The Supreme Court on Monday blocked the Postal Service from enforcing new mail voting rules ahead of the midterm elections.
In the wake of this decision, Trump has called this decision disastrous, for the healing/recovery of America, claims it will lead to massive monetary losses, and that his nominations are entirely different people - than the nominees he originally installed.
Simultaneously, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche purportedly claims that the Trump-administration will honor SCOTUS's decision, but a the the same time - will pursue all avenues to contest it. Unfortunately, what Blanche doesn't understand, however, is the ruling has been made. These shadow-docket, last-minute attempts to disenfranchis…
In the wake of this decision, Trump has called this decision disastrous, for the healing/recovery of America, claims it will lead to massive monetary losses, and that his nominations are entirely different people - than the nominees he originally installed.
Simultaneously, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche purportedly claims that the Trump-administration will honor SCOTUS's decision, but a the the same time - will pursue all avenues to contest it. Unfortunately, what Blanche doesn't understand, however, is the ruling has been made. These shadow-docket, last-minute attempts to disenfranchise voters, the unconstitutional basis of of stripping states of the constitution clearly outlines (permitting individual states the autonomy and self-agency to establish the time/place of voting), attempts render the neutral USPS - as an enforcer of Trump's non-enforceable EO (the authority of which resides, presumably attempts to additionally exfiltrate voter rolls from states through the requirement of externally PII barcoded ballots, the other outlandish requirement that mis-matched last names (for established and qualifying voters) - or even a single bent corner - would toss batches of 10K ballots - 9,999 (or 10,000) that were otherwise legitimate mail-in-ballots, and a litany of other controversial decisions.
Clearly the Trump-regime was rolling with the plan, in the hopes they could escalate any contestation of the plan to the highest courts of the land and seek injunctive relief (or that SCOTUS could claim no injury had yet occurred). However, it's very much outwardly clear what the purpose of these policies ultimately were, as the rushed implementation, the whistle-blower who came forward to expose the plans to disenfranchise voters through arbitrary "batching" - to ensure en-masse voter disenfranchisement (ultimately forcing either provisional ballots, or in-person voting - which is currently still at threat of creating disenfranchisement), etc.
Of course, I would not put Trump to claim mass-fraud, demand stoppage of vote counting (or demand that all votes must be counted on election day - which is impossible), potential efforts to seize ballot pickups - or encourage sycophants/supporters/ICE/military to show up to polling places (fortunately, such efforts are being preemptively contested - such as requiring that no form of voter intimidation or jamming up of polling places through intimidation/entrapment, or efforts to jam-up polling may be made); in addition to the litany of past gambits made during the last election cycle which included resorting to blackmailing Ukrainian President Zelenskyy (to find dirt on opponent's son - Hunter Biden - or hold back release of defensive missiles; or more recent efforts - following the kidnap/exfiltration of Venezeula's Moduro: forcing him to admit that Venezuela interfered in the 2020 elections); and of course - one major "Trump card" left on the table, is associated with the unannounced/illegal seizure of ballots from the 2020 election from 4/5 states for which it was attempted (and weaponized-DOJ, having broken chain of custody) - will potentially claim that massive-fraud was found with the results of the 2020 election.
This administration has literally left no stone, unturned. As Bannon put it "flood the zone with shit" and "He's [Trump's] going to get a third term. So, Trump '28, Trump is going to be president in '28 and people ought to just get accommodated with that."
Truly the last minute decision to force USPS to broadly adopt such policies, was simply to jam up the system and disenfranchise/intimidate voters. I still recall when Trump claimed he voted by mail and in-person, and encouraged his supporters to do so. Right now, he's further doubling-down on what appear to be attempts to bribe voters with the promise of $5000 "dividend checks" if Republicans take both the House and the Senate. At its core, Trump has contended that our country is ripe with "massive and wide-spread voter fraud", that illegal foreigner and dead-people had voted in past elections (of which there is no evidence of this, and actually voter fraud is actually exceedingly rare), during the 2020 election - Trump encouraged supporters to stand in line the day of elections to vote in person and not use mail-in-ballots (but ultimately relented - likely from allies warning him such framing may backfire and disenfranchise his voters - given the threats posted by COVID and the unwillingness of some voters - not turning up on election day.
As some may recall, Trump was suggesting, right out of the gate: in the months into the lead-up to the 2020 presidential election; and following his electoral college win in 2016 - still parroted unfounded claims and lies of voter fraud.
The overarching goal is to state there is fraud in our elections, whilst sewing elements of fraud and undermining/dismantling the election process. The net result, either way, is to sew mistrust in the process, so whether it be Democrats, or Republicans - the nation holds uncertainty - given: the pre-textual, subtextual, subversion, sewing/framing of mistrust in the elections process as a whole (and potentially extending to the results - which of course, I openly expect he will levy).
As Trump lost this gambit - the only true way to assuredly clinch these 2026-midterms, Trump has been flailing/floundering/deflecting/distracting, by out of the blue claiming that Democrats were responsible for his purported attempted assassination in Butler, PA. However, the receipts actually indicate the opposite. And if anything, the Trump-regime has been relentless at offering transparency to explain why his ear - seemingly - healed overnight: never released his medical treatment reports (instead a simple signed letter head from Randy "The Candy Man" Jackson, was provided in lieu of full-transparency), additional redactions of what occurred that day; in addition to Crook's body being cremated less than 48 hours following the incident - FBI/secret service seemingly failed to preserve forensic crime scene evidence (by removing the body prematurely, and hosing down the roof where the shooter was located). Additionally, what sits at odds with this, was Crook's and his family were registered Republicans. In additional, there was an oddity - for which the Sheriffs office was actually in touch with Crooks (and apparently had spoken to Crooks) - just days prior to the events that transpired in Butler, PA. Collectively, in my opinion, this cries afoul of some very suspicious circumstances. That said, I have no doubt - nor make light of the event and the associated victims and collateral damage and lives of Trump supporters lost, within the crowd. However, there are plenty of elements that simply don't add up and provide a cohesive story of what transpired that day; also sitting at odds with that, was that secret service and FBI had determined and announced rather prematurely, that Crook's was a lone-gunman; Christopher Wrey was not convinced that Trump was shot; and of course the photo-op arm pumping and Trump's mouthing of "Fight! Fight! Fight!"
