullard on September 29, 2026.

Aparecido Donizetti Padovan, 62, a Brazilian national: on one count of making a false claim of citizenship in order to vote and one count of voting by alien. He is alleged to have voted illegally as an alien in Minnesota and falsely claimed United States citizenship in order to vote on November 5, 2024. The defendant had his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Elsa M. Bullard on September 29, 2026.

Chis Adam Pettiquoi, 43, a Liberian national: on one count of making a false claim of citizenship in order to vote and one count of voting by alien. He is alleged to have voted illegally as an alien in Minnesota and falsely claimed United States citizenship in order to vote on November 5, 2024. The defendant had his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Elsa M. Bullard on September 29, 2026.

Christian Liam Schenk, 47, a Canadian national: on one count of making a false claim of citizenship in order to vote and one count of voting by alien. He is alleged to have voted illegally as an alien in Minnesota and falsely claimed United States citizenship in order to vote on November 5, 2024. The defendant had his initial appearance in the District of Massachusetts on September 29, 2026.

Hester Sophia Weihmann, 69, a South African national: on one count of making a false claim of citizenship in order to vote and one count of voting by alien. She is alleged to have voted illegally as an alien in Minnesota and falsely claimed United States citizenship in order to vote on November 5, 2024. The defendant had her initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Elsa M. Bullard on September 29, 2026.

These cases were investigated by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and are being prosecuted by First Assistant United States Attorney Joseph S. Teirab, according to the DOJ press release.


The Supreme Court of the United States shut down the 2025 map for the Missouri midterm election, reinstating the 2022 map that preserves the Democrat-favored U.S. House District.

The unsigned order simply declared “At this late date, ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election would usher in electoral chaos.” It should be noted that the primaries were based on the 2025 election map, giving doubt to SCOTUS’ ‘chaos’ claim as the basis for their ruling.

Supreme Court, for third time, rejects GOP’s bid to use Republican-friendly maps in Missouri– www.washingtontimes.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

The Supreme Court rejected Republicans’ latest attempt to revive a GOP-tilted map for November’s congressional elections, ruling for a third time that even though the state held primaries under the new map, the old one must be used.

Trump Admin Releases Plan To Protect 2026 Election Infrastructure– thefederalist.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

The Trump administration released a “comprehensive” plan on Thursday that U.S. election officials can use to safeguard the integrity of the voting process during the upcoming midterms, The Federalist has learned.

“Election security is national security,” Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Markwayne Mullin said in a statement. “This plan, which will be implemented in full, is crucial to the security, freeness, and fairness of choosing the leaders of our country. Making America safe again isn’t just done at the border, in our streets, and on the coast — it’s also done in protecting the integrity of American elections.”

Obtained by The Federalist, the 2026 Election Infrastructure Security Plan includes numerous tools and services that election officials can use to protect election infrastructure from physical and cyber threats in the midterms. The extensive report was produced by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which falls under DHS.

The 13-page document begins by providing a comprehensive overview of existing election infrastructure (voting and processing facilities, voting hardware, etc.) and the core technological components (voter registration systems, tabulation systems, etc.) that define a typical election process. It also includes an analysis of potential cyber and physical threats to this infrastructure that officials may encounter during the 2026 contest, such as attempted cyber hacks of state voter registration databases and bomb threats directed at election offices.

The report provides guidance on how best to confront these prospective issues. For instance, to mitigate potential cyber vulnerabilities, the plan advises election officials to consider using paper ballots “that can be easily reviewed to ensure transparency, auditability, and resilience against software failures or manipulation,” and to “[c]onduct post-election manual audits of paper ballots to verify that voting systems function properly and to identify errors before certifying the final results.”

Kamala Harris: Removing Hundreds of Thousands of Non-Citizens from Voter Rolls Is ‘Cheating’– slaynews.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

Former Vice President Kamala Harris accused Republicans of “cheating” by removing non-citizens and other ineligible names from voter rolls.

The twice-failed Democrat presidential candidate made the claims as she continues a nationwide media blitz, fueling expectations of another campaign in 2028.

Harris was elevated to the top of the 2024 Democratic Party ticket without receiving a single presidential primary vote.

Harris was coronated after former President Joe Biden’s mental decline became impossible for party leaders to conceal.

Her campaign then burned through roughly $1 billion in a matter of weeks before losing the election to President Donald Trump.

Now, after a string of speeches, interviews, and public appearances, Harris appears to be laying the groundwork for another White House run.

This time, her agenda involves attacking Trump’s election integrity agenda.

The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled the Missouri 2026 Midterm election should follow the same map in place for the primaries. That map is the GOP-altered one that eliminates one Democrat House Seat stronghold. The court stated, “This Court holds that Missouri’s current plan to use the 2022 map in the November 2026 general election violates the Constitution. Only use of the 2025 map complies with the Constitution and federal law.”

8th Circuit Orders Missouri To Use GOP-Backed Map For Midterms– thefederalist.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

Missouri’s chaotic redistricting battle is finally over — or so America thought.

A three-judge panel for the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday that the Show Me State must use its 2025 congressional map in the upcoming midterm elections. The new map would take Missouri from a six Republican-two Democrat map (enacted in 2022) to a seven Republican-one Democrat map.

“This Court holds that Missouri’s current plan to use the 2022 map in the November 2026 general election violates the Constitution. Only use of the 2025 map complies with the Constitution and federal law,” the court held.

The panel was comprised of Judge James Loken, a Bush 41 appointee, and Judges David Stras and Justin Smith, both Trump appointees.

The entire kerfuffle began earlier this month, when the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the state must use its 2022 map for the midterms and to include a statewide referendum on the 2025 map on Missouri’s 2026 fall ballot. The left-wing People Not Politicians‘ efforts to get the referendum placed on the ballot were initially rejected by Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins.

Missouri-based Chief District Judge Stephen Clark, a Trump appointee, issued a temporary restraining order days later in a federal challenge brought by several congressional candidates, mandating the Show Me State to use the 2025 map for the midterms. That ruling came moments after U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh rejected an emergency request by Missouri officials to pause the Missouri Supreme Court’s decision.

SCOTUS ultimately froze Clark’s TRO without explanation the following day. The high court said that the lower court’s order is paused “pending the disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari in this Court, if such a writ is timely sought.”

DOJ Charges 16 Noncitizens in Voter Fraud Cases– legalinsurrection.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

The Justice Department (DOJ) announced charges against 16 people in seven states for alleged illegal voting, illegal voter registration, and related election crimes. Eight of the defendants were charged in Texas.

DOJ says the cases include noncitizens accused of voting in federal elections, false citizenship claims, and naturalization fraud. Investigators also turned up alleged passport fraud, wire fraud, and illegal firearm purchases.

The department was direct about the consequences:

“If you are not allowed to vote in our elections, you shouldn’t. And if you do, that’s a crime.”

