SENATOR MITCH MC CONNELL HELD IN LIMBO'S PRISON-ON LIFE SUPPORT. FILE A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS TO SPRING HIM TO THE TRUTH

 

June, Mitch McConnell being helped (courtesy ofNathan Posner/Anadolu/Getty Images)

WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH SENATOR MCCONNELL? 

The news reports are uncertain. Rumors abound that Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell is brain dead. If he was recovering from his heart attack/stroke, we would be receiving updates. Instead, Elaine Chao former Transportation Secretary in Trump's first term, his wife, fled to China for a time and resigned from her business position in the US. She claims the trip was scheduled. But wouldn't she want to stay and pray by her husband's side for his recovery? 

My cousin did that when his wife was in a coma and it was touch and go. But with my cousin's prayers she recovered from her dire state. Senator McConnell is the beloved Kentucky Senator who has been responsible for some of the most groundbreaking legislation and leadership supporting billionaires and the ultra conservative right. In fact, the moment Ruth Bader Ginsburg gave her last breath, McConnell was moving with replacement candidates, despite her hospital bed not yet being cold, and despite her friend Justice Bryer staying she seemed fine when he spoke to her the night before she was pronounced dead. Interesting. One never knows does one what goes on in hospital rooms. 

Ah, well. McConnell pounced upon Bader Ginsburg's death like a rabid dog and got to work. Yet, it seems that if the Kentucky Senator is indeed brain dead, as some have stated (Laura Loomer, who said McConnell is "screwing up" passage of President Trump's Save Act), then this should be investigated. Others including his wife and friends "who spoke to him" swear he is recovering. 

WHY WON'T ANYONE SPEAK UP FROM THE MAGA PARTY? 

It will be a "Whoops" if he doesn't. But it is not as if MAGAS don't lie. It would seem all they do is play dirty tricks with elections and bend stare decsis to their will, censor, obfuscate and use prestidigitation with words to skew the facts/truth. Cover ups are their MO. Look at he cover up with the Epstein files which took how long to release and then it was done to name the victims and redact the names of the criminal pedophiles? Cover up? Todd Blanche is defying court orders not releasing the rest of the files in unredacted form to the public who has a right to know if pedophiles and criminals are in congress and compromising our democracy, the victims of blackmail.

COVER UPS OF THE TRUTH. THAT'S LIES OF OMISSION. GOD HATES LIES. IT SAYS SO IN HIS WORD, BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, DONALD TRUMP, ELAINE CHAO KNOW THIS. 

The MAGAS are the great Christian Party. What would Jesus do? Go for a resurrection through prayer, or say McConnell's time has arrived. Let go and let God. However, it's not as if the greatest Christian political party in the history of the US is surrounding the senator's bedside keeping up a 24/7 prayer vigil for his return to the land of the living. Indeed, with Elaine Chao's disappearance and McConnell's bedside kept curtained off to any reports by anyone, it would seem no one gives a damn whether he might return in recovery with happy smiles. 

Why don't we know anything? Why is there a press cover up and cover up by the MAGA party for this august Christian and one of the finest MAGAS and reputed KKK members ever? This is an embarrassment and humiliation. He has been lying in the hospital for going on 1 month.

But there is a countdown. MAGAS can't let Senator McConnell die in peace until after August 3rd when the party doesn't have to hold a special election.  

WHY MCCONNELL MUST NOT DIE ACCORDING TO GOD'S WILL 

The Republicans have elected Andy Barr as their candidate for the Kentucky Senate race in November. But if McConnell’s seat became vacant more than three months before election day, the state would have to hold a special election.

If the vacancy becomes  available within three months of the election, the governor of Kentucky, Andy Beshear, a Democrat, chooses a successor from a shortlist of three compiled by the Kentucky Republicans’ executive committee.

COVER UP, COVER UP, COVER UP TO DISENFRANCHISE AMERICANS 

Meanwhile, are the Amercan taxpayers paying for a brain dead McConnell to continue out of the arms of God for months in a secret cover up? Do they want to knowingly DISENFRANCHISE THEMSELVES FROM SOMETHING THAT GOD HATH WROUGHT? CERTAINLY GINSBURG'S DEATH WAS GOD TAKING HER, WASN'T IT? BUT MCCONNELL'S ISN'T? HE IS BEING IMPRISONED BY THE HOSPITAL AND MAGAS WHO WANT THEIR CHOSEN CANDIDATE NOT BESHEAR'S? 

There is recourse. Habeas Corpus. Beshear should file a petition to release the body of Mitch McConnell "alive" from his hospital prison bed on life support. At least then, we would know whether we are willing paying to be disenfranchised by allowing McConnell not pronounced dead but brain dead after the August 3rd date, or discover if he is truly recovering, as his friends have said. Let Americans know the truth. Is that too difficult? Why? MAGAS, why?

'Achievable Ways to Disempower the Police State Through State Law' by Christopher Armitage/Substack

 

STATE REMEDYS TO PULL OUT THE TEETH OF FASCISTIC LAW ENFORCEMENT

10 CURRENT FACTS ABOUT US POLICING

Ten examples below are current law or current federal data. Together they divide into two categories: what officers may legally do to us, and what the courts have so far declined to make officers do for us. To be clear, a list of grievances without a remedy is not helpful so this article ends with a remedy: four reforms state legislatures have already proven they can pass.

