Dec. 17, 2025 · Elections
The 2026 Election Has Already Been Rigged and I Can Prove It
In November 2026, Americans will vote in a midterm election. The question is whether it will matter. Over the past year, Republicans have assembled a system designed to produce the outcomes they want regardless of how people vote. Here’s what the evidence shows.
Trump was president on January 6, 2020 and he tried everything he could to stay in power. He pressured the Justice Department to help him overturn the election, but officials threatened mass resignation rather than comply. He demanded Pence refuse to certify the results, but Pence wouldn’t do it. He called Georgia’s election officials and told them to find him votes, but they refused. He sent a mob to the Capitol, and they stormed it, but they couldn’t stop the certification. The system didn’t stop him. Specific people inside the system told him no, and that made all the difference.
He lost power and Biden took office. Trump faced no consequences for any of it, and he and his allies spent the next four years identifying everyone who’d told them no.
When states tried to use the 14th Amendment to keep him off ballots, SCOTUS overruled them unanimously.¹ He won in 2024. On his first day back in office, he pardoned the people who’d stormed the Capitol at his direction. Then he spent the year purging everyone who’d valued the country over GOP power. The DOJ is now run by loyalists who won’t threaten resignation when he asks them to break the law. Pence is gone, replaced by a vice president who’d have done what Pence wouldn’t. The state officials who certified against him have been primaried, harassed, or driven from office. The generals who’d made clear they wouldn’t intervene are being replaced.
The lesson Trump learned from January 6 wasn’t that he’d gone too far. It was that he didn’t have the right people in place. Now he does.
Political scientists keep debating whether we’re heading for civil war. Barbara Walter, who served on a CIA task force predicting political instability, warns that America has entered the “anocracy zone” where civil conflicts become more likely.² But civil war as academics define it requires organized armed conflict producing at least a thousand battlefield deaths, and her conclusion is that’s not where this is going.
Now, I have a question for you, the reader. If the election theft was blatant and obvious enough, would your governor do anything besides write a strongly worded letter? More importantly, what would you do if watching an election be cancelled or stolen in real time?
Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation, has been explicit about what this represents. In July 2024, he declared: “We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be.”³
Here’s an interesting bit of trivia for you. The Heritage Foundation partnered with Hungarian government-funded think tanks that helped Viktor Orban dismantle Hungary’s democracy, people who’d already done this once and knew exactly which institutions to capture and in what order.⁴
They’ve told us what they’re building, and they’ve hired the people who know how to build it.
The mechanisms aren’t new. What’s new is that they’re all held by the same hands at the same time, and those hands have already shown they won’t let go when told to.
Consider what happened when courts tried to stop the federal workforce purges. In March 2025, Judge Amy Berman Jackson issued a preliminary injunction blocking the dismantling of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and ordering reinstatement of fired employees.⁵ While the injunction was active, the administration announced termination of 1,483 employees, ninety percent of the agency’s workforce.⁶ A sworn declaration revealed that when staff raised concerns about complying with the court order, they were told “all that mattered was the numbers” and leadership would “assume the risk.”⁷ Jackson said the administration was “thumbing their nose at both this Court and the Court of Appeals.”⁸ In a separate case involving 16,000 fired probationary employees, Judge William Alsup ruled the terminations unlawful but refused to order reinstatement. His reasoning was blunt: “The Supreme Court has made clear enough by way of its emergency docket that it will overrule judicially granted relief.” In court, he said: “They are the boss. I’m just a district judge.”⁹
Thanks for complying in advance Judge Alsup. The domestic terrorists appreciate it.
Protect Democracy documented at least twelve separate cases during the first six months of 2025 where courts found the administration violated their orders.¹⁰ The pattern has a name: legalistic noncompliance. You use procedural maneuvers and appeals to create the appearance of working within the system while functionally ignoring it. And it works because courts have no independent enforcement mechanism. U.S. Marshals report to the Justice Department. Criminal contempt charges require federal prosecutors who answer to the Attorney General. The Supreme Court has used its contempt authority exactly once in its entire history, and never against the executive branch.¹¹ When the president decides not to comply with courts, there’s no one to make him.
Think about what this means for election disputes. If a court orders a state to certify results the administration doesn’t like, who enforces that order? If a judge rules that certain ballots must be counted, what happens when the executive branch declines to ensure compliance? The answer, as 2025 has demonstrated repeatedly, is nothing. Of course, the Supreme Court already put its thumb on the electoral scales in 2000 to seat George W Bush. Do you think they wouldn’t for Trump?