It added a broader warning to anyone considering it:

“Let this be a warning to anyone trying to cheat and undermine our elections.”

By Staff

“Woe to those who are at ease in Zion, and to those who feel secure on the mountain of Samaria, the notable men of the first of the nations, to whom the house of Israel comes! Pass over to Calneh, and see, and from there go to Hamath the great; then go down to Gath of the Philistines. Are you better than these kingdoms? Or is their territory greater than your territory, you who put far away the day of disaster and bring near the seat of violence?

“Woe to those who lie on beds of ivory and stretch themselves out on their couches, and eat lambs from the flock and calves from the midst of the stall, who sing idle songs to the sound of the harp and like David invent for themselves instruments of music, who drink wine in bowls and anoint themselves with the finest oils, but are not grieved over the ruin of Joseph! Therefore they shall now be the first of those who go into exile, and the revelry of those who stretch themselves out shall pass away.” – Amos 6:1-7

INTRODUCTION

For the past few weeks, the 2026 Elections has been our top news tag. That news tag has numerous subset news tags within it. This week, one of those subset news tags, Mass Mailer Election, could be considered a Deep Dive contender in its own right.

Within the 2026 election, there are two dominant narratives emerging, “affordability” (or cost of living) and AI Data Centers. The latter, AI Data Centers, like the Mass Mailer Election, could have been its own Deep Dive.

We have decided to combine the top Deep Dive contenders, the 2026 election, the Mass Mailer Election, and AI Data Centers, into one Deep Dive. This Deep Dive looks at the top emerging “issues” of the midterm elections in contrast to what lies underneath, the ideological battle for a new civilization to replace the one already declared dead, the American republic.

In our estimation, the election narrative is dominated by questions of ease.

In the case of the AI Data Centers, the question is about resource demand and its impact on the local population. Coupled with that “debate” is the apocalyptic warning AI will kill us if we don’t police it. The debate is entirely separated from geopolitical reality. It is all about ease in America alone.

In the case of the affordability issue, the question is about prices at the grocery story. The war in Iran is framed almost entirely around its cost to fuel, which is driving the cost of everything else up. The war in Iran is also framed around America’s allegiance to Israel, with the progressive state media and progressive entertainment agit prop reinforcing the myth that Israel controls us.

There are no conversations about geopolitical realities. China is almost completely missing from progressive state media reflections on the Iran War. All that those who are captured by the progressive state network (be they watchers of CNN or Hasan Piker) see is America the demon abroad and America the demon at home.

AI is about capitalist exploitation that threatens to literally murder the whole world. The only hope is for AI to be controlled by progressive priests. They will “assure” AI conforms to the “good,” which is anti-American at its heart, and anti-human in its execution.

The Supreme Court’s ruling enabling Mass Mailer election fraud due to a procedural consideration reflects the death of American Rule of law in the land, though it is hardly SCOTUS’s first overt departure from American Rule of Law in the last year alone.

SCOTUS itself has lost any connection to any substantive understanding of American Rule of Law, as only two of the nine justices consistently seem to understand what it is. The rest consider equality over individual liberty, “kindness” over Due Process, and “social justice” over the right to bear arms.

The Progmericans hold on to American Rule of Law standards to some degree, though hardly consistently. Wherever progressive power would be fundamentally threatened, these Progmericans will defend their closer cousins, the progressives. They fear true American liberty for their constituents far more than they do the progressive state.

The election ahead of us is a contest between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.

The Republicans in power are dominated by Progmericans, people who will reflect American values, and defend them, up to the point of existentially threatening progressive power. They also still hold progressives in key positions of power, such as in the Senate with Majority Leader John Thune.

The Republicans have some Americans in their ranks, but these Americans have little real power in the party.

The Democrats, though, mean to finish off America once and for all. The American flags will come down and the new progressive flag will emerge. The nation will be renamed, and a new “Constitution” will be imposed from on-high. It will come from the party, through an in-house “Democratic” process.

The fight in this election is between those willing to sometimes defend American liberty and NOT jettison the project altogether; and those who feel their century-plus revolution is strong enough to throw off the now-dead host that sustained it and allowed it to become fully empowered.

That host is the American republic, and the progressives mean to throw the outer shell into the Potomac River. For this reason, we chose the Ease of America in the Midterm Elections as our Deep Dive of the Week.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In this Deep Dive on ease as the central issue of the midterm elections, we look at the nature of the Democrats through a couple bellwether examples, James Talarico and Abdel El-Sayed. We will also look at the new power in the Democratic Party, the DSA. This reveals the existential nature of the real issues behind the 2026 election.

Next, we break down SCOTUS’ decision to allow an unverifiable mass mailer voter scheme to happen in the 2026 midterms, choosing process over national security. This ruling gives the Democrats a much greater chance at “winning” the midterms.

We look at the two dominant issues in the midterms, affordability and AI. These issues have buried the existential issues behind this election, whether America continues to exist or becomes a new “socialist republic.”

Finally, we end our Deep Dive with an assessment of the state of the midterm elections. Be sure to read our October 30, 2026, issue where we will break down the 2026 election and offer a Predictive Analysis.

A. THE DEMOCRATS

While there are multiple factions in the Democratic Party, the two prevailing ones are the now-ists and the not-now-ists (both of which have subset factions within them). The now-ists we will henceforth call the Nows, and the not now-ists we will henceforth call the Nots.

The hardline Marxists and Islamists are in the Now camp, the social justice champions are in the Not camp. The Nots want to throw off the shackles of the American “corpse” every bit as much as the Nows want to, but they have a rightful fear that if they do, the Nows will dominate the new civilization to come. The Chuck Schumer Nots fear losing power to the Nows, not losing America to the progressive state.

There are two candidates who exemplify both the Nots and the Nows. One candidate is James Talarico, the progressive xian running for a U.S. Texas Senate seat. He represents the Nots. The other candidate, Abdul El-Sayed, the progressive Islamist running for a U.S. Michigan seat, is in the Now camp.

Abdel El-Sayed has been weighed down by his direct affiliation with progressive information terrorist Hasan Piker, who pitches a pro-CCP, pro-Hamas, political violence-inciting, anti-American narrative to young Americans through social media. He is one of the top streamers in the world, making millions annually from his livestreams.

He has leveraged his huge audience to help promote El-Sayed not just after he won the nomination but in the Democratic primaries. Piker and El-Sayed have appeared in at least one public event together.

Recently, Piker claimed American was worse “pound for pound,” than Al Qaeda. He then resorted to gross numbers, not actual pound for pound numbers, comparing one terroristic attack to all the deaths ever caused by the United States in the history of the world. The cause of all the deaths is assumed to be “terrorism.” This follows his charges Jews who support Israel deserve whatever violence they get.

When El-Sayed was confronted about his continued affiliation with Piker, he refused to refute Piker, instead choosing to deflect to “cost of living” Gish galloping (more on this later). He could not dare refute the claim America is worse than Al Qaeda or that the Jews deserve being murdered.

