Trump aides exploring executive actions to curb voting by mail

tRump and crew will do anything to rig the election in his favor.   Hugs

Trump’s campaign and the Republican Party have taken to the courts dozens to challenge voting rules. Trump’s aides are pondering possible executive actions.

This past spring, President Donald Trump began a full-fledged assault on voting by mail, tweeting, retweeting and railing about massive fraud and rigged elections with scant evidence.

Then the Republican apparatus got to work backing up the president.

In the weeks since, Trump’s campaign and the Republican National Committee have taken to the courts dozens of times as part of a $20 million effort to challenge voting rules, including filing their own lawsuits in several battleground states, including Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Nevada. And around the time Trump started musing about delaying the election last week, aides and outside advisers began scrambling to ponder possible executive actions he could take to curb mail-in voting — everything from directing the postal service to not deliver certain ballots to stopping local officials from counting them after Election Day.

But the flurry of activity is buoying the president in other ways. Namely, it has allowed Trump to present himself as a fighter on an issue that many of his most fervent supporters have taken up in the last few months.

Trump fans, said John Fredericks, a conservative radio host who serves on the Trump campaign’s advisory committee, “think Trump is going to win legitimately, but the Democrats are trying to steal the election by manipulating mail-out ballots. They want the president to jawbone enough so there’s a level of outrage to get rid of these ballots.”

Trump has spent months railing against mail-in voting as the pandemic raged and his poll numbers dropped nationally and in battleground states. Yet on Tuesday, Trump appeared to change his mind for one battleground state: Florida. He claimed that because the state’s two back-to-back Republican governors — Ron DeSantis and Rick Scott — had managed elections professionally. Sophia Lin Lakin, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Project, dubbed Trump’s action “hypocritical.”

Voting specialists also note that five states — Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah and Washington — already conduct elections entirely by mail with few problems. This fall, three additional states — California, Vermont and Nevada — plan to send ballots to registered voters because of the pandemic.

“They’re absolutely exaggerating and overstating the fraud. It is not a rampant problem,” said Sean Morales-Doyle, deputy director at the Brennan Center for Justice’s Democracy Program, where he focuses on voting rights and elections. “It is not the existential threat that the president says it is.”

Trump, impatient with the slow nature of lawsuits, suggested last week that the November election be postponed, though he later claimed he was merely trying to highlight the possibility of fraud after he faced a backlash from even members of his own party. Only Congress can change the date of the election.

Since then, Trump has mused to aides about what executive orders, if any, he could sign to curb voting by mail.

“I have the right to do it,” Trump told reporters Monday. “We haven’t gotten there yet. We’ll see what happens.”

Yet even conservatives allies, including von Spakovsky, are skeptical Trump has the authority to intervene in elections. John Yoo, a senior Justice Department attorney under former President George W. Bush, agreed. Yoo has been advising the White House recently on unilateral actions Trump could take on immigration, health care and taxes. But he said it didn’t appear Trump could take significant executive action on mail-in voting

Some suggested Trump could try to stop local officials from counting remote ballots after Election Day and direct the Postal Service to not deliver certain ballots to voters using an emergency declaration, according to one of the people.

Election experts said a more likely option for Trump would be sending federal officials into states under the guise of ensuring every vote is counted, citing the 15th Amendment or the Voting Rights Act.

Any of the moves would be immediately challenged in court.

“It would certainly be unprecedented to attempt to control any aspect of the election process,” said Richard Pildes, a professor of constitutional law at the New York University School of Law and leading expert on election law. “The courts would scrutinize any action closely.”

More at the link above.   However this is clearly an attempt by tRump and his crew  to sabotage the election, to rig it in favor of tRump.  Our very democracy is on the ropes here, and will be decided by this election.   It scares the piss out of me how close this is and how badly it could go wrong.   Hugs


19 thoughts on “Trump aides exploring executive actions to curb voting by mail

    • Scottie August 9, 2020 / 08:39

      Hello Nan. Yes, and also illegal things as well. Hugs


  1. dolphinwrite September 16, 2020 / 20:16

    It makes sense that when people vote, they bring their identifications, or at least, find their names on the list, and in this way, there is little chance for voter fraud. And only citizens should be voting.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Scottie September 17, 2020 / 04:52

      Hello dolphinwrite. Ah yes so many myths. Let’s start with voting fraud. There has been more attempts to vote fraudulently in person than by mail. When you look at how many people vote and the really small verified attempts at voting fraud, the fraud is miniscule. Far too low to swing an election.
      A great read for the information is here:
      And the washington Post also wrote

      a Washington Post analysis of data collected by three vote-by-mail states with help from the nonprofit Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) found that officials identified just 372 possible cases of double voting or voting on behalf of deceased people out of about 14.6 million votes cast by mail in the 2016 and 2018 general elections, or 0.0025 percent.