Trump has deployed National Guard forces to Los Angeles, Washington D.C., Chicago, Portland, and Memphis.¹² Every major deployment has been ruled unlawful by at least one federal judge, and every deployment continues anyway through the appeals process. In Los Angeles, Judge Charles Breyer issued a permanent injunction in December 2025 and called the administration’s arguments “profoundly un-American.”¹³ The Ninth Circuit upheld the ruling and ordered troops removed.¹⁴ In Washington, Judge Jia Cobb ruled the deployment illegal and noted that violent crime was at a thirty-year low before the intervention.¹⁵ In Portland, a Trump-appointed judge wrote a 106-page ruling finding that there was neither rebellion nor any inability to execute laws that would justify military presence.¹⁶ None of this stopped the deployments. The legal defeats become talking points about activist judges while the troops remain where they are.
When asked directly about using the Insurrection Act, Trump said in October 2025: “We have an Insurrection Act for a reason. If I had to enact it, I’d do that. If people were being killed, and courts were holding us up, or governors or mayors were holding us up, sure I would do that.”¹⁷ Governor JB Pritzker has said publicly what many officials believe privately: the purpose of these deployments is to cause chaos, create fear and confusion, and justify military intervention.¹⁸ The troops are positioned in Democratic cities. The legal question of whether they can be present on election day is heading to the Supreme Court. The administration has already demonstrated it will defy rulings it doesn’t like while SCOTUS has time and again bowed to their party.
While all of this has been happening, six states enacted new congressional district maps for 2026, which is more mid-cycle redistricting than any election since 1970.¹⁹ This wasn’t routine adjustment; this was a coordinated effort to lock in advantages before votes are cast. Texas provides the clearest example. The legislature passed a new map at Trump’s direct urging in August 2025, and federal judges struck it down in November, citing evidence that Republican lawmakers manipulated the racial demographics of voting districts. The ruling referenced a Department of Justice letter and public statements by key legislators acknowledging what they were doing. The Supreme Court stayed that ruling in December and reinstated the map for 2026.²⁰ Republicans are projected to gain four to five House seats in Texas alone.²¹ North Carolina’s new map reduced the Black voting-age population in a key district from 40 percent to 32 percent.²² Missouri’s new map split a Democratic incumbent’s district.²³ The pattern repeated across multiple states: draw maps that predetermine outcomes, defend them through appeals until the election passes, then treat the results as legitimate regardless of how the legal challenges resolve.
If you're counting on a wave election strong enough to result in not just impeachment but conviction, I'd like to remind you that 1 in 3 Americans still support the GOP, and the Republicans have stacked the deck for a long time to make sure their voters have an outsized impact on representation.
But even if Democrats overcome the rigged maps and the troop deployments and the courts that can’t enforce their rulings, there’s one more mechanism waiting, and almost no one is discussing it. Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution grants each chamber of Congress the power to judge the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own members. In plain terms, the House decides who gets seated in the House.
This already happened once in 2025. In October, Speaker Mike Johnson refused to administer the oath of office to Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva, who’d won an Arizona special election to replace her late father. Johnson cited ongoing budget negotiations; when senators confronted him, he said he’d seat her as soon as they got back to work.²⁴ The precedent for more aggressive use already exists. In 1985, a Democratic-controlled House refused to seat Republican Rick McIntyre from Indiana despite state certification showing he’d won by 34 votes. The House appointed a commission, conducted its own review, and ultimately seated his opponent instead. The Constitution allowed it.²⁵
Former Congressman Steve Israel, who served sixteen years in the House, has warned explicitly that Republicans could use this mechanism to retain power even if Democrats win the 2026 elections.²⁶ Challenge results in close races, cite fraud allegations, invoke the constitutional authority to judge elections, and refuse to seat Democratic winners while litigation continues. Since the House majority controls the process, there’s no external check. Courts could rule such actions unconstitutional; the Supreme Court’s decision in Powell v. McCormack places limits on exclusion.²⁷ But by now the pattern should be clear. What happens when the executive branch declines to enforce a ruling against the legislature? Republicans control both. The same pattern of defiance applies.
I’m not telling you not to vote. Vote. But if you read all of this and your only plan is to win a federal election inside a system designed to reject the outcome, you’re betting everything on the best-case scenario.