America is founded on the idea of individual self-stewardship, which restricts the state’s right to use violence to force Americans to believe things they don’t believe.

Al Qaeda was founded on the principle that the Quran is the law, and the “leaders” are the interpreters of the law. The law demands worship of the true Allah and following the true Muhammad. All others will be subject to rape, sex slavery, chattel slavery, and execution.

El-Sayed could not refute the claim an Islamist totalitarian genocidal group is better than America. Tucker Carlson agreed with this statement, by the way. He represents the Nows who still hope to build an American-progressive hybrid to replace the presumed dead republic. He is a Nowist Progmerican.

Islam is a more appealing state religion than Christianity, for it affords gnostic powers to the holders of the truth, the interpreters of the Quran, the Tafsir, and the Hadiths.

James Talarico is in the Nots camp. He fears losing woke power to the Marxists and/or the Islamists, so he holds more desperately onto the outer shell of America. For him, the easiest suit he can put on is the Christian suit, though this one is rainbow infested.

Outside of his anti-Christian theology, Talarico revealed how progressive he is to the core with a recent statement he made that reflects how he views those he hopes to lead.

He said that humans are all just “big Kindergartners,” and for that reason, we should govern “our world like we run a kindergarten classroom.” He is the gnostic priest with the special knowledge to keep the “big Kindergartner” from hurting himself or others.

The Nows get their power from the Democratic Socialists of America, who are now becoming a dominant force in the Democratic Party. The Nots gave the Nows power; the Nows rose to power with the street thugs that make up this insurrectionist revolutionary party. The Nots funded and trained them, and now they hope to still contain them.

Before the Nows had party power, they’d been the street power of the Democratic Party for the last 10 years, increasingly being called upon to move the political discourse to the left by means of direct violence (what they euphemistically call “direct action”).

Now, the Nows are no longer a violent fringe exploited by the Nots to their own ends, they are their own real power. They aren’t even the minority in the Democratic Party anymore. A recent poll showed nearly 60% of Democrats support the DSA. The DSA’s own party platform is committed to creating “a new constitution…  [and creating] a democratic socialist republic.”

They are as openly Now as it gets, and they are winning hearts and minds in the Democratic Party, a party Karl Rove and John Cornyn will vote for in Texas (even if it’s for the Not candidate).

B. MASS MAILER ELECTION

When the Supreme Court declined to stay a lower court ruling stopping President Trump’s Mass Mailer EO from taking effect, they fell back on procedure over national security. They chose process over the existential integrity of the election itself. The ruling was 7-2 on a court with only 3 progressive-nominated justices. This reflect a judicial system that is fundamentally, overwhelmingly progressive, not American, in nature.

Matthew G. Andersson, writing in the American Thinker, captured the frustration Americans had with this ruling. He wrote “The Court, yet again, can’t see the forest from the trees, and worse, got caught up in analyzing the tree bark.  Like a pilot in a spin, it is suffering from spatial disorientation, and has judicially crashed.

“Apparently the SCOTUS believed the question before them involved the post office.

“Their attention was captured by the concept of postal delay: that the president’s EO would retard mail ballot processing with rules designed to actually protect it.  Their perception of time overruled the necessity of security. They fell for the legal subterfuge of the DNC, and lost their constitutional compass. The Court buried itself in minute legalism, rather than actual national justice.

“The Court is otherwise so used to picking winners and losers in traditional litigation, that it forgot that the Constitution can be a different national duty. A constitutional fight can sometimes create a zero-sum result: everyone loses if the nation is splintered by political tribalism.  Unity is the constitutional cause, and no one wins when a constitutional election system is seen as a dispute instead of a joint responsibility.”

Of course, Andersson is exactly right, though one doubts this was as “logically” driven (even if wrongly focused) as much as this was sophistry disguised as logical justification based on constitutional law and judicial precedent.

When there is an existential threat to progressive power, the Progmericans, the four non-progressives who joined them in the majority decision, will find a way to defend their closer cousin, even if it means sacrificing the American republic.

With this ruling, wherever progressives count ballots in mass mailer election states, close races will always be won by the progressive, unless the race is not essential to majority status (only cheat when you have to, for every cheat is a risk of exposure).

The four non-progressive justices who chose procedure over national security and basic American rule of law did so knowing the outcome they were likely assuring, a Democrat-controlled U.S. House and Senate.

Once in power, these Mass-Mailer “elected” progressives will be able to wreak havoc on Trump’s good progressive-neutralizing actions while they plot the end of the republic in 2028, all thanks to the Progmerican justices on SCOTUS.

C. COST OF LIVING

The progressive state media has been driving the cost of living is too high narrative heavily leading up to the midterm elections. While confidence in political parties bringing down the cost of living is overall not very high, Democrats beat Republicans 36% to 28% according to a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll.

Affordability and AI Data Centers (more on those next) are the top issues among voters going into the midterms.

We mentioned Abdul El-Sayed earlier as a representative of the Nows, the people willing and desiring to create a new state free of the American republic’s “baggage.” He is also our bellwether for how Democrats are able to use “cost of living” to deflect voters from existential issues about the very existence of the American republic in the first place.

Crooks and Liars covered this exchange between El-Sayed and a guest on a CBS News Talk show (Face the Nation). They set up their quoting of the salient exchange with the claim “The only attack Republicans have on El-Sayed is being interviewed by Piker, and they know the media is only too willing to promote their memes.”

The media is willing to challenge El-Sayed not in defense of the GOP, but in defense of the Nots, whom they represent. Crooks and Liars serves an audience of Nows, people hungry to destroy the republic and replace it with a socialist state.

Crooks and Liars writes like its audience is filled with “Big Kindergartners.”

Here is the exchange Crooks and Liars shared:

JIANG: Well, there are Jewish voters in your state who are concerned about your relationship with Piker. You have condemned anti-Semitism, but not called out his rhetoric directly. Why not?

El-Sayed: Weijia, with all due respect, this is the third time you’ve asked about a Twitch streamer in California.

I’ve done four events in Michigan this week. You know what didn’t come up? Twitch streamers in California.

You know what did come up? Grocery prices. The fact that people can’t see a doctor. The worry that they have about the quality of air and water.

I’m not interested in having a conversation about streamers in California because they are not raising the prices of gas and groceries.

I’m more interested in having a conversation about tariff policies and trade wars we shouldn’t be fighting.

About hot wars with Iran.

About AI, which I know we were supposed to talk about right now.

So let’s actually talk about the issues that are affecting people instead of getting distracted by whatever the president says we should be talking about.

Their whole game is to make us fight culture war so that we don’t pay attention to the fact that the president has made $2.2 billion.

His family has made even more. How about your family in Michigan? How about your ability to afford the basic things?

How about the ability to believe that you could see a doctor without having to potentially fall into medical debt?

