Since the usual suspects--Democrats and their paid prevaricators-lawyers--are lying about Trump's EO concerning mail-in ballots, let's look at the facts, shall we?
...If implemented, Trump’s directive would result in a federal database of US citizens by state who are eligible to vote....
Eligibility would be determined by a combination of Social Security, IRS, DMV, and other OFFICIAL records for each State; each State would have to submit a list of eligible voters to the Feds 60 days in advance of an election, and ONLY those who are 'eligible' will get mailed ballots.
The EO has provisions for correcting errors, by the way.
There is more useful info at the above link.
6 comments:
Trump’s usurpation of state and federal laws governing mail voting, orders the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to compile lists of voting-age U.S. citizens in every state, using incomplete and unreliable federal data sources.
You bitterly complain that federal agencies are incompetent, yet you want to give them more power. Very odd.
Specify the laws that Trump's order is violating. "Time and manner" is not a bar to verifying identities.
The point? He is making it more difficult for massive mail-in election frauds. It won't be perfect, of course. Democrats will find ways to cheat; they have lawyers for that.
The Constitution gives only states and Congress the power to set election rules.
The GOP in several stated have supported mail in voting. Because there isn’t this type of massive fraud as you are have been crowing about.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/12/17/republicans-midterms-mail-in-voting-00693867
Furthermore…
Research published by the Brookings Institute in November found that cases of mail-in voting fraud account for merely 0.000043% of all ballots cast by mail, equivalent to roughly four out of every 10 million.
The research focused on four of the five most recent general elections: those in 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2022. To make its calculations, Brookings drew on a Heritage Foundation database of election fraud cases that “ended in a finding that the individual engaged in wrongdoing,” identifying cases in which people were charged with fraud related to mail-in voting.
In the 2020 election, in which a record number of Americans voted by mail and which Trump has repeatedly claimed he lost as a result of voter fraud, the researchers calculated that those cases comprised just 0.000051% of the mail ballots cast.
The PURPOSE of fraud is to commit a crime while UN-DETECTED, or to commit a crime which is detectable but cannot be 'pinned' onto the perp--or if 'pinned,' the perp has already left the jurisdiction.
Citing studies which cannot find fraud is like looking at the ice on a lake and concluding that there is no water there.
Further, the EO only requires States to submit verified ID's of voters. That is clearly NOT anything which interferes with "time and manner." Determination of citizenship is within the scope of Article Two, Sentence One.
Your premise that "the purpose of fraud is to remain undetected" is definitionally true. But your analogy is a classic appeal to ignorance
and contains a logical flaw. In science and the law, the absence of evidence can be evidence of absence IF exhaustive searches yielded nothing. Comparing an ecosystem (a lake) to a heavily audited administrative process (an election) is an imperfect parallel.
See, while fraud inherently seeks to hide, modern elections are NOT opaque like a frozen lake; they are highly audited systems with built-in "sonar."
To claim fraud exists on a massive scale simply because it MIGHT be hidden ignores the reality of multi-layered election security. For widespread fraud to occur undetected, it would require a massive, flawless conspiracy involving bipartisan election officials, observers, and thousands of co-conspirators, none of whom ever leak information.
Furthermore, numerous academic studies, state-level audits, and judicial reviews in the past two decades conducted by both political parties have looked extensively "beneath the ice" using forensic data analysis, signature verification checks, and hand recounts. They have consistently found that while isolated, retail-level voter fraud occurs occasionally (and is usually caught), systemic, outcome-altering fraud is virtually non-existent. In biology or geology, if you drill into the ice a thousand times and never hit water, it is entirely logical to conclude the lake is frozen solid.
—-
Now, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled voter qualification and the administrative mechanisms used to verify voters do fall squarely under the umbrella of how an election is managed. If a federal Executive Order imposes a specific verification mandate on states, it directly alters the "manner" in which they process votes.
Under the Elections Clause (Article I, Section 4), states have the primary authority to set the times, places, and manner of elections. Congress has the power to alter those regulations. The President CANNOT use an Executive Order to bypass Congress and impose new administrative burdens or verification hurdles on states. And adding federal mandates to state election data inherently interferes with the "manner" of the election by dictating how states must validate their voter rolls.
For widespread fraud to occur undetected, it would require a massive, flawless conspiracy involving bipartisan election officials, observers, and thousands of co-conspirators
Not "thousands." Only a few are needed to gin up fake voters, mail ballots to those fakes, and direct the collection of marked ballots. Your theory also presumes that ALL the players in that scheme are cognizant of the whole game--a presumption which is not necessarily true, and which may be false. Johnny X is recruited merely to pick up ballots from Location Z and drop them into Box A. He's paid $50.00/trip and given three locations to harvest. Nobody tells him WHY he's doing it and he doesn't ask about a quick $150.00. Similarly, election clerks' job is to mail out ballots to Locations Z, V, and M--after a request. They don't examine the signature. We are down to only 3-5 people who know PARTS of what's going on, and perhaps only one who knows the whole scheme. She "quit" her job in Milwaukee, by the way, and has read about Hillarycide.
Post a Comment