Here’s what costs you nothing: call your state legislators and your governor’s office. Ask them one question. What’s your plan if the election is stolen? Not your talking points. Not your fundraising email. Your plan.
If they don’t have one, demand they make one. Demand red-line laws. Break-glass-in-case-of-stolen-election laws. Trigger provisions that activate the moment a court order is defied or a duly elected representative is refused their seat. Make them write it down and pass it now, while they still can.
If the evidence in this piece is wrong and everything works out fine, those laws sit unused. No downside. But if the evidence is right, then the only thing standing between democracy and its override will be whether anyone prepared for this moment.
The federal government can be captured. The states don’t have to comply
References
¹ Trump v. Anderson, 601 U.S. (2024). Supreme Court per curiam opinion, March 4, 2024.
² Barbara F. Walter, How Civil Wars Start (Crown, 2022); Walter’s CIA Political Instability Task Force service confirmed via UC San Diego Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation.
³ Kevin Roberts on War Room podcast, Real America’s Voice, July 2, 2024. Transcript confirmed by Media Matters and Rolling Stone.
⁴ Heritage Foundation signed cooperation agreement with the Danube Institute (Hungarian government-funded think tank), March 2023. Spencer Chretien presented at Hungary’s Center for Fundamental Rights, May 2024. Reporting by Atlatszo and CBS News.
⁵ National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Judge Amy Berman Jackson, 112-page preliminary injunction, March 28, 2025.
⁶ American Prospect, NPR, and CNN reporting, April 17-18, 2025. Employee count varies 1,408-1,483 across sources; 90% of workforce consistently confirmed.
⁷ Sworn declaration of “Alex Doe,” CFPB employee, filed April 2025. Reported by American Prospect and American Banker.
⁸ Judge Amy Berman Jackson, oral order, April 18, 2025. Reported by CNN and NPR.
⁹ Judge William Alsup, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. September 12, 2025 final ruling (written quotes) and April 2025 court statement (”They are the boss”), confirmed by NPR, Law & Crime, and Government Executive.
¹⁰ Protect Democracy, “The Trump Administration’s Conflict with the Courts, Explained,” updated October 2, 2025.
¹¹ United States v. Shipp, 203 U.S. 563 (1906). The only criminal contempt proceeding in Supreme Court history, against Tennessee Sheriff Joseph Shipp for facilitating a lynching.
¹² National Guard deployment dates: Los Angeles (June 7, 2025), Washington D.C. (August 11, 2025), Chicago (October 2025), Portland (September 27, 2025), Memphis (October 1, 2025). Multiple wire service and local news reports.
¹³ Judge Charles Breyer, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, permanent injunction, December 10, 2025.
¹⁴ Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, December 12, 2025, upholding Breyer ruling and ordering troop removal by December 15.
¹⁵ Judge Jia M. Cobb, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, 61-page ruling, November 20, 2025. Thirty-year crime low confirmed by D.C. Attorney General’s office and Time Magazine.
¹⁶ Judge Karin J. Immergut (Trump appointee, 2019), U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, 106-page ruling, November 7, 2025.
¹⁷ Donald Trump, remarks to reporters, October 6, 2025. Wire service transcripts.
¹⁸ Governor JB Pritzker, statement, October 6, 2025.
¹⁹ Congressional Research Service and Pew Research. Six states: California, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, Utah. Most mid-cycle redistricting since 1970.
²⁰ Three-judge federal panel struck down Texas map November 18, 2025. Supreme Court stayed ruling December 4, 2025 (6-3), reinstating map. CNN and Texas Tribune reporting.
²¹ Ballotpedia projection, December 2025.
²² UNC Carolina Demography analysis: District 1 Black Citizen Voting Age Population dropped from 40.7% to 32.1% under October 22, 2025 map.
²³ Rep. Emanuel Cleaver’s 5th Congressional District carved up; Jackson County split among three districts. Map signed September 28, 2025. PBS NewsHour reporting.
²⁴ Adelita Grijalva won September 23, 2025 special election; sworn in November 12, 2025 after approximately 50 days. Arizona Republic and Associated Press reporting.
²⁵ Indiana’s 8th Congressional District, 1984 election. Rick McIntyre certified by 34 votes; House refused to seat him January 1985 and seated Democrat Frank McCloskey May 1, 1985. Congressional record and C-SPAN archives.
²⁶ Steve Israel, “The Simple, Legal Way Trump Could Steal the Midterms,” The New Republic, December 8, 2025.
²⁷ Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969).
Subscribe by email →