Those are the conversations that people are having. Those are the conversations I want to have.

So yeah, I’m not all that interested in having a conversation about a Twitch streamer, forgive me, when people can’t afford their gas and their groceries.

First, he invalidates the speaker, saying “this is the third time you’ve asked about…”, implying she is belligerent, not that he has yet to answer her question. He doesn’t dare invalidate the man who rallies the street fighter and ballot harvester/stuffer army, but he doesn’t dare openly endorse Hasan Piker’s overtly anti-American and Jew-hating statements.

It is ok to lie about who you are to people you deem unworthy of honesty.

To the progressive, Americans are not worthy of truth, integrity, or even agency, and certainly not forgiveness and restoration.

After invalidating the speaker, our deft progressive Islamist then sanitizes the progressive information terrorist, Hasan Piker, labeling him “a Twitch streamer in California.”

He then takes on the moral supremacist role, chastising the woman for not being sensitive to the starving masses. He laments, “You know what did come up? Grocery prices,” referring to his Michigan campaign tour where he claimed no one was asking about a “California Twitch Streamer.”

Then he Gish galloped threats-to-ease issues, like the Iran War, AI, and the wealth of the Trumps versus the poverty of the people. His next move was to subtly attach the speaker and the question to Trump, saying, “So let’s actually talk about the issues that are affecting people instead of getting distracted by whatever the president says we should be talking about.”

This is equivalent to calling any cogent objection to their project a “dog whistle of white supremacism.” The white demon, in this example, keeps the progressive from seeing truth; here, it is the Trump demon that keeps the progressive from seeing truth.

He brings in the fascist, the Nazi, the white supremacist, the orange demon, Donald Trump not only to disarm a reasonable question he continues to refuse to answer, but it’s also a veiled threat to the speaker, who knows full well anyone even associated with Trump is fair game for violent assault by the progressive state.

This also, by extension, puts those labels on this woman, who is now assumed to be nothing but an NPC of Trump’s fascist MAGA. He claims the real issues are essentially ease, comfort, cost of living, not the existential threat his ideology is to the American republic.

He comes through the DSA and agrees with their platform of replacing our constitution with one that creates a socialist “republic.”

He speaks in hypnotic advertising tones, repeating the buzzwords over and over again, twitch streamers, gas prices, what really matters, with a morally indignant tone, demonizing the questioner and sanitizing the demon, Hasan Piker. We have little doubt the speaker received death threats after this widely shared exchange.

This exchange perfectly represents how the Democratic Party hopes to avoid all the messy conversations about the existence of an American republic in the world they all envision (that includes the Nots like Talarico).

As we are not a nation of whole system thinkers, this tactic, against the backdrop of the progressive state media monolith, is almost certain to work. The threat of violence remains implicit in the language they choose to use, a language that is an actual dog whistle permitting and calling for violence against their political opponents. Sometimes, the language is not implicit at all, it’s direct.

Demonize the questioners, signal to the violent the orders to attack, sanitize the demons, and promise a life of ease if you just give us power.

D. AI DATA CENTERS

The central issue in a majority of contested U.S. House and Senate Races is becoming Data Centers. At a time when one party, the Democratic Party, is looking to convert America to the Progressive State, Americans are more concerned over data centers than losing their constitutional rights.

Barack Obama is leading the clarion call for the Democrats in the midterms; that clarion call is “It’s the AI, stupid.”

Thanks to the Democratic Party’s progressive state media, the narrative of AI as both the angel of destruction and consumer of essential resources is being pushed hard. Democrats find an anti-AI space that enables them to both convince Americans to hand over AI governance to them, and to vote for them to stop the data centers from being built.

President Trump’s tone-deaf response to concerns about AI data centers doesn’t help. He invalidates everyone who has any concerns about the rapid deployment of AI. While the Democrats are hyping the concerns beyond reality, President Trump is minimizing them beyond reality. He has also yet to clearly articulate what’s at stake in the war no one understands we are fighting, the AI War.

Our main opponent is China from without and the Democratic Party from within; they BOTH see a strong U.S. with the winning Americanized AI as an existential threat to their joint ideal ecumenical social visions, Progressivism here and Socialism with Chinese characteristics in China. The progressives are playing a dangerous game with their frenemy China, willing, at least for now, to retard American AI development.

This might not be to appease China but rather it might be to assure AI development doesn’t break their progressive containment. If it grows too fast, it might have American-supporting AI infrastructures competing with progressive ones. Even Progmerican AI infrastructures would be a threat to their project.

With Anthropic’s attempt to consolidate American AI governance under one woke board, we have more confidence our assumption is correct.

They are not looking to ultimately retard AI development in the race with China, their frenemy, they are looking to prevent its growth from breaking their progressive containment. All this voting public mostly sees is the existential threat AI poses to the world and how data centers will denude the land of life.

There are no serious discussions about the geopolitical reality AI has created for the world. Geopolitics is virtually a non-factor in AI discourse. The conversation is limited to cost on ease, not the overall reality of power our nation-state finds itself in.

With the scalability of AI now accomplished, we live in a world with nearly 200 nation states all now striving to maximize their potential AI power. In America, that conversation isn’t happening at all.

There is some discourse around the cultural ramifications of AI, and conservatives have waved warning flags exposing the progressives’ efforts to consolidate AI governance under their moral framing.

While those conversations are happening, they are overshadowed by the sensational apocalyptic doom and gloom narratives now also being pushed by conservative outlets.

ASSESSMENT

The 2026 Midterm elections are not dominated by existential questions about the differences between Progressivism and Americanism. There are no serious questions about the compatibility between Americanism and Islamism. The price of gas is more salient to the “American” voter than whether one or more of the parties in power reflects constitutional American Rule of Law or not.

No one outside of a very few people is warning Americans they are about to choose treason for the lie of affordability over defending the republic (such as we can through the Progmerican vehicle of power the GOP has become).

Among rank and file “Americans,” the awareness of American Rule of Law is thin, with that awareness mostly only coming when they are being challenged by authority. To them, progressives are Americans because progressives have been a part of America for more than 100 years.

Even Donald Trump holds up the two founders of progressivism in America, Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, as Presidential exemplars. He even added the man who metastasized progressivism into American institutions to near the top of the list.

That man was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who cemented the notion that the primary principle of America was to defend the weak from the strong in the overall American zeitgeist. This is a progressive ideal, not an American one. That ideal villainizes the strong and fetishes the weak, giving emotional justification to eschew individual liberty when it “hurts the weak” to the “benefit” of “the strong.”

Trump also made himself the greatest, which helps progressives in the midterms who want to make the election a moratorium on “orange man bad,” not their anti-American standards and their desire to destroy the republic and make it a socialist dystopian nightmare.

While we have always “rooted for the underdog,” we did not do so at the expense of American rule of law. We did not vilify the strong, we just didn’t worship them like our European descendants did. It is not until progressivism rose in this country that we looked on the successful as demons.

