Featured

Trump: Iran asked me to be Supreme Leader, but I said no thanks

Trump’s “Iran asked me to be Supreme Leader” joke at an NRCC fundraiser uses a real, deadly leadership crisis in Iran to normalize assassination-as-policy and blur what’s confirmed about the war and succession.

Mar 26, 2026

Featured

‘Men need to be perp-walked’ after Epstein files release, Massie tells BBC

A GOP lawmaker says the Epstein document releases are still falling short—because redactions and withheld material may be blocking accountability and survivor-centered justice.

Mar 25, 2026

Buried.News

The stories buried under the noise

Primary focus

Trump fires Kristi Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

A Cabinet secretary was forced out amid contracting and oversight scrutiny, signaling that executive control—not transparent accountability—can dictate leadership of the agency driving mass detention and deportation.

Mar 5, 2026

Featured

The Trump gold coin is not normal : Consider This from NPR

A federal design panel OK’d a Trump portrait for a commemorative gold coin, but the key question is whether Treasury can legally bypass long-standing limits meant to keep living politicians off U.S. money.

Mar 23, 2026

Featured

White House Confronted Over Huge Bets Made Minutes Before Trump’s Big War Move

A $580 million burst of oil-futures selling minutes before Trump’s Iran “talks” post raises a basic public-interest question: did anyone trade on advance knowledge of a market-moving national security decision?

Mar 24, 2026

White House circulating blatantly illegal draft emergency order to take control of elections

A circulated draft emergency order would strip states of constitutional control over elections, using a fabricated emergency to let one president unilaterally ban core voting methods nationwide.

Executive

Feb 26, 2026

⚖ Legal Exposure

Ethics Violation

Likely Unlawful

Potentially Criminal

Likely Criminal

Circulation of a draft emergency order to seize federal control over elections—coordinated with outside anti-voting activists—presents a significant abuse-of-power and ultra vires (unconstitutional) risk. If signed and implemented, it could implicate criminal civil-rights and conspiracy theories, but the article’s facts primarily support a serious investigative red flag rather than completed prosecutable structural corruption or a clearly satisfied criminal statute.

Sources

https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/white-house-circulating-blatantly-illegal-draft-emergency-order-to-take-control-of-elections

Summary

Anti-voting activists say they are circulating a draft emergency executive order, in coordination with the White House, to declare a national emergency and let President Donald Trump take control over voting. The draft asserts an expanded presidential role in elections despite the Constitution’s Elections Clause placing election authority with states, not the president. If pursued, it would attempt to unilaterally ban mail-in ballots and voting machines nationwide on claims of foreign-interference susceptibility.

Reality Check

Seizing election administration by emergency decree would set a precedent for executive control over the ballot, weakening democratic stability and putting our voting rights at the mercy of a single officeholder. On these facts, the conduct reads less like lawful governance than attempted abuse of emergency powers to override the Elections Clause and suppress lawful voting mechanisms. Even if the order itself would be challenged as unconstitutional, coordinating to implement it could implicate federal election crimes depending on acts taken—particularly 52 U.S.C. § 20511 (fraud in voter registration and voting) if false claims are used to interfere with lawful voting processes. The core violation here is structural: using the White House to advance a conspiracy-based pretext for federal takeover of state-run elections is a blueprint for authoritarian control of future outcomes.

Legal Summary

Legal Analysis

52 U.S.C. § 20511 — Federal election fraud; intimidation/interference (limited fit)

The draft order would “unilaterally ban mail-in ballots and voting machines,” which—if implemented—could function as an unlawful interference with lawful voting processes; however, the article does not allege intimidation, fraud in vote tabulation, or specific coercive acts toward voters.
Key gap: the context describes a circulated draft and asserted lack of presidential authority, not executed conduct targeting voters or falsifying election results.

18 U.S.C. § 242 — Deprivation of rights under color of law

If a president used emergency powers to override state election administration (mail ballots/machines) without lawful authority, that could constitute acting “under color of law” to deprive citizens of constitutional/statutory voting rights.
Key gap: the article reports circulation/coordination around a draft order and expert views that it would be unconstitutional; it does not allege the order was signed or enforced.