Trump has a long and sordid history of not playing by the rules, typically primes/choreographs prematurely stories like mass-fraud in a given election - even before a single vote has been casted, and has even joked that his ego would not accept a loss.
It's also important to mention that SCOTUS never further elucidated (nor clarified) the difference between "official" and "unofficial acts", when it came to Trump demanding presidential immunity. Trump claimed that he would be unable to do his job, unless he was provided absolute immunity. Trump further claimed in mid-2024, that he knew nothing of Project 2025 - whilst installing Ross Vaught (the spokesperson/brain-child/figure head - to head OMB, in his administration) and many others as cabinet members of his administration. Moreover, Trump's attempts to distance himself from the events of: January 6th (while drawing a bullseye on Vice President Pence) - "you gotta fight like hell, or we won't have a country"; along with his association and connection to Epstein and Trump's name being referenced over 1M times in the Epstein files, the lack of transparency, heavy redactions; and any failures to redact were removed from the set of already released files, failure to produce the second batch of files; not to mention removal of evidence that connects Trump to Epstein (photos of the two of them taken together) - let alone the continual conflation/framing between rendering perpetrators as victims and victims as perpetrators (along with failure to redact Epstein's victims and providing a means for presumed perpetrator/co-conspirators - via their lawyer - to request their PII be redacted from the files.
While I could continue to further expand on such topics, the discrepancies, etc. - I do find it convenient that SCOTUS's statement about immunity (combined with the fact that as humans, we suck at nuance, and contextually - there were clear efforts to cling to power - following the results of the 2020 elections): which all essentially teed up the Trump-regime to act with fully immunity/impunity and for acts of capitulation from Republican enablers/sycophants/and more broadly - in the past, via shadow-docket - from SCOTUS themselves. While Democrats continually reaffirmed that SCOTUS would uphold the constitution and not act in partisan ways - with multiple rulings that seemed to demonstrate their willingness to capitulate to Trump's demands: I am relieved to find that in the past few days, the Trump-regime's attempts to disenfranchise voters en-masse, was not successful. While it's quite obvious this violated many provisions in the constitution and this battle is far from over, it does create the legal framing for potential forced enforcement of the rules set forth by the constitution.
One final worry in my mind, is how a 34-time convicted felon was able to take-up-the helm a second time (and how this alone wasn't disqualifying), let alone the actions taken on J6, the subsequent en-masse pardoning of insurrectionists - along with Blanche's attempts to force the $1.776 slush-fund through a clearly weaponized/non-independent/and compromised DOJ - which would then encourage Proud Boys/mob - to further "stand back, and stand by", and descend upon polling sites. What was especially dangerous about SCOTUS's ruling/decision of absolute-immunity for the president - when combined with his ability to pardon (along with reports within the WH that seemed to clearly outline - blanket pardons for anyone with 200-feet of the Trump WH): creates a zero-sum gamification of politics; ultimately with little to no accountability, moment of self-reflection, etc. Furthermore, it appeared rather desperate to see Trump's Post Master General - willingness to implement via EO (not as required by congress) to render the postal service as a partisan player, regardless of the desire to dress it up as something it ultimately never was.
The final concern, however, is given the rather questionable nature of the results of the 2024 election, combined with Citizen's United decision, and Trump's unpopularity - given the failure of this administration to act on campaign promises - and attempts to gaslight the public: it seems clear that outspending on the presidential campaign may be used to provide cover to what is otherwise non sequitur, when you juxtapose the run-offs, lack of popularity, etc. Additionally, Dominion Vote was purchased by a Trump loyalist (with a commitment towards "free and more fair elections" - whatever that means), let alone that en-masse wholesale buy-up of local news stations and the legacy media's capitulation - whose cover-story is "a commitment towards more 'balanced' coverage" - whilst simultaneously sitting at stark odds, given the threats posed by the FCC - and attempts (some successful) to cancel comedian's satirical exposition, and threats of revocation of their FCC licenses - if they failed to comply. Obviously this alone creates a chilling effect.
Whatever the case, there's a fracture in what was otherwise a unified MAGA-coalition. Even Alex Jones - recognized that he supported the very thing he was against - the "deep state" - in which he went on and on about and painted Trump as champion and savior of his purported NWO. Certainly, Trump sold himself as that in the 2016 elections when he "drained the swamp". Comparatively, however: Trump during his State of the Union Address on July 17th, 2026 - claimed there was foreign interference in the 2016 elections - but appeared to blame every other country - except Russia - when the Mueller report had found that there was Russian meddling in our 2016 elections.
Again, I expect every gambit, stratagem, and Trump card will be employed... but fortunately, the rather psychotic and antithetical to reality (and non-constitutional attempts - thus far, seem to be held at bay - at the moment). Only time will tell and we'll keep you updated on the latest happenings, in the lead-up to these 2026 midterms. As our founders has intended, democracy and the government was intended to be "by and for the people" and to offer all of us inalienable rights, afforded to us under the constitution. There are real threats when we abandon truth, justice, and accountability - which can have sweeping effects, when democracy is perverted/subverted, or when weaponization of government seeks to disenfranchise the sentiment/experience and intimidates and silences the voices of its citizens. After all, government is intended to work for the will of the people and majority - not against it.