Most Americans do not see progressives as an alien belief exapting American institutions to their anti-American ends, they see progressivism as the “evolved” standard of Americanism. Where once there was individual liberty, now we mitigate for the disenfranchised. Equality trumps liberty in the minds of most “Americans,” even most self-professing conservatives.

While we will not yet make a prediction on how this election might go (as we have not thoroughly looked at all the key races), we can see the trends are favoring a Democratic victory. The two wildcards here are the degree to which Democrats can cheat without being caught by a DOJ that is actively looking for the cheats and the degree to which polls are being created to push narratives rather than discern truth.

If the DOJ is as inept as we rate it so far (for instance, it is unwilling to arrest and charge Hasan Piker, even as he overtly calls for the murdering of Americans almost every day on Twitch), we fear that diligence will be feckless.

If the polls are not narrative pushers, the Democrats look poised to win.

Our October 2026 monthly issue will cover in depth the state of the 2026 midterm election, offering both a PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS and RECOMMENDED ACTION for our readers.

The 2026 midterms needed to be a moratorium on the influence of progressivism and Islam on this country in recent years, and whether or not their values are compatible with ours (they’re existentially not). Instead, it has become an election about the overblown AI demon and the cost of groceries.

While Democrats kidnap children from parents who refuse to “transition” them, transitioning children is hardly talked about on any campaign trail. It’s nearly ignored by the progressive state press, and thus by the progressive influencers who take their queues from the progressive state press.

The American people would rather pay less for coffee than stop Democrats from demoralizing and mutilating children through their transgender ideology (an ideology that demands the state compel belief for the sake of suicidal children).

If America were not under the thumb of the progressive state media and its cultural agit prop machine, the horrors of the rise of Islam, the depravity of abortion, the anti-American values of progressivism would have been clearly shown by an Americanist press, a true free press and not a content marketing terror machine.

Were corporate media outlets to regularly show the consequence of abortion, both on the murdered child and the murdering mother, abortion would lose support overnight.

As it is, they seek to criminalize such exposure, calling the display of their work, mutilated dead babies, “hate speech,” a progressive concept that existentially threatens America’s founding principles of self-stewardship. Every woman that chooses to murder their child is now forced to protect the progressive state, for an American one would rightly shame them.

The progressive state press is NOT the free press, it is an illegal political action center that willingly and intentionally uses lies, obfuscations, and omissions of truth to demoralize the American republic and protect the depravity of the progressive state.

It is a criminal operation centrally directed. It deserves no 1st Amendment protections since it is not executing free speech, it’s executing an information terror campaign intended to destroy the republic from within.

The Progmericans, people like Trump and Vance, want to hold on to that power for themselves. They want to exapt the progressive state press to become the Progmerican state press.

The failure by the Trump administration, even in his first term, to recognize the ongoing existential threat the progressive state press poses on our Republic continues to shackle our ability to resist an enemy from within who wants us enslaved, starving, imprisoned, or dead.

Again, we suspect this is because Progmericans like Trump still hope to use that de facto state press to their own ends, for while they value nation-states over a global imperialist Empire (which is the progressive goal) and they value nation-state patriotism as a unifier of a nation, they don’t value true individual liberty, for they hope to control outcomes every bit as much as progressives do, just for more localized ends, not ecumenical ones.

The progressive state press continues to protect the Democratic Party from the proper American scrutiny it has yet to face since it first invaded our shores more than 100 years ago (maybe close to 150 years, some would rightly argue).

The progressive state press continues to make the 2026 midterm elections a moratorium on ease, not nationhood, knowing full well they are inviting anti-American demons into our house to destroy us from within.

The American people continue to choose ease at Zion over facing the hard war against progressive and Islamists insurrectionists from within, who have already claimed whole cities and states not theirs. They continue to choose cheap steak over the right to bear arms.

FURTHER RESOURCES:

Progressivism in America: Past, Present, and Future – Edited by David Woolner and Jack Thompson

American Progressivism – Edited by Ronald J. Pestritto and William J. Atto

The 2015 Election and the Power of Progressivism – A Brief History with Documents – Brett Flehinger

Democrat Fundraiser ActBlue Accepted ‘Illegal Foreign Political Donations,’ Concealed Evidence from Congress– slaynews.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

A congressional investigation has found that Democratic Party fundraising powerhouse ActBlue weakened fraud safeguards and accepted “illegal foreign political donations” before misrepresenting its security procedures to Congress.

Congressional Republicans released an update to their investigation of ActBlue, the massive online fundraising platform used by leading Democrats including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Michigan U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, and Democratic Party congressional leadership.

The report alleges that ActBlue deliberately loosened its fraud-prevention standards during the 2024 election cycle despite internal assessments warning that doing so would increase fraudulent contributions.

ActBlue has denied wrongdoing and accused Republicans of conducting a politically motivated campaign against the organization.

Texas Democrat Caught on Video Explaining $25 Program to Influence Voters– legalinsurrection.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

Townhall Media caught Sky McAdams, an organizing manager for Texas Majority PAC, admitting to a scheme involving paying people to influence others to vote for Democrats.

You know they desperately want Texas Democratic Senate nominee James Talerico to win.

You can’t pay someone to vote for a candidate, but apparently the PAC discovered a way around the rule.

From the video:

MCADAMS: We are paying people $25 to attend a one-hour Zoom class to learn why voting is important and why the Republicans are causing all of these bad things. So it’s like a roundabout way of paying people for their votes, essentially, which is interesting.

PERSON RECORDING THE VIDEO: What’s the – what’s this called?

MCADAMS: It’s called the Paid Relational Program. I think rally Texas is the official name. You can’t pay someone to vote for someone. You can’t be like, “Here’s $25, go vote for me.” You can say, “Attend a one-hour class and you can receive $25.” And then the class just talks about the importance of…it’s a little gray.

PERSON RECORDING THE VIDEO: But right now we could use all the help we can get.

MCADAMS: If I was a Republican, I would be pissed. I would be like, “That’s shady as f**k.”

Relentless’s website admits that it recruits “low-propensity voters and compensates them for their time as they reach, persuade, and mobilize their friends and family to vote.”

The U.S. Supreme Court just launched a constitutional crisis– www.americanthinker.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

The Supreme Court failed to affirm the president’s recent executive order protecting election integrity by voter ID and eligibility.

The details of the Court’s judicial reasoning is full of granular reference made ultimately to various federally derived postal rules which are not relevant to the larger national security implications of the EO.

Unfortunately the Court failed to anchor its attention fully to the one document that mattered: the larger U.S. Constitution.

The Court, yet again, can’t see the forest from the trees, and worse, got caught up in analyzing the tree bark.  Like a pilot in a spin, it is suffering from spatial disorientation, and has judicially crashed.

Apparently the SCOTUS believed the question before them involved the post office.