18 U.S.C. § 371 — Conspiracy to defraud the United States (impair lawful governmental functions)

Anti-voting activists are said to be “in coordination with the White House” to advance an emergency order premised on a conspiracy theory to justify federal takeover of election administration contrary to the Elections Clause.
Potential theory: coordination to impair the lawful function of state-run federal elections and related federal oversight through deceitful premises; key gap is lack of detail on deceptive acts, participants, or concrete steps beyond circulating a draft.

Constitutional / administrative law exposure — Elections Clause & separation-of-powers violations (civil/unlawful order risk)

The article states the Elections Clause gives states sole authority over elections; experts and a state election chief say the president lacks authority to claim these powers, making any attempt “blatantly unconstitutional.”
This supports strong civil illegality / ultra vires risk if executed, but without a described enacted order, the current exposure is primarily procedural/abuse-of-power red flag rather than completed prosecutable conduct.

Conclusion: The described conduct reflects a serious investigative red flag involving politicized and potentially unlawful executive overreach toward election administration, but the article does not establish an executed deprivation of rights or a fully formed criminal conspiracy with concrete overt acts beyond circulating a draft order.

Detail

Anti-voting activists said they are circulating a draft emergency executive order that would declare a national emergency and enable President Donald Trump to take control over voting.

The draft order is described as rooted in a conspiracy theory that China interfered with the 2020 election. It would authorize the president to unilaterally ban mail-in ballots and voting machines on the stated ground that they are susceptible to foreign interference.

The activists circulating the draft said they are coordinating with the White House. One advocate identified is Peter Ticktin, an attorney for Tina Peters, the former GOP Colorado county clerk serving a nine-year state prison sentence for her role in a 2021 voting-system breach tied to efforts to find fraud based on election conspiracies.

Voting-rights experts, democracy advocates, and at least one state election chief said the president lacks authority to claim such powers and that any attempt would be unconstitutional. The U.S. Constitution’s Elections Clause assigns election authority to states, not the president.

Norms Impact

Trump announces Space Command headquarters moving from Colorado to Alabama

A president is demanding fast-track Supreme Court cover to preserve tariffs a federal court found unauthorized, testing whether emergency powers can be stretched to bypass Congress.

Judiciary

Sep 2, 2025

Sources

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/trump-announce-space-command-headquarters-location/

Summary

President Trump said he will appeal a 7-4 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision holding that he exceeded his authority to impose certain tariffs under an emergency powers law. The presidency is being positioned as able to override statutory limits by recasting economic policy as an emergency power question for the Supreme Court to settle on an accelerated timetable. The practical consequence is that major trade rules affecting prices and markets remain in limbo until at least Oct. 14 while the administration seeks expedited high-court review.

Reality Check

Fast-tracking Supreme Court review to preserve tariffs a federal court found unauthorized risks normalizing governance by “emergency” decree, weakening our protections against unilateral economic coercion. If the court’s finding is correct—that the president exceeded authority under an emergency powers law—this is not just policy drift; it is executive action outside statutory limits, with the injury borne by the public through prices and market disruption. On these facts alone, criminal liability is unlikely; the core exposure is institutional—an attempt to convert constrained delegated power into a blank check, undermining separation of powers and Congress’s control over taxation and trade.

Detail

President Trump criticized a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that found many of his tariffs unlawful and said the ruling came from a “liberal court.” The Federal Circuit held, by a 7-4 vote, that the president exceeded his authority to impose the tariffs under an emergency powers law.

Trump said his administration will appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday and will ask the justices to expedite consideration. The Federal Circuit’s decision will not take effect until Oct. 14, a pause intended to allow the administration time to seek Supreme Court review.

Trump argued that the country would be in “serious, serious trouble” without the tariffs and claimed the judges who ruled against his administration would like to see “trillions of dollars” taken away.