      The fact is mail in ballots, either the ones requested or sent to the voter have as many safeguards as in person voting. You can not duplicate the voting as if tried both ballots would be thrown out. The envelopes have safeguards, there is matching signatures, and in the case of those ballots mailed out to all registered voters, the person has to register first.

      Where are you saying non-citizens are voting for president or congress? Please check out the resources below for the full legal information. Hugs

      You must be a U.S. citizen to vote in federal, state, or local elections.

      Who Can Vote?
      You can vote in U.S. elections if you:

      Are a U.S. citizen
      Meet your state’s residency requirements
      You can be homeless and still meet these requirements.
      Are 18 years old on or before Election Day
      In almost every state, you can register to vote before you turn 18 if you will be 18 by Election Day. See a table of voter registration age requirements by state.
      Are registered to vote by your state’s voter registration deadline. North Dakota does not require voter registration.
      Who CAN’T Vote?
      Non-citizens, including permanent legal residents
      Some people with felony convictions. Rules vary by state. Check with your state elections office about the laws in your state.
      Some people who are mentally incapacitated. Rules vary by state.
      For president in the general election: U.S. citizens residing in U.S. territories Can Noncitizens Vote in the United States?
      Created by FindLaw’s team of legal writers and editors | Last updated July 30, 2020

      Generally, you must be a United States citizen to vote in an election. While federal law does not expressly prohibit noncitizens to vote in state and local elections, no states allow noncitizens to vote in those elections – with a few minor exceptions that we’ll discuss later. Since the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 was passed, noncitizens have also been barred from voting in federal elections, such as presidential elections.

      In 1996, the U.S. Congress passed a law prohibiting noncitizens from voting in federal elections, such as U.S. House, U.S. Senate, and presidential elections. Federal law did not address state or local elections.[1]

      As of March 2020, two state constitutions specified that noncitizens may not vote in state and local elections: Arizona’s and North Dakota’s. No state constitutions explicitly allowed noncitizens to vote in state or local elections.[2]

      Twelve municipalities across the country allowed noncitizens to vote in local elections as of March 2020. Eleven were located in Maryland. The other was San Francisco, California.

      According to the Pew Research Center, there were approximately 25 million noncitizens living in the U.S. as of 2017. That included 12.3 million permanent residents and 2.2 million temporary residents in the country with legal permission and 10.5 million living in the country without legal permission.[3]


  2. dolphinwrite September 18, 2020 / 20:02

    One thing I have done over the years is share ideas then see how other people react. You find out who is legit and who has a secret motivation, using all kinds of technobabble and rhetoric. Honest people see for themselves.


    • Scottie September 19, 2020 / 04:47

      Hello dolphinwrite. I don’t get your comment. It is a word salad that means nothing. It is one of those things meant to sound profound and yet actually says nothing.

      Everyone shares their ideas to either influence others or to see how others feel about the issue. That part of your comment is fine. The rest sounds like you judge the response on if they agree with you or not. The last part is simply nonsense.

      I presented you with facts. Not opinions, but facts. I like facts. They can be pesky things, but it is best when talking issues to use them. It shows your positions are backed up by provable known reality.

      So can you respond to the facts I showed? Can you address the reply I made in which I refuted your assertions.



      • Nan September 19, 2020 / 12:40

        Scottie — this is typical of this person’s comments. Much ado about nothing. And never related to the topic of discussion.

        Liked by 1 person

        • dolphinwrite September 19, 2020 / 21:23

          I was speaking about the one’s negatively commenting. Thank you for making the point.


        • Scottie September 20, 2020 / 10:49

          Hello Nan. Yes I have seen their comments on your blog. To write / reply in a manner that no one can figure out what is being said is not wise, it is trolling. Hugs

          Liked by 1 person

  3. dolphinwrite September 19, 2020 / 21:25

    The effort is age old, nothing new, but demonstrates those who cannot think for themselves due to their own hidden agendas. Barbs, taunts, ignoring, and comments like not on topic demonstrates no real communication intent. I expected as much, but readers should have the opportunity to hear sides and decide for themselves, whether their intentions are real or otherwise.


    • Scottie September 20, 2020 / 13:44

      Hello dolphinwrite. You really seem to like the sounds of your own words I guess. The point of conversation / discussion is to exchange ideas and information. If one person is babbling and no one can understand their point they are not adding anything to the conversation and in fact show themselves to not be able to add anything. If a group is talking about air pollution and someone makes the statement “The brook talks to me as the grass grows” they show them self to be an idiot with nothing to add to the conversation nor able to understand what is being discussed.

      I like discussions, even with people I do not agree with. But those discussions have to be in a common language to be useful or worth having. If you want to speak clearly and get your ideas across we can have many conversations discussing all sides of the issues. If you want to babble I wont waste my time.

      Everything you wrote above is babble. It can be taken to mean a dozen different things so means nothing. It is not only a waste of your time, but mine as well. If that is what you intended to do then you are a troll. What enjoyment you get out of wasted time I can not fathom.