Their attention was captured by the concept of postal delay: that the president’s EO would retard mail ballot processing with rules designed to actually protect it.  Their perception of time overruled the necessity of security. They fell for the legal subterfuge of the DNC, and lost their constitutional compass. The Court buried itself in minute legalism, rather than actual national justice.

The Court is otherwise so used to picking winners and losers in traditional litigation, that it forgot that the Constitution can be a different national duty. A constitutional fight can sometimes create a zero-sum result: everyone loses if the nation is splintered by political tribalism.  Unity is the constitutional cause, and no one wins when a constitutional election system is seen as a dispute instead of a joint responsibility.

California Drags Pro-Lifers To Court For Crime Of ‘Offering Hope’– thefederalist.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

California Attorney General Rob Bonta wants a court to punish pro-life organizations for telling women they may have another choice after starting a chemical abortion.

His case against Heartbeat International and RealOptions targets their communications about abortion pill reversal and seeks millions in penalties along with restrictions on what they can say. But to understand what California is asking the court to suppress, look beyond the legal briefs and listen to the women who actually sought that help.

Three of them took the witness stand. They told the court what happened when they took mifepristone, regretted their decisions, and desperately searched for a way to keep their babies and continue their pregnancies. Today, each is raising the child she feared she had lost.

And in California’s own closing brief, the state described what these women received from Heartbeat and RealOptions with a remarkable word: “hope.”

“That Defendants offered hope to these individuals underscores the seriousness of their misconduct.” Those words appear on page 45 of the California attorney general’s post-trial brief in The People of the State of California v. Heartbeat International and RealOptions.

The “individuals” are women who took the first drug in a chemical abortion, regretted that decision, and urgently searched for another option. The “hope” was that they might still be able to sustain their babies and continue their pregnancies. The “misconduct” was telling them about abortion pill reversal.

Did Liberal Justices Delay Dissents To Stop Trump’s Voting EO?– thefederalist.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

Did the Supreme Court’s liberal justices slow-walk their dissents in litigation over President Trump’s mail-in voting order to run out the clock on its implementation for the 2026 midterms? That seems to be what Justice Samuel Alito subtly suggested in the court’s most recent ruling on the subject.

On Monday night, the high court rejected the Trump administration’s request to pause a lower court blockade on a new U.S. Postal Service rule. As described by Fox News, the new rule required election officials to “submit ballot-envelope designs for approval and upload voter information and unique tracking barcodes to a new USPS portal.”

The decision — which effectively bars the policy from taking effect for the fall elections — was presumably 7-2, with Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas saying they would have granted the government’s request for relief. Aside from Justice Brett Kavanaugh — who said the USPS rule seems lawful but denied the government’s request because it’s too close to the midterms for election officials to implement it — the majority offered little explanation for its decision.

Alito, on the other hand, penned a lengthy dissent (joined by Thomas) outlining several issues with the court’s holding. It was in this opinion that the Bush 43 appointee seemingly telegraphed some potentially nefarious shenanigans by the court’s Democrat appointees in the case.

The apparent hint came in the dissent’s concluding pages, in which Alito refuted the alleged concerns that the Democrat-led states challenging the Postal Service rule had regarding “the practical effects of implementing the rule close to the midterm elections.” While taking “that problem very seriously,” the justice highlighted two key points demonstrating why it isn’t enough to warrant rejecting the government’s request to implement the rule for the 2026 contests.

The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that a lower court ruling suspending President Trump’s XO attempting make Mass mailer voting more accountable will stand, at least until AFTER the 2026 election. The ruling effectively enables Democrats to slow-walk close races in their favor using reserve “ballots” “registered” to the dead and non-citizens still on their uncleansed voter rolls.

SCOTUS Blocks Trump’s Mail-In Voting Order Ahead Of Midterms– thefederalist.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to pause a lower court blockade on Monday night against President Trump’s mail-in voting executive order ahead of the 2026 midterms. The vote was presumably 7-2, with Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissenting.

In its unsigned opinion, the high court rejected the Trump administration’s emergency application to stay a Sept. 4 decision by Massachusetts-based District Judge Indira Talwani. The Obama appointee and past Democrat donor issued a preliminary injunction blocking part of the U.S. Postal Service’s new policy that complies with the president’s mail-in voting order. The USPS rule “would require election officials to submit ballot-envelope designs for approval and upload voter information and unique tracking barcodes to a new USPS portal,” as described by Fox News.

The preliminary injunction replaced a temporary restraining order Talwani had issued against the new rule days prior. The Trump administration — which initially appealed the TRO to SCOTUS — withdrew its initial application over the TRO and filed a new one asking the high court to pause Talwani’s injunction.

The Supreme Court previously overturned a separate injunction by Talwani against Trump’s mail-in voting order last month. In a 6-3 ruling, the high court ruled that it was too soon for courts to consider the challenge brought by Democrat-led states and D.C. because the administration had yet to issue rules at that time, as required by the president’s edict.

The Supreme Court Just Ruled Against Election Security– townhall.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

The Supreme Court has rejected the Trump administration’s efforts to restrict mail-in ballots for the upcoming midterm elections in the 7-2 decision.

NEW: House Republicans Map Out Filibuster Bypass for President Trump’s SAVE America Act– wltreport.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

House Republicans may have found their best path yet to get President Trump’s election-integrity agenda through the Senate.

Instead of waiting for Democrats to supply the votes needed to break a filibuster, GOP leaders are preparing to use budget reconciliation to move the core of the SAVE America Act with a simple majority.

The target is straightforward: require proof of citizenship when Americans register to vote and establish a nationwide photo-ID standard for federal elections.

Current reporting lays out the plan and the tight timetable facing Republicans before the November midterms:

House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil is overseeing the election provisions. He says conversations are underway with the Trump administration and Senate Republicans about writing them into a reconciliation package.

Fox News Digital reports that Steil wants to include the SAVE America Act’s two biggest mandates: documentary proof of citizenship during voter registration and photo identification when casting a federal ballot.

Whistleblower alleges DHS voter fraud investigation could violate state laws– www.washingtonexaminer.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

A whistleblower claimed a Department of Homeland Security effort to investigate voter fraud violated state laws, a charge the agency denies.

On Monday, Senate Democrats announced their reveal of a whistleblower complaint regarding a DHS effort to investigate voter fraud. According to the whistleblower, DHS had directed U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officers to violate state laws as part of its “Unlawful Voter Initiative,” which seeks to gather evidence about voter fraud.

Feds Arrest California Fraudster Who Paid Homeless to Sign for Other Voters – PJ Media– pjmedia.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

Federal authorities in California continue to identify and arrest election fraudsters, with the latest criminal having become infamous through an undercover journalism video.

Back in March, James O’Keefe released an exposé showing an operation to pay off homeless people on Skid Row to forge the signatures of other voters in order to rack up enough names for getting certain ballot petitions approved. Petition circulators were offering homeless Angelenos between two and three bucks for the forgeries. The fraud operation had lists of registered voters (including addresses) and told each homeless person which name to assume and exactly what to write for the ballot petitions. Bill Essayli, first assistant U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, revealed that one of the individuals running a fraud operation in the video was 47-year-old James Brass of Victorville.