POLICE TRAINING AND BEHAVIORS

1.  A department can reject an applicant for scoring too high on an intelligence test, and a federal appeals court found nothing unconstitutional in the practice. When Robert Jordan scored a 33 on the Wonderlic cognitive ability exam, well above the scores typical for patrol applicants, New London, Connecticut declined even to interview him, because the city considered only candidates who scored between 20 and 27 on the theory that high scorers grow bored and quit. The policy survived rational basis review, the Second Circuit held in Jordan v. City of New London (2000), and the decision has never been disturbed. The Constitution sets no minimum for the judgment, education, or intelligence of the people we arm and send into our homes, yet at least one city successfully defended a maximum.

2. Whatever the entrance exam misses, the academy has little time to fix, because training an American police officer takes less time than licensing the person who cuts our hair. Basic training at state and local academies averaged 806 hours in 2022, which comes to about twenty weeks, per the Bureau of Justice Statistics Census of Law Enforcement Training Academies, while cosmetology licenses in most states require somewhere between 1,000 and 1,500 hours. Germany trains its officers for a minimum of two and a half years before they patrol alone, and Finland requires a three year degree from its Police University College, which leaves the American figure short of both. The distribution inside those 806 hours matters as much as the total, since recruits averaged 73 hours on firearms skills and 51 hours on criminal and constitutional law, per the same census, which means the typical academy spends more classroom time teaching a recruit to shoot than teaching that recruit what the Constitution allows.

3. Officers are not even required to know the law those hours are supposed to teach, and the Supreme Court has said so directly. A North Carolina officer stopped a car over a single broken brake light even though state law required only one working lamp, so no violation had actually occurred, yet the stop went forward, a consent search followed, and the car’s owner ended up with a felony cocaine conviction that the courts refused to overturn. A reasonable mistake of law can justify a seizure, the Court held eight to one in Heien v. North Carolina (2014). The rest of us are still governed by the old maxim that ignorance of the law is no excuse, and officers received a different rule, written by the same Court that wrote ours. 

4. We can be handcuffed, booked, and jailed for offenses that carry no jail time at all. Gail Atwater was driving her two children home in Lago Vista, Texas when an officer arrested her for a seatbelt violation, an offense whose maximum penalty was a fifty dollar fine, and she was handcuffed in front of her kids, driven to the station, booked, and held in a cell for about an hour until she posted bond. The Fourth Amendment permits a full custodial arrest even for a fine-only offense, the Supreme Court held five to four in Atwater v. City of Lago Vista (2001), and the majority described what happened to her as involving gratuitous humiliations and pointless indignity before upholding the arrest anyway.

5. Staying silent does not invoke the right to remain silent, which is the kind of sentence that sounds wrong until we read the cases. A Michigan suspect sat nearly mute through almost three hours of questioning, and when he finally gave a one-word answer, that word counted as a waiver because he had never expressly invoked the right, the Supreme Court held in Berghuis v. Thompkins (2010). Texas prosecutors then used a man’s silence during voluntary, pre-arrest questioning as evidence of his guilt, and the Court allowed that too, in Salinas v. Texas (2013), because he never spoke the invocation aloud; even the words “Maybe I should talk to a lawyer” had already failed as too ambiguous in Davis v. United States (1994). The working script therefore has two sentences and no improvisation: I am invoking my right to remain silent, and I want a lawyer. After that comes actual silence, because answering a question an hour later can count as a waiver of everything the script just protected.

6. The precision demanded of us in that interrogation room does not bind the officers across the table, because police can lie to us outright, and the Supreme Court approved the practice more than half a century ago. Detectives in Oregon falsely told a murder suspect that his cousin had already confessed, the suspect then confessed himself, and the confession stood, the Court held in Frazier v. Cupp (1969), which remains good law today. Under it, officers can invent eyewitnesses who never existed, cite DNA evidence no lab ever produced, and describe a failed polygraph that was never administered. The tactic works, which is the problem, because it works on the innocent too; incriminating statements or outright false confessions appear in roughly 29 percent of the DNA exoneration cases documented by the Innocence Project. Ten states, beginning with Illinois in 2021, have barred deception in interrogations of minors, and the list now includes California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Virginia, but for adults the lie remains legal almost everywhere. People with intellectual and developmental disabilities are demonstrably susceptible to false and coerced confessions, and so far the statute books barely acknowledge it: Illinois extended its ban in 2024 to cover people of any age with a severe or profound intellectual disability, a Pennsylvania bill covering intellectual disabilities and autism advanced out of committee this spring, and the other forty-eight states require nothing.

7. When officers do break the law, qualified immunity protects them unless a prior court case already condemned nearly identical conduct, and the precision demanded of that match would be funny in any other context. The doctrine appears nowhere in the text of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 that it limits; the Supreme Court constructed it across a series of decisions, and the modern version dates to Harlow v. Fitzgerald (1982), whose test asks whether the precise violation was clearly established in existing precedent before the officer committed it. Consider what that requirement produces. Officers accused of stealing more than $225,000 in cash and rare coins while executing a search warrant kept their immunity because no earlier decision had established that stealing seized property violates the Constitution, the Ninth Circuit held in Jessop v. City of Fresno (2019), and the Supreme Court declined to review the case; a Nashville officer who released a police dog on a burglary suspect who said he had surrendered and was sitting with his hands raised kept his immunity as well, because the closest precedent involved a suspect who had been lying down, the Sixth Circuit held in Baxter v. Bracey (2018). The difference between sitting and lying down decided the case.

