The GOP just had the first day of its first-ever mid-term convention, in Dallas, Texas. The president was as full of juice and energy (or “piss and vinegar”) as he has always been known for, and overwhelmingly discredited his detractors who claim he is tired or “in decline.” The Left’s constant psychological propaganda undermines public confidence in their president, and is a form of effective domestic psychological terrorism because it seeks to undermine and attack national unity and resolve. Patriotism, enthusiasm, and self-confidence are the enemies of the political Left. The convention’s energy and solidarity reinforced why Americans elected President Trump, and why the DNC is determined to oppose their will.
Read more September 11. 2001
One of the loudest and most enthusiastic expressions of that will came when the president reiterated his administration’s commitment to the SAVE Act: mandatory voter photo ID, and proof of citizenship.
The DNC and its media paper of record, the NYT, are naturally running a full-time public affairs campaign directed at influencing the U.S. Supreme Court’s expected deliberation concerning Executive Order 14399, Ensuring Citizenship Verification And Integrity in Federal Elections. But it’s more than routine DNC public affairs lobbying: it’s desperation, claiming that “Trump Is Sabotaging the Midterms. The Supreme Court Must Stop Him.” The president, they exclaim, “is menacing the midterms, with an executive order that would throw voting by mail into chaos if it went into effect.”
Chaos, however, is precisely what the DNC wants. Voter fraud is based on a “chaos” theory, such as an emergency pandemic pretext to create chaotic, fraudulent, last-minute election rule changes.
Now the DNC is clearly counting on the USPS to be that source of chaos, by trying to shift the entire mail ballot controversy from illegal voters and the ballot itself, to the mail system. By doing so, they are creating the institutional pretext to set up even deeper and more complex delays in vote counting and ballot fraud, while blaming the president on a political level, and the EO on a legal level.
Election officials are now sending ballots out sooner, before their normal distribution time, and sowing further chaos by circumventing the postal service altogether, and having their unverified “constituents” come out and pick up ballots manually at various distribution centers that they specify.
In addition, if mailed ballot forms do not comply with any new verification rules, they can be cured: “If a ballot envelope is not in compliance, the mailing will be rejected and returned to election officials. Election officials must address and fix any errors before re-submitting the mailing, which would delay the delivery of ballots to voters.”
You can see what’s coming: even more manufactured excuses and delays in counting votes; and more pretext to stall, miss deadlines—and manufacture ballot “dumps.”
Read more Remembering That Devastating Day
And who is to say the DNC wouldn’t simply “fake” official mail, logos, and bar codes and engage in mail fraud? In the meantime the Left can appeal to the SCOTUS to intervene against the EO, but I would rate the odds high that the president succeeds in instituting at least some initial form of improved mail ballot standards. But other more powerful means of executive action to suppress widespread election crime, beyond ballots and mailing, may be necessary given the DNC’s desperation, and their demonstrated willingness to do anything in order to gain political control—including public violence.
In the meantime, the political Left is claiming the EO to be “illegal,” and counting on the SCOTUS to make a determination based on Article I: “The times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations.” The Democrats assert that the Constitution doesn’t give the president the authority to set election administration rules; only the states, with congressional oversight, can. They’re wrong.
The president’s executive order is more than a policy preference, or mere political interest: the EO is an act of law enforcement. Rather than engage in legal subterfuge by pointing to Article I, the Democrats might consider Article VI Clause 2, or the Supremacy Clause, and the “supreme law of the land.” Indeed, the federal government has a specific constitutional obligation to guarantee a republican form of government to every state in the union. A republic is formed by the election process. That makes the EO an effective authority under Article VI.
The DNC’s widespread state election fraud has created a conflict-of-law problem, which is what the Supremacy Clause is about, and why the president’s EO can be interpreted as a conflict-of-law cure. The presidential oath is also a source of relevant law. The U.S. Constitution contains three oaths or affirmations, but only the oath of office of the president of the United States specifies that its words must be spoken out loud. Speaking out loud creates witness, and elevates it to a specific contract with citizens. Upholding the Constitution by preserving, protecting and defending it, has been made a specific performance obligation due to the DNC’s repeated constitutional violations.
That makes the president’s executive order non-discretionary and obligatory. It makes the SCOTUS bound to uphold it.
Matthew G. Andersson is a law and policy author and has testified before the US Senate. He is a graduate of the University of Texas at Austin and University of Chicago.
Read more A Disgrace To The 9/11 Victims
Image generated by ChatGPT.