      You expected as much? As much what? Make yourself clear and we can discuss it.

      Barbs, taunts, ignoring, and comments like not on topic demonstrates no real communication intent.

      I picked this part out because if that had been the case you might have had a point.   As that was not what happened and you did not provide examples it is again only postering.   If the topic is voter fraud as this is and I reply with facts and you reply with "The sky is blue", yes the off topic remark is very relevant.   

      It is not for me to make your case for you. If you need help with that they we need to have a separate conversation on that issue.

      The effort is age old, nothing new, but demonstrates those who cannot think for themselves due to their own hidden agendas

      This is an example of word salad not advancing a discussion. OK, what effort are you talking about that is age old? If a person has a hidden agenda that clearly shows they can think for themselves. So you see how writing this in a reply looks bad for you, and shows you want to sound smarter than you are. A smart person tries hard to make themself clear about what they are saying on a subject, a silly person wants to make others think they are profound on a subject. Which are you?

      So dolphinwrite I have gone through all of this rather than dismissing you to show that I am will to discuss ideas with you and to have conversations on the issues. But only if you are also willing to put in the effort. If you just want to do drive by comments you think make you sound smart but don’t or if you just want to troll, I simply have no time for it. If you really want to get your view on an issue I post about heard, then make comments that are designed to be understood by the people reading them, not a mythical university philosophy class.



      • Nan September 20, 2020 / 14:25

        Scottie, this is VERY typical of dw — which is why he is no longer allowed to comment on my blog. I gave him several chances, as you are doing, but the salad just kept getting stirred with nothing added to make it tasty.

        Liked by 1 person

        • dolphinwrite September 21, 2020 / 18:35

          Of course you would delete real discussions for fear of having real discussions, instead of sitting in a self-proclaimed castle. But that is your right. But I, and others, give the opportunity, and you can choose not to hear. In this public forum.


          • Nan September 21, 2020 / 18:37

            Blah … Blah … Blah. The same as you did on my blog.

            You really need to learn how to contribute something useful instead of making up words as you go along.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Scottie September 22, 2020 / 06:48

            Hello dolphinwrite. I just replied to your comment to me. Let me add here that if no one understands you, the problem is with your writing not the many readers who you fail to make yourself clear to. You seem to feel only you are making sense, only you want a “real discussion” and so forth. However your claims of superiority and self righteousness fail if your the only who thinks you are superior and righteous. If you are the only one in the room that believes what you spout, then you really should reexamine what you are saying. Hugs

            Liked by 1 person

      • dolphinwrite September 21, 2020 / 18:34

        Nice try. When, as you say to understand, but not truly seeking, but to use intellectual speak as a method of appearing, that also speak volumes. That’s a very old technique. Let me explain before you delete my comments. It’s age old. Kids have been using it for millennia. Teens use it. We saw it in colleges. And the older folks, playing politics, are just grown up who never really grew up, using the technique. It’s called downplaying other’s comments who are not in agreement, acting like they can’t understand what is truly understanding, as a method of dismissal. Cliques use those same techniques, as a method to “out” the ones who really think for themselves, as a method to get outsiders to want in. But as I’ve explained to others, being an “outsider” who thinks for themselves is like a community of outsiders, so they’re not really outsiders, but the ones in the know, for they’re really seeking to understand. The technique your using of saying there’s no intelligence in others’ responses that are really writing understanding is so old that I’m surprised. Actually, not surprised. There’s a sort of self-importance, mocking others’ who disagree or think for themselves, that readers will see if they’re honest with themselves. All the best.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Scottie September 22, 2020 / 06:42

          Hello dolphinwrite. Well I tried to reason with you. I do not delete comments unless the are nasty ad hominem attacks. You can not have an intelligent conversation with a babbling toddler, nor can you have a reason discussion with someone if neither of you speak the same language. There is nothing to be gained by it. You may think your being smart, thoughtful, and witty, but the truth is your words mean as little as babbling in a different language because no one can understand your point. If you can not express your point in a manner others can understand you are not adding anything to the conversation, and it is useless to pay attention to you.

          This has nothing to do with your being an outsider, your stance on issues , what the subject is, it is about being understood. Only if people can understand you can they respond. You are not writing in a way that lets people understand your point, and that makes your writing a failure if your point is to add your opinion to a topic. It is a useless waste of time for you to write that way and it is also a waste of time for people to try to reply to you.

          There is only two reasons for you to write in the word salads as you have been doing. It is you are deluded in thinking it makes you sound intelligent and profound, or your trolling. It is your choice to show us which one.

          If you expect me or anyone else here to respond to your comments then you will have to make the point of your comment understandable. That is your responsibility, not ours. Be well. Hugs

          Liked by 1 person

  4. dolphinwrite September 23, 2020 / 20:23

    I also tried to understand your positions, which was the purpose of writing, but also to allow readers to hear both of us. So, I wrote, let others think for themselves, then I will go on to the next discussion.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.