8. Governments can take our property without convicting us of anything, and the proceeds fund the agencies doing the taking. Civil forfeiture proceeds against the property rather than the owner, which is how case names like United States v. $8,850 entered the law books, and because the action is civil, the protections we associate with criminal court, appointed counsel among them, generally do not apply. States and the federal government forfeited at least $68.8 billion between 2000 and 2019, a figure the researchers describe as a drastic undercount because many states report incomplete data, per the Institute for Justice report Policing for Profit, and in 2014 the net receipts of the federal forfeiture funds reached $4.5 billion while the FBI put nationwide burglary losses at $3.5 billion, which means federal forfeiture alone took more than every burglar in America combined, an analysis The Washington Post published in 2015. At least four states, Maine, Nebraska, New Mexico, and North Carolina, have eliminated the practice by requiring a criminal conviction first, and most of the rest have declined to follow them.

9. Officers fired for misconduct get hired by other departments, and we know this because two law professors counted. Matching employment records for every full-time officer in Florida across three decades, the researchers found roughly 1,100 previously fired officers working in the state in a typical year, about three percent of the workforce, and those officers clustered in smaller agencies with fewer resources, where they proved more likely than their peers to be fired again or accused of moral character violations. The findings appear in The Wandering Officer, published in the Yale Law Journal in 2020, and no binding national system exists to interrupt the pattern, since the National Decertification Index depends on voluntary state reporting and a department that prefers not to ask is free not to.

10. After nine entries describing what the law permits officers to do to us, the last one describes what the law requires officers to do for us, and the answer, with one exception we will get to, is nothing. Two women in a Washington, D.C. rowhouse called police twice while intruders attacked their roommate downstairs, and after officers knocked once and left, the assaults continued for fourteen hours; the survivors sued and lost, because government owes police protection to the public at large rather than to any particular person, the D.C. Court of Appeals held in Warren v. District of Columbia (1981). The Supreme Court reached the same result for a boy beaten into permanent disability by his father despite repeated reports to authorities, in DeShaney v. Winnebago County (1989), and again for a mother whose three daughters were murdered after police declined to enforce her restraining order, in Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005), and after Parkland the federal courts applied the identical logic to the school officials and the armed deputy who stayed outside during the shooting, in L.S. v. Peterson (11th Cir. 2020). The exception covers people in custody, which means the Constitution obligates police to protect us only after they have taken our liberty away. Nothing in those rulings stops a legislature from writing affirmative duties of its own, and a dozen states plus the District of Columbia did exactly that within a year of George Floyd’s murder, requiring officers to intervene when a fellow officer uses excessive force, with penalties that range from decertification to criminal charges. The phrase protect and serve began as a winning entry in a 1955 Los Angeles Police Department slogan contest, and in the seven decades since, no court has given it legal force.

 CONSENT SEARCHES

Consent searches require our consent, and officers have no obligation to tell us we can refuse, per Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973), which means the sentence “I do not consent to any search” is invaluable, violates no rules, and preserves our rights.

STATE LEGISLATURES CAN CHANGE POLICING  MAKING IT RESPONSIVE 

The pattern across all ten is consistent: courts wrote broad permissions for state power and narrow paths to accountability. Nearly every remedy that exists so far came out of a state legislature: Illinois wrote the first juvenile deception ban in 2021 and nine states followed, Colorado removed qualified immunity as a defense under state law in 2020 with New Mexico following in 2021, and New Mexico had already abolished civil forfeiture entirely back in 2015. Laws like those get written when enough of us learn the facts and apply them.

The state wrote these rules down. The least we can do is read them.

Reading is step one, and step two takes about ten minutes. Every one of us has state legislators, findable by address in under a minute, and each of them can be asked for a clear yes or no, on the record, to four questions: 1. will you support a ban on police deception in interrogations of juveniles and people with developmental disabilities, 2. will you support a criminal conviction requirement before forfeiture, 3. will you support removing qualified immunity as a defense under state law, 4. will you support a statutory duty for officers to intervene and report when a fellow officer uses excessive force. Ask by email, by phone, or at a town hall, and treat silence as an answer too. Following up after a non response or a form letter can be very impactful. Ten states have banned law enforcement intentionally misleading minors, and Illinois went a step further and added protections for individuals intellectual disabilities, at least four states require a conviction before forfeiture, two have removed the immunity defense, and at least a dozen require intervention, which means every legislature in the country still has at least one of the four left to pass, and it might as well start with ours.

IS IT WRONG TO STREAM YOU WITHOUT YOUR KNOWING, USING META'S GLASSES? Christopher Armitage on Substack

(COURTESY OF JOSH EDELSON / AFP) (Photo by JOSH EDELSON/AFP via Getty Images)

 

Christopher Armitage wore META'S GLASSES to stream a subject

He did it for research purposes saying, "I learned afterward that my wearing them on that stream was really distressing for the person I streamed with. I also learned there was a lot I was ignorant about and that these glasses come with serious creep and fascist baggage. You won't see me wearing them again."

Then, he apologized saying, "To be clear, I apologize for wearing a recording-capable device on our stream without telling them beforehand and giving them the chance to say no, and I apologize for being ignorant about what Meta does with everything these glasses capture.

As a result of wearing them Armitage further discovered what META is doing with the devices. After his study he and his team created a blueprint to stop META'S encroachment into our privacy. It's the  "MODEL WEARABLE RECORDING DEVICE PRIVACY ACT." The act can and should be introduced in state legislatures.