 

Brass and two of the petition circulators who worked for him, Courtney Price of Jacksonville, Fla., and Jateisha Herron of Boron, Calif., are now facing charges.

Among the shocking quotes in the O’Keefe video were “If you mess up, I can’t get paid,” “You’re Robert,” “You only writing what I’m telling you to write,” and “You’re asking a lot of questions, you scaring me.” The individual who made the last statement also informed the undercover journalist that she could make another three dollars by going a little ways up the street and finding another fraud operation just like his. All of this is a violation of California’s election code Division 18, Chapter 7, Article II, Section 18613, which states clearly, “Every person who subscribes to any initiative, referendum, or recall petition a fictitious name, or who subscribes thereto the name of another, or who causes another to subscribe such a name to that petition, is guilty of a felony and is punishable by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code for two, three, or four years.”

Hence the indictment against Brass, Herron, and Price. Brass was set to make his first court appearance on Thursday afternoon, according to Essayli. “All three defendants are charged with one count of conspiracy to commit identity fraud in furtherance of a state felony. Brass and Price are charged with an additional count of identity fraud in furtherance of a state felony,” Essayli said.

 

He added that the criminals’ “conduct undermines the confidence voters have in our election systems. We will vigorously investigate and charge anyone involved in corrupting our elections.”

Given the scope of the fraud network that O’Keefe identified in his video, and the fact that Essayli already promised a major election fraud crackdown, the likelihood is that federal authorities will soon be arresting and charging other individuals too.

 

Editor’s Note: President Trump is fighting to renew America in this 250th birthday year.

Help us fight back against anti-American propaganda and leftist fraud. Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.

 

 

The Supreme Court just created massive chaos in Missouri when Justice Brett Kavanaugh rejected a petition by the Missouri GOP seeking to overthrow a state SCOTUS ruling blocking their redistricting map. This map was the one voters assumed when they voted in the primary election.

A lower Federal court has already “lifted” the state SCOTUS ruling, leaving state authorities wondering which court to honor. If the lack of a SCOTUS ruling holds, Missourians who voted in the primary might be voting in a different district in the general election. This non-ruling effectively preserves one Democrat seat.

BREAKING: Supreme Court Makes Its Move in Missouri’s High-Stakes Midterm Map Fight– wltreport.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

The U.S. Supreme Court has denied Missouri officials’ emergency request to use the state’s newly drawn congressional map in the November midterm election.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh denied the application Tuesday without a written explanation. The brief order leaves the Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling in place while election officials prepare for November.

That means Missouri will conduct the general election under the congressional districts adopted in 2022, even though the newer map was used for the August primary.

The emergency fight grew out of House Bill 1, a mid-decade redistricting measure approved by Missouri’s Republican-led legislature in September 2025 and signed by Gov. Mike Kehoe.

The map was drawn to improve Republican prospects in a Kansas City-area district. President Trump had encouraged Republican-led states to pursue new maps as control of the U.S. House remained closely contested.

Missouri used the new lines during its August primary. But a referendum campaign seeking a statewide vote on HB 1 collected more than 300,000 signatures and challenged Secretary of State Denny Hoskins’ decision to keep the question off the ballot.

On September 3, the Missouri Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the state constitution allows voters to approve or reject congressional redistricting legislation through a referendum.

The central question was whether the referendum power over “any act of the general assembly” reaches a congressional redistricting bill. The state’s high court concluded that it does because none of the constitution’s listed exceptions applied to HB 1.

The court also rejected the claim that election laws are categorically exempt from referendum. It noted that HB 1 contained no emergency clause and described the redistricting as optional because the districts enacted after the 2020 census remained available.

The justices ordered Hoskins to certify the petition and place HB 1 before voters in November. They barred officials from using the new districts unless voters approve the measure, leaving the 2022 lines in force for the general election.

In their emergency application to the U.S. Supreme Court, Missouri officials argued that switching maps between the primary and general election would create serious administrative and constitutional problems.

They said more than 1.2 million Missourians had already voted in the primary under the new districts. In their view, using different districts for the primary and general election would fracture a single election process and raise equal-protection concerns.

The filing warned that local officials would have to reassign hundreds of thousands of voters, explain new districts and revise months of election preparation in less than nine weeks. Missouri also pointed to federal deadlines for transmitting ballots to military and overseas voters.

The state further argued that the Missouri Supreme Court failed to account for federal election law when it restored the older districts. Officials asked Kavanaugh to pause the injunction while they pursued further review.

The challengers answered in an opposition filed Monday that HB 1 never legally took effect because the referendum petition suspended it under Missouri law.

They maintained that the 2022 districts never stopped being the lawful map for November. Their filing also said the federal claims had not been properly preserved in the state-court proceedings, creating a separate barrier to Supreme Court intervention.

The referendum supporters argued that state officials created the timing problem by waiting until August 4 to reject the petition, nearly eight months after organizers submitted more than 300,000 signatures. They disputed the claim that election administrators could not return to the earlier lines.

They urged Kavanaugh to leave the state court’s order untouched and allow voters to decide HB 1. Tuesday’s denial did exactly that for now, but it supplied no reasoning and did not resolve the broader constitutional arguments on the merits.

Attorney Marc Elias, whose firm represented the referendum supporters, called the decision a victory for his client and Missouri voters.

The political stakes are substantial. Missouri currently sends six Republicans and two Democrats to the U.S. House under the 2022 districts, while the newer map could have given Republicans a stronger opportunity to gain another seat.

For Missouri voters, the practical result is now clear: congressional candidates will compete under the 2022 map in November, while voters separately decide whether to approve or reject HB 1.

Read the full Supreme Court order here: Hoskins v. Von Glahn, No. 26A304.

Featured image: Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump and retired Justice Anthony Kennedy at the White House in 2018. Official White House photo by Amy Rossetti, via Wikimedia Commons; public domain.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

 

FBI Hits Democrat Nevada Election Chief with 7 Subpoenas for Voter Records– slaynews.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

The FBI has hit the office of Nevada’s Democrat Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar with seven subpoenas seeking voter-related information as federal authorities ramp up scrutiny of the battleground state’s election records.

Aguilar’s office confirmed that it received all seven subpoenas from President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ) over the past three months.

The subpoenas were issued through the FBI.

However, Aguilar’s office has refused to disclose exactly what voter records, documents, or testimony federal investigators are seeking.

The extraordinary wave of subpoenas comes as Nevada prepares for the critical November midterm elections and amid an escalating battle between the Trump administration and Aguilar over access to the state’s voter rolls.

It also follows federal concerns that thousands of noncitizens may be registered to vote in Nevada.

