Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 06/26/2026 10:43:51 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The explosive expansion of mail-in voting — turbocharged during COVID and conveniently never rolled back in many blue states — punched a massive hole in American election security. Conservatives raised the alarm for years. They were dismissed as paranoid. The media shrugged. Meanwhile, ballots kept flying through the postal system with zero meaningful verification that the person on the envelope was, you know, an actual eligible voter.
But something just shifted. The federal government has stumbled onto a devastatingly simple enforcement mechanism, and the states with the dirtiest voter rolls are already lawyering up. Funny how that works.
From The Post Millennial:
The US Postal Service General said Wednesday that states refusing to comply with a presidential order requiring the submission of voter information could have their mail-in ballots halted.During a Senate hearing testimony, Postmaster General David Steiner defended the administration’s position, saying the US Postal Service was not being politicized and that compliance with the proposed requirements would determine whether ballots are processed.
Read that again slowly. The Postmaster General — under oath, in front of the United States Senate — just told every non-compliant state in America that the mail stops if they won’t verify their voters. No hedging. No bureaucratic weasel words. Just a clean, direct ultimatum.
No manifest, no mail.
The policy also ties federal funding to state compliance, which adds a second pressure point. This isn’t some novel power grab cooked up by White House lawyers at midnight. It’s the federal government directing its own agency on how to conduct its own operations. The postal service answers to the American taxpayer — not to state officials who’d prefer to keep their voter rolls buried in a filing cabinet somewhere.
But here’s the question that keeps going unanswered: if your voter rolls are accurate and your elections are squeaky clean, why burn money on attorneys to avoid a basic verification check? The resistance itself tells you everything.
Senator Gary Peters tried to corner Steiner during the hearing, pressing him on whether USPS would still deliver ballots to states that refuse to hand over their absentee voter lists. Steiner didn’t blink. “Under our proposed regulation, no,” he replied. “We would tell the state that we need the manifest.”
That’s not politicization — it’s the bare minimum of competent governance. Strange how those two concepts get confused so often in Washington.
For decades, the conservative movement has championed voter ID, citizenship verification, and transparent election administration. These are common-sense positions that consistently poll well — even among independents. Trump’s executive order opens an entirely new front in that fight, leveraging federal infrastructure to accomplish what blue-state legislatures have stubbornly refused to do themselves.
The legal battles will drag on. Cable news panelists will shriek about voter suppression between commercial breaks. None of it changes the core argument: before the United States Postal Service delivers a ballot, it should confirm that ballot is going to a verified American citizen.
That’s not suppression. That’s a republic acting like it actually cares about its own survival. And for the first time in a long time, the federal government is backing that principle with real teeth.
Sources: The Post Millennial
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
And Trump has promised to kick some commie behind. This could get good.
District federal judge to issue nationwide injunction in 3.. 2.. 1..
No doubt some Obama-appointed federal judge will rule against this in a week or two.
Federal judge overruling in 3,...2,...
He and the administration will lose in court. As they should.
Lots of work for the USPO and I wonder how they will accomplish it? They are broke already and full of faithful union member democrats.
I believe Colorado is one of those states, but mail in votes are flowing!
Trying to think this trough logically, probably wrong though, I think it is still against the law to vote if you are not legally registered. Delivering a ballot to someone not legally registered would make the party delivering the ballot complicit in the crime wouldn’t it? Wouldn’t that make it completely within the rights and obligation of the USPO to need to make sure that ballots they deliver were legal?
"Stumbled" my a$$. I have it on good authority from one intimate with California election fraud that this is a very carefully worked out tactic. It not only blocks delivery en masse it allows crossing said state registration databases with other Federal data such as Social Security, passports, green cards, etc.
“He and the administration will lose in court. As they should”
Why don’t you explain the portion of the Constitution where Federal Judges have the power to enforce Federal Law? I would be very happy to hear this citation and logic.
For your education:
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-1/ALDE_00000243/
You might notice that the Judicial Branch has no power to enforce the Constitution or Existing laws. The Administration, just like with most of the other cases that have been reviewed by the SCOTUS, will likely win. The Executive is performing their appointed duties of ensuring that the Legislative laws are followed. State have the right to run voting, but they don’t have the right to let ineligible people vote to dilute.
See Section 2 of the 1965 Voters rights act.
https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/HTML/LSB11382.html
The Judicial, if it overrides the Constitution and prior Voters Acts of 1965, especially on a low court level, risks ‘lawfaring’ itself into obscurity. The SCOTUS will overrule, but people will remember the ‘ridiculousness’ of the lower courts.
Trump certainly finds interesting methods of leverage.
The sooner the better...then emergency appeal to Scotus.
Two reason it will be overturned.
1. This is not usually brought up but there is the whole issue of coercion. Basically the federal government is saying NOBODY in your state can vote by mail unless you hand over voter rolls which may very well contain information that is protected by state law (I don’t mean citizenship status) That means the states are put in the position that in order to make sure people are allowed to cast their legal votes (remember plenty of voters cast perfectly legit absentee ballots) So to make sure those voters can vote the state would have no choice but to do as the federal government dictates. That is coercion and it violates the states’ rights.
2. The Postmaster General and the Administration have no statutory authority to prevent the delivery of legal mail.
And like it or not absent following the usual steps of bringing a case to court there is no “legal” proof which ballots are fraudulent. Trump does not get to simply declare he believes (no matter how reasonable that belief is) there is fraud through absentee ballots and stop that legal method of voting by compelling the states to hand over voter rolls.
What needs to be remembered is that Congress can certainly amend laws regarding absentee voting, as well as the so called Motor Voter law. Which for some reason they have not done. They can also make the voter application form be one that is sworn and notarized. Requiring two proofs of identity and residence wouldn’t hurt either. Fraud starts at registration.
“Why don’t you explain the portion of the Constitution where Federal Judges have the power to enforce Federal Law”
Was it suggested the Federal Judge is enforcing Federal Law? Nope it is the job of the judicial branch to ensure that the law is being followed. They do screw up more often than not when they have been appointed by Biden or Obama. But there is no Statutory authority that allows the President or the Post Master General to refuse to deliver absentee ballots based on their (no matter how reasonable) declaration that those ballots contribute to election fraud. Remember plenty of legal votes are cast by absentee ballots.
Honest voting can people adjust to that.
Bribe dealer goes broke
Yes to all above.
Two reason it will be overturned.
federal elections should be run by the fed.
Some libtard federal judge has already issued an injunction against it. 😣
Every person in this country has either a Born in the USA Birth Certificate or a document that says they are a Naturalized Citizen...on record.
There are no exceptions that I can think of.
The Constitution says that only citizens can vote in a Federal Election.
Since we have been lax in our voter registration, it's about time we support our forefathers who created the Constitution.
PASS THE SAVE ACT!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.