META'S STREAMING GLASSES

First Armitage points out that he wasn't filming. He was just wearing the glasses. That is a problem, and invasion of privacy. He clarifies in his article on Substack.

This is partly because Meta has been accused of recording audio and video even when people believed their devices weren't recording. The company's record makes the accusation credible.

META cannot be trusted and must be regulated 

Meta captured facial geometry from users' photos and videos without consent and paid 650 million dollars to Illinois class members in 2021 and 1.4 billion dollars to the State of Texas in 2024 for that conduct.

In April 2025 the company changed the glasses' default settings so that voice recordings are stored on Meta's servers for up to one year to train its AI, with no option to decline the storage.

What META'S glasses captured, even if the device was not streaming

Footage captured by the glasses, including video of people undressing, using the bathroom, and having sex inside their own homes, was sent to contractors in Kenya for human review and labeling, according to a February investigation by the Swedish newspapers Svenska Dagbladet and Göteborgs-Posten.

FEDERAL CLASS ACTION, Bartone v. Meta Platforms 

A federal class action filed on March 4, Bartone v. Meta Platforms, alleges that Meta never disclosed the human review pipeline and that reviewers saw identifiable faces and credit card numbers in the footage. The complaint describes a pair of the glasses left on a bedside table that kept capturing while the owner's partner changed clothes in front of them, unaware.

Dozens of influencers have used the glasses to covertly film women in public and post the footage for engagement, a BBC investigation found in January; in one case the video of a 21 year old reached 1.3 million views with her phone number attached.

There is now a small commercial market for drilling the recording light out of the frames.

The Wearable Recording Device Privacy Act

The team at the Existential Republic assembled the act out of law that already exists.

Its definitions come from the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, which has survived eighteen years of litigation. Its indicator requirement comes from Pennsylvania House Bill 2603. Its conduct rules extend California Senate Bill 1130 and follow the method of Louisiana's pending consent bill. Its authority to condition sale on hardware standards rests on California's smartphone kill switch and connected device security statutes, both enacted and both standing.

The act requires a working recording indicator on every device sold in the state and requires the device to shut off capture whenever that indicator is blocked, removed, or broken. It criminalizes selling the tools and services that defeat the light.

It makes cloud storage of recordings opt-in, requires disclosure of any human review, prohibits training AI on bystanders without their written consent, gives anyone captured by one of these devices a right to deletion within thirty days, and preserves in plain text the right to record police and public officials performing their duties in public.

The Act is actionable to reign in META

Behind all of it sits a private right of action worth 10,000 dollars per negligent violation and 25,000 dollars per intentional one, plus punitive damages, with the amounts drawn from the federal Wiretap Act and from the Texas statute Meta already paid 1.4 billion dollars under.

No device Meta currently sells complies. Under this act, none could be sold in your state until the company redesigns to the standard your legislature sets.

I understand if people are upset. I was ignorant on the subject, and I hear folks on this. I was wrong to ever wear this product and I apologize for the distress that caused.

State Legislatures should pass the act

This legislation can be passed at the state level, and it would prevent this kind of thing from happening in the future and ultimately would protect people.

The full text is on The Existenttialist Republic via Christopher Armitage's Substack. There you will find a source map so your legislator's counsel can verify every section.

What you can do 

Here is what we do with this act. Look up your state representative and your state senator at open.pluralpolicy.com/find_your_legislator, the Open States tool, which pulls their email and office contact from your street address. Email them this article, or copy and paste the bill text itself, which is easier from a PC browser. Ask them for two things: their thoughts on the act, and a public endorsement of it.

Then send it to your county Democratic party, your Indivisible chapter, and any organizing group you belong to. Ask the leadership to put it in front of their members, and ask the members to endorse it and share it.

---

MODEL WEARABLE RECORDING DEVICE PRIVACY ACT

Model legislation for introduction in any state legislature. Bracketed text indicates placeholders for state-specific citations and classifications. A source map for every operative provision appears in Appendix A so that legislative counsel can verify provenance and existing judicial construction.

SECTION 1. TITLE

This Act may be cited as the Wearable Recording Device Privacy Act.

SECTION 2. LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

The Legislature finds as follows:

(a) Wearable recording devices that integrate cameras and microphones into ordinary eyewear and other worn articles are now mass-market consumer products. Unlike a handheld camera, these devices collapse the distinction between observation and capture, and bystanders frequently cannot perceive when recording is occurring.

To finish reading, go to Christopher Armitage's Substack                                                                             https://cmarmitage.substack.com/p/i-wore-metas-glasses-then-i-read?publication_id=5818316&post_id=205440540&triggerShare=true&isFreemail=true&r=70flt&triedRedirect=true 

Eighteen States Have Complied With the GOP’s Election Theft Infrastructure. Enough to Kill a Democracy? Reprinted from Christopher Armitage/Substack

 

Trump during his first term, elected with the help of Russia and theft of data  from Cambridge Analytica and Facebook (as per Robert Mueller's report)

 MAGA STATES HAVE DISENFRANCHISED ALL VOTERS CONCEDING TO TRUMP, POTENTIALLY MAKING ELECTIONS GROSSLY UNFAIR AND FRAUDULENT

Eighteen states have turned their complete voter files over to the Trump Justice Department, including the driver’s license numbers and Social Security numbers of every registered voter in them. That count comes from Protect Democracy, which names all eighteen; Texas, Florida, and Ohio are among them. Together those eighteen states have 148 US House seats, 36 US Senate seats, and 184 electoral college votes, roughly two thirds of what it takes to control the House, the Senate, and the presidency. The question in the headline has an answer, and it is fewer than eighteen.