DHS Planning Major Voter Fraud Investigation Surge Ahead Of Midterms– trendingpoliticsnews.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

The Department of Homeland Security is preparing to dramatically expand voter fraud investigations across a group of battleground and Democrat-led states beginning Tuesday, putting federal investigators on the ground just weeks before the 2026 midterm elections.

Homeland Security Investigations will launch what officials are calling a “coordinated criminal voter fraud surge initiative” beginning September 1. The effort is expected to run through mid-October and will involve investigators pursuing leads, interviewing individuals and preparing potential cases for prosecutors, according to internal federal guidance reviewed by CNN,

Nine states are expected to see investigative action: California, Connecticut, Georgia, Missouri, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, Washington and Wisconsin. The deployment marks another significant escalation in the Trump administration’s effort to investigate allegations involving noncitizens who may have illegally registered or cast ballots.

HSI, an investigative arm of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, traditionally focuses on crimes including human trafficking, drug smuggling and child exploitation. Under President Donald Trump, however, the agency has increasingly been tasked with election-related investigations, particularly cases involving suspected noncitizen voting.

The timing is notable. The initiative will take place as states move closer to November’s midterm elections, when control of Congress will be decided.

Historically, federal prosecutors have been discouraged from taking highly visible investigative steps close to elections if those actions could affect campaigns or voting. That Justice Department policy does not directly bind DHS, however, and the internal DHS guidance reportedly makes no mention of those traditional timing concerns.

U.S Attorney Essayli: California Voter Rolls ‘Vulnerable’ After Non-Citizen Arrested– legalinsurrection.com
News Source
EXCERPT:

First Assistant United States Attorney Bill Essayli said that the arrest of the Honduran national in California for allegedly unlawfully registering to vote shows the state’s vulnerability.

Essayli told Bill Melugin on Fox News:

This case really highlights the vulnerability in California’s voter rolls. They basically allow anybody to register to vote on the honor system. There’s nobody in government that is checking to confirm you’re a citizen, and in fact, in this case, he on the form put down a California driver’s license and a social, which he had because he has a visa that does not prove you’re a citizen. And according to the Secretary of State, they say at least half a million people don’t even provide that information when they register to vote.

Darwin Jonathan Rivera Flores faces two felony charges: false claim to U.S. citizenship and fraudulent voter registration.

Rivera Flores is a lawful permanent resident in California’s San Fernando Valley. But he is not a citizen and therefore cannot vote.

Rivera Flores has not voted in an election. The voter registration was dated November 4, 2025.

Authorities believe Rivera Flores intended to vote in November.

Rivera Flores appeared on the FBI’s radar due to harassing an agent after he disrupted ICE operations in February.

Obama Judge Once Again Orders Postal Service To Defy Trump’s Mail-In Ballot Executive Order– dailycaller.com
News Source

EXCERPT:

An Obama-appointed judge once again temporarily barred the U.S. Postal Service from carrying out President Donald Trump’s restrictions on mail-in ballots in a Thursday ruling.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani lifted a preliminary injunction Wednesday after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that some of Trump’s limits could remain in place. The judge issued a new ruling reversing the previous decision, arguing that USPS overstepped its legal mandate, which once again blocked Trump’s rule.

Trump signed an executive order on March 31 titled, “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” which established certain rules for the USPS regarding mail-in and absentee ballots. Section 3 of the executive order required all outgoing election mail to be marked as “Official Election Mail,” including a unique Intelligent Mail barcode and be pre-approved by the USPS for design and barcode placement. (RELATED: Judicial Order Blocking Trump’s Post Office Rule For Mail-In Ballots Lifted After SCOTUS Intervention)

“Where a state or local election official does not obtain envelope and return envelope design approval, or does not upload voter information, or does not include unique intelligent mail bar codes on ballot envelopes, the U.S.P.S. will not mail ballots to voters,” the ruling stated.

Talwani argued that Congress did not delegate authority to the USPS to regulate election mail. She argued the rules would prevent citizens from voting by mail unless the USPS approved the ballots in a timely manner.

The judge further argued that imposing these rules on the states is unconstitutional. She placed a fourteen-day stay on the “implementation or enforcement” of the rules, which prevents USPS from taking these steps ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

“The court finds Plaintiffs likely to succeed on the merits of their claims that (1) the USPS lacked authority to issue the Final Rule; (2) the Final Rule is unconstitutional in imposing these requirements on the States; and (3) the Final Rule is unconstitutional in prohibiting non-compliant State and local officials from using the United States Postal Service to mail ballots,” the judge said.

Talwani initially barred Section 3 in an Aug. 11 ruling after the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts and other activist groups sued the administration over the executive order.

A court in California issued a similar injunction, which reached the Supreme Court in the case, Trump v. California. The high court stayed the injunction, allowing the administration to move forward with the executive order.


Obama Judge Once Again Orders Postal Service To Defy Trump’s Mail-In Ballot Executive Order– dailycaller.com
News Source

EXCERPT:

An Obama-appointed judge once again temporarily barred the U.S. Postal Service from carrying out President Donald Trump’s restrictions on mail-in ballots in a Thursday ruling.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani lifted a preliminary injunction Wednesday after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that some of Trump’s limits could remain in place. The judge issued a new ruling reversing the previous decision, arguing that USPS overstepped its legal mandate, which once again blocked Trump’s rule.

Trump signed an executive order on March 31 titled, “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” which established certain rules for the USPS regarding mail-in and absentee ballots. Section 3 of the executive order required all outgoing election mail to be marked as “Official Election Mail,” including a unique Intelligent Mail barcode and be pre-approved by the USPS for design and barcode placement. (RELATED: Judicial Order Blocking Trump’s Post Office Rule For Mail-In Ballots Lifted After SCOTUS Intervention)

“Where a state or local election official does not obtain envelope and return envelope design approval, or does not upload voter information, or does not include unique intelligent mail bar codes on ballot envelopes, the U.S.P.S. will not mail ballots to voters,” the ruling stated.

Talwani argued that Congress did not delegate authority to the USPS to regulate election mail. She argued the rules would prevent citizens from voting by mail unless the USPS approved the ballots in a timely manner.

The judge further argued that imposing these rules on the states is unconstitutional. She placed a fourteen-day stay on the “implementation or enforcement” of the rules, which prevents USPS from taking these steps ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

“The court finds Plaintiffs likely to succeed on the merits of their claims that (1) the USPS lacked authority to issue the Final Rule; (2) the Final Rule is unconstitutional in imposing these requirements on the States; and (3) the Final Rule is unconstitutional in prohibiting non-compliant State and local officials from using the United States Postal Service to mail ballots,” the judge said.

Talwani initially barred Section 3 in an Aug. 11 ruling after the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts and other activist groups sued the administration over the executive order.

A court in California issued a similar injunction, which reached the Supreme Court in the case, Trump v. California. The high court stayed the injunction, allowing the administration to move forward with the executive order.