Trump wants to CONTROL YOUR VOTER FILES, SS NUMBER, DRIVER'S LICENSE 

Since early 2025, the Trump administration has been trying to take control of voter rolls, mail ballots, and registration rules away from the states and hand it to the federal executive branch. THIS IS NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION OR POWER OF THE FEDS. IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO CURTAIL STATES' RIGHTS.

A March 2025 executive order demanded changes to state voting procedures and ordered federal election money withheld from states that refused. Courts blocked parts of it, and on June 24, 2026, a federal judge permanently barred key provisions. The Justice Department demanded voter registration data from all 50 states and the District of Columbia, including driver’s license numbers and Social Security numbers. The Department of Homeland Security rebuilt a database called SAVE so states could submit their voter rolls to it for citizenship checks.

A second executive order, issued March 31, 2026, ordered federal agencies to build lists of United States citizens and send them to the states before every election, ordered the Postal Service to create a list of approved mail voters, and told the Postal Service to refuse to deliver ballots from anyone not on that list.

POTENTIAL FOR TRUMP'S RIGGING ELECTIONS WITH "SAVE" VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTION AND UNDERCUTS STATES' RIGHTS

DHS has also written new grant conditions, obtained by CNN and expected to go out to the states, that would make states change their election procedures and run their full voter rolls through SAVE to receive homeland security grants from a program worth more than one billion dollars this fiscal year. States that refuse would lose 20 percent of the money. As of this writing DHS has not formally announced the conditions. Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows said that cutting the funds of refusing states “endangers American lives and democracy itself.”

Most states said no. The Justice Department answered with 31 federal lawsuits against 30 states plus Washington DC to force the data handover, and so far no court, trial or appellate, has ruled in the department’s favor. On June 22, a federal judge ruled that the rebuilt SAVE system broke three federal laws: the Privacy Act, the Social Security Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. That judge, Sparkle Sooknanan, wrote that the federal government had “knowingly trampled on the privacy rights of American citizens.” Two days later, the Sixth Circuit became the first appeals court to rule on the data lawsuits, upholding the dismissal of the case against Michigan. And on June 25, a federal judge in Boston blocked the core of the mail voting order for the November 2026 election in a lawsuit brought by 23 Democratic-led states and DC. The judge, Indira Talwani, wrote that “The Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections.”

News stories about these rulings count the states that refused and the rulings the administration lost. Every one of those stories is accurate. They still measure the wrong thing, because a count of refusing states only means something if each state’s choice stays inside that state’s borders. It does not, for two reasons.

A benign picture of the capitol building before it was stormed by Trump's paid rioters because he couldn't take losing the 2020 election to President Joe Biden. He told staff who later testified before Congress (Cassidy Hutchinson) the loss made him look bad.Trump clearly has a problem losing and will stop at nothing "to win," despite the fact that rigging elections and lying doesn't make him a winner. 

PROBLEMS 

The first reason: once voter data leaves a state, the federal government keeps it, and every new state adds to the same federal database. That database works as soon as one state hands over its records, no matter how many others refuse.

Twelve of the eighteen had handed over complete files, driver’s license and Social Security numbers included, by early April; the other six complied partly or later. Texas alone accounts for a large share of the affected voters: it signed an agreement with DHS in March 2025 and ran its more than 18 million registered voters through SAVE. Separately, the DHS agency that handles citizenship began building a registry that combines its own records with data from the Social Security Administration and the State Department.

The Justice Department also asked states to sign a confidential agreement along with the data handover. Under its reported terms, a state that signs agrees to remove any voter the department flags as ineligible within 45 days. Two states signed: Alaska and Texas. Mississippi, South Dakota, and Tennessee handed over their rolls but refused to sign. A state that signs has given the federal executive branch ongoing control of its voter roll. SO, ALASKA AND TEXAS HAVE COMPROMISED ELECTIONS STARTING FROM NOW, SUBJECT TO THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.

A court ruling issued after a transfer does not bring the data back. On May 12, 2026, the Office of Legal Counsel issued a written opinion saying federal law lets the Attorney General force states to produce their voter lists and share them with DHS. Losing individual court cases does not erase that opinion.

The second reason is geography. Control of the House and Senate will be decided in a small number of competitive districts and states, and several cooperating states hold those races, including Texas, Ohio, Florida, Iowa, and North Carolina. At least 25 states have run their rolls through SAVE since April 2025, 60 million registrations in a year, plus another 7.4 million from North Carolina, where Republicans control the state election board.

The court wins protect mostly the governments that sued. The June 25 injunction covers the 23 suing states and DC, and the administration told the courts this week that it is moving ahead with the system in the remaining states. Postmaster General David Steiner told the Senate on June 24 that under the proposed rule the Postal Service would refuse to deliver mail ballots in states that do not send their voter lists to the federal government. A voter in Houston or Columbus gets nothing from the injunction, because that voter’s state government joined the federal programs instead of fighting them. 

One ruling reaches further: in a separate case brought by the NAACP, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan found the plan to deliver ballots only to preapproved voters broke a 2021 agreement with the Postal Service, and his ruling applies nationwide. That ruling protects ballot delivery. It does not touch the data collection, the purge agreements, or the state purge laws. So the court protection concentrates in states whose governments already refused to cooperate. In the cooperating states that hold the races deciding control of Congress, only the ballot delivery ruling applies.

Trump in an incredible moment of coming to Jesus (though he never repented all his actions and turn from lying to true redemption) ran a free and fair election with the help of Elon Musk and many others' help. Two NSA whistleblowers came out on Substack stating that Kamala Harris won by a considerable margin, but the fear was a global cabal of criminals who threatened the truth coming out. And HERE WE ARE: AT WAR WITH IRAN, TARIFFS, INFLATION RATES THAT WERE HIGHER THAN BIDEN'S, 100,000 JOBS AND TAX REVENUE CUT WITH CIVIL SERVICE FIRINGS, SKY HIGH OIL PRICES, 40 TRILLION IN DEBT-US A BANKRUPT COUNTRY-BEHOLDEN TO BANKERS AND BOND HOLDERS BECAUSE OF TRUMP'S TAX CUTS FOR BILLIONAIRES, SLAPPING YOUR GREAT GREAT GREAT GRAND CHILDREN WITH INDENTURED SERVITUDE. AND CONCENTRATION CAMPS WHERE CHILDREN ARE RAPED, AND GET PREGNANT, ALL A PART OF TRUMP'S PEDOPHILIA AND BABY BREEDING FACTORY. THE PEDOPHILIA AND CHILD TRAFFICKING INDUSTRY GOES RIGHT ON ON OUR HOME SOIL.

 

JIM CROW FOR WHITE, BLACK, PURPLE, ALL WHO VOTE AGAINST MAGA 

The 60 million registration checks flagged about 24,000 possible noncitizens, and officials also flagged several hundred thousand registrations of people who may have died. Those totals only show how many people the government has flagged so far. It can flag as many as it chooses, and no one has to prove a flagged voter is ineligible before the registration is canceled; the voter has to prove they are eligible. That arrangement is a devastatingly powerful voter disenfranchisement tool.

In Texas, flagged voters got a letter, and if the county heard nothing within 30 days, the registration was canceled; some who did answer turned out to be citizens. A new Ohio law makes local election boards promptly cancel the registrations of people the secretary of state flags as noncitizens in checks he must run at least monthly. That secretary, Frank LaRose, defends the law on the ground that flagged voters can “immediately restore their registration status” by showing proof of citizenship.

DISCOURAGING PEOPLE TO REGISTER TO VOTE: JIM CROW'S YES MASSAH 

The system also discourages people from registering at all, separate from the cancellations. A federal official confirmed that people flagged by SAVE are referred to DHS for possible criminal investigation, and the judge who reviewed the system wrote that a centralized federal database like this would discourage registration because citizens could fear misuse of their personal information. In races decided by hundreds or a few thousand votes, losing voters from only one side, and mostly from one party, can change the result even when the national numbers stay small.

WHO IS FOOLING WHOM? TRUMP'S "SAVE" GUARANTEES THE SANCTITY OF YOUR VOTE?  (and the moon is made of Swiss cheese)

The administration has also arranged its litigation so that losing in court still produces something useful. After losing the voter data cases in California, Michigan, and Oregon, the Justice Department filed emergency appeals warning that the security and sanctity of elections in those states would be questioned without quick rulings, and its filings say that without a final court decision there is “no other process to ensure a fair election in 2026.”

Stated plainly, months before the election, the department put into official court documents the claim that results in refusing states should be treated as doubtful. If a state cooperates, the government gets its data and a purge process. If a state refuses, the government gets a written reason to challenge that state’s results in November. Either way, the administration gains something it can use. David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research and a former Justice Department voting section attorney, said of the department’s conduct, “There’s so much lawyering from the DOJ here that is raising ethical questions.” 

From the 2017 Women's March in NYC. Millions showed up around the world. It's not like no one knew then how criminally incompetent he was. But many didn't know of the evil and harmful pedophilia Trump engaged in with Jeffrey Epstein and scores of others old white men who have yet to go to jail. His criminality and abject perversion knows no bounds: Venezuela killings, concentration camps-pedophilia and child trafficking and baby farms, daily violating the constitution (war in Iran) censoring MSM, wecking the WH East Wing, financial fraud and conflict of interest grifts with crypto currency, extortionate pardons, $1 million to belong to his "Board of Peace" then pronouncing the war with Iran at Netanyahu's behest, his theft under the auspices of America250, more theft, helping his friends/donors steal taxpayer money and on and on...

 

MAIL VOTING ATTEMPT TO COMPROMISE AND THROW OUT VOTER REGISTRANTS

The same approach is underway with the mail  voting order. Within a week of the June 25 injunction, the administration appealed to the First Circuit, asked the district judge to lift her order by July 6, and warned in its filings that the injunction will make it impossible for the Postal Service to build the new ballot delivery system before November even if the administration wins the appeal. Those filings put in writing, ahead of time, a federal reason to call November mail ballots compromised.

The effort does not stop at voter rolls. The FBI has seized ballots from the 2020 election in Fulton County, Georgia, and the Arizona Senate complied with a federal grand jury subpoena for records from its Maricopa County audit. The department wants records from Wayne County, Michigan, about the 2024 election, and the names of every person who worked as an election worker in Fulton County in 2020. The March 2026 order tells the Justice Department to make investigating and prosecuting election officials a priority when those officials give ballots to people the federal government considers ineligible.

Collecting the names of individual election workers and threatening officials with prosecution discourages people from doing that work whether or not charges are ever filed.

THE SAVE AMERICA ACT (the only one saved is him from impeachment-maybe not) 

President Trump is also pressing Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, which would make people show citizenship papers to register, limit mail voting to reasons such as illness, disability, military deployment, and travel, and make states submit their voter rolls to DHS and remove anyone the system flags. In March he said of the bill, “It will guarantee the midterms.”

Between June 22 and June 29, federal courts ruled the SAVE overhaul unlawful, permanently barred parts of the 2025 executive order, upheld the dismissal of the Michigan data case on appeal, blocked the mail voting order for 23 states and DC, and upheld Mississippi’s ballot deadline law at the Supreme Court. Those rulings stop specific legal mechanisms.

               

 

STOLEN DATA, WRONGLY CANCELED REGISTRATIONS, NO PROTECTION FOR ELECTION WORKERS, TRUMP'S PROJECTION ON BLUE STATES OF FRAUD, NOT ON FRAUD HE PERPETRATED ALREADY IN RED STATES. 

With the machinations of this process, they do not bring back data already handed over, automatically restore wrongly canceled registrations, reassure naturalized citizens who now connect registering with a federal investigation, protect election workers whose names have been demanded, erase the department’s written claims that elections in refusing states cannot be presumed fair, or stop the grant conditions waiting to go out.

So, how many states is enough? To steal an election, the infrastructure needs only three things: enough voter data, cooperation from states that hold the competitive races, and an official reason to dispute the results everywhere else. Texas alone supplied the first two: 18 million records handed over, a signature on the 45 day removal agreement, citizens with canceled registrations, and competitive House seats inside its borders. The Justice Department’s own court filings supplied the third. The answer is one, and it has already happened.

To see what to do about this go to Substack and Christopher Armitage's page. The pictures and long captions are mine.

'Trump/MAGA Wire Fraud': Reprinted from brilliant author Christopher Armitage of the Existentialist Republic on Substack

 

On July 2, 2026, Democratic staff on the House Natural Resources Committee published a report alleging that the President’s fundraisers redirected donations meant for America250, the congressionally chartered anniversary foundation, into Freedom 250, an entity the White House controls, by giving donors Freedom 250’s routing and account numbers.

Wire fraud is a federal crime, and only federal prosecutors can charge it. The President whose fundraising operation the report’s authors describe appoints those prosecutors. The report supplies the evidence, and the evidence needs a prosecutor the President cannot control and criminal prosecutions that cannot be pardoned by Trump.

So myself and the Existentialist Republic team drafted three citizen referral letters, the kind of letter any member of the public can send to a prosecutor asking the office to request they open an investigation. Each letter states the law the conduct violates, the publicly available facts that connect the conduct to that office, the office’s own record in similar cases, and the first documents to demand.

The District of Columbia letter is first because the entity is registered there. Most crimes in the District are prosecuted by a federal appointee the President selects, but charity fraud is an exception: the elected DC Attorney General prosecutes charitable solicitation violations himself. His office already recovered $750,000 from the Trump inaugural committee.

The New York letter goes with it, because Freedom 250’s fundraising reached New York and the office that obtained the Trump Foundation’s dissolution runs the state’s Charities Bureau. New York adds a reason to act first. The state has its own double jeopardy law: once a federal prosecution for the same acts finishes, New York loses the power to bring its own case, with narrow exceptions. The courts dismissed the Manafort prosecution under that law in 2019 because the Manhattan District Attorney waited for the federal case to finish, and a protective federal plea, a narrow case the Department of Justice could file and settle fast, would end a Freedom 250 case the same way.

Delaware chartered the LLC, and Delaware law lets its Attorney General ask the Court of Chancery, Delaware’s business court, to cancel the charter, the document that gives the company its legal existence, and to appoint a receiver, a neutral officer the court places in control of the company and its records. A receiver in control of the records can produce the donor lists that every other office needs and that Freedom 250 keeps secret.

The three letters are dated July 3, 2026. No law requires me to notify federal prosecutors or to ask their permission. The Virginia letter comes next, once a subpoena identifies the bank that received the misdirected wires, because Virginia law lets a fraud case be tried in any county where any part of the scheme happened, and receiving the money qualifies.

Four more states can open their own investigations the moment a resident or company inside the state is identified among the deceived donors: California, Washington, Illinois, and Minnesota. The donor lists demanded in the first three letters are the documents that would identify those donors. A deceived donor can also act directly: a person or company that wired money to Freedom 250 while intending America250 can contact their state attorney general, and that one contact gives the state its case.

Every other finding in the report can be enforced only by federal agencies the President controls: the money Congress appropriated and the White House diverted, the contracts steered to the President’s operatives, the donations corporations left off their lobbying disclosures, and the fundraising from foreign companies. The President appoints none of the three officers above.

The letters state the limits: the report is a staff draft the full committee has not voted on, the central allegation comes from witnesses who spoke to committee staff confidentially, the report’s authors name no donor and state no amount, and Freedom 250 calls the report “a partisan smear.” Each letter asks for one thing, an investigation that uses subpoenas, the court-backed orders that compel documents and testimony, to test what the witnesses said.

The checkpoints are public. Whether Freedom 250 registered to solicit donations in the District is a record anyone can request. A District prosecution would appear in the Superior Court’s public filings, and a New York subpoena fight would appear in the state court’s public records. A Delaware petition to cancel the charter would appear in the Court of Chancery’s records. A referral requires no law license and no court filing, and any reader can send their own, as can any organization. If you are a member of any organizations with an interest in fighting corruption, this is a fantastic way to influence the system towards justice. 

To see the content of the three letters to the AGs which are a matter of public record, please go to Christopher Armitage of the Existentialist  Republic on Substack. And check out his other fantastic articles which are activist-legally based and reveal congress, to white Democrats in the House and Senate can be doing something to stop this administration, but their feet are slow to the task.

IS MUSK STEALING 250 MILLION AMERICANS' SOCIAL SECURITY, A PONZI SCHEME!?

 

TRUMP/MUSK/REPUBLICANS PLAN TO STEAL SOCIAL SECURITY MONEY THAT IS NOT THEIRS

How many working Americans in 2024 them have social security taken out of their paychecks with matching funds from their employers? It was 183 million workers in 2015. However, the number fluctuates with those Americans joining the job market and those dying. How many billions do Americans fund Social Security with? $200 billion is a conservative answer. Every working American young and old and every retired American has Social Security. The smooth running operation takes in money and pays out money contributed by workers and employers. Counting the migrants, illegal and legal, immigrants the fund is bringing in a tremendous amount of money. They don't want you to know how much because REPUBLICANS want it.

GREEDY EMPLOYERS HATE HELPING TO FUND THEIR EMPLOYEE'S SOCIAL SECURITY. MUSK TYPIFIES A GREEDY EMPLOYER WHO HATES FUNDING HIS EMPLOYEES SS.

REPUBLICANS, EVER ON THE TAKE FROM CORPORATIONS AND WEALTHY DONORS  HAVE BEEN ITCHING TO GET THEIR HANDS ON OUR MONEY. THEY ARE ALSO INTERESTED IN MAKING GREEDY EMPLOYERS HAPPY BY STOPPING THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS AND DESTROYING THE FUND ENTIRELY AND TAKING THE MONEY. 

Elon Musk was not elected to any position, but has appointed himself with Trump/Republican's apparent approval to break the law and commit unauthorized acts the courts oppose.

TO STEAL THE MONEY, REPUBLICANS AND MUSK WOULD TRY TO ENGAGE IN THE PUTIN PONZI SCHEME. TAKE FROM THE POOR AND GIVE TO THE OLIGARCHS, UNLAWFULLY, ILLEGALLY, BY DUPING THEM.

LEGAL LAWS MANDATE SOCIAL SECURITY AND FUNDED PROGRAMS

THE MONEY IS OURS. REPUBLICANS HAVE NO RIGHT TO IT BECAUSE OF FICA (  The Federal Insurance Contributions Act) and SECA (Self-employment Contributions Act). These two acts which have helped millions of Americans over the last 85 years are the backbone of the system. 

Employers want to stop helping Americans. Musk wants to stop helping Americans. This is what is happening at the Social Security Administration (SSA), which Trump wants to make COMMUNISTIC.

Whistleblowers from inside the SSA say that Musk/Trump to steal from the SSA are trashing it by firing employees and removing personnel to make it appear incompetent. Their "efficiency" is baloney. The  system works smoothly so they are illegally committing fraud. They are using malfeasance and mismanagement to lie and scam. This is a ponzi scheme. 

No money will be saved since Americans and employers fund their own social security (why corporations want Social Security dumped). Instead, they plan to steal trillions of dollars for their own use to give themselves tax breaks. So TRASHING THE SSA is a money grabbing "ponzi scheme." 

It will kill older Americans who rely on Social Security checks to pay bills that arrive in the mails like clock work.  

 

Donald Trump and deceased friend Jeffrey Epstein's partner in crime, Ghislane Maxwell

SOCIAL SECURITY IS TAXED AND ADDS MONEY TO THE TREASURY

Furthermore, Social Security is considered income and is TAXED. So with the illegal firing of federal employees, not only will our treasury be depleted of taxes from fired employees. The US treasury will be depleted of taxes from those collecting Social Security. All together, 75 million elderly people are on Social Security. 

Trump who is elderly doesn't care about the elderly. Trump only cares about pleasing Putin who wants to get revenge on the US for all the years Russia was humiliated by the fall of communism, The USSR, under Putin is an oppressive, UNFREE regime. Putin is rich because he takes all the resources and money from Russia and lets it oligarchs keep some.The rest is communistically spread to citizens; very little is given to citizens. Even today, in areas away from the cities, Russian citizens don't have washing machines and some don't have indoor plumbing. An iPhone is a gift from God, but they don't have WiFi on thefarms.

EVERYONE NEEDS TO STOP THIS ATTEMPTED THEFT OF SS BY CALLING BOTH DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS. YOU MAY USE THE FOLLOWING SCRIPT.

I am deeply alarmed about DOGE’s plan to gut social security by hollowing out its staff and shuttering offices. It’s horrifying. I’ve heard that the entire Office of Transformation has already been dissolved, as well as the entire Office of Civil Rights and Equal Opportunity. 7,000 people have already been fired across the agency and they’re coming for many more. These attacks on Social Security are outrageous. I wholly oppose them. If I or someone I love loses my Social Security or has services interrupted because of these staffing cuts I will be furious. Stop Musk now. Get him out of our government. He’s destroying it. Thanks.

 

 

 

 

 https://www.facebook.com/share/r/18gztzyTRJ/