Liberal Forum

Over the last few months, Donald Trump has been pushing the states to provide evidence they are abiding by ELECTION LAW, and NOT permitting ILLEGALS to vote.  MANY states provided that evidence... but others, (mostly BLUE States) have NOT ONLY NOT provided evidence, THEY have obtained Judges rulings that "Elections are the responsibility of the STATES "... and REFUSED !

HA!! ...WELL, They fell RIGHT into Donald Trumps TRAP !!

The Department of Justice just a few days ago has put state election officials on notice by giving them five days to outline their plan to maintain ‘clean voter lists’ ahead of the elections — and warning that failure to comply could be met with criminal prosecution !!

 The dictum came in the form of a letter signed by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon and sent to election officials in all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia, a spokesperson for the Justice Department confirmed.  They gave election officials a five-day period to detail what steps they are taking to comply with federal, state, and local election laws. ...and they reiterated that election officials could be ‘criminally prosecuted’ for ‘aiding and abetting’ noncitizen voting — a reminder that comes as the Trump administration has sought to crack down on voter security efforts more broadly ahead of the November midterm elections. 

SO, in a NUTSHELL... yes, it's the states "responsibility" to make sure election law is upheld, BUT, if they DO NOT do that... it's the Federal Governments "responsibility" to PROSECUTE those within those states of NOT doing their JOBS.  Donald Trump just let them know, THEY WILL be held to account... and with the PROOF (i.e. election ballots) already under the control of the federal government (via raids all across the country)... and presumably have been evaluated and the evidence already secured... TRUMP is telling them... "THEY WILL be held to account" !!

GOOD LUCK DUMMY-CRATS !!

https://www.dailymail.com/news/us-polit ... urity.html
 

ConservativeWave » 14 Jul 2026, 6:53 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 6:53 am

Over the last few months, Donald Trump has been pushing the states to provide evidence they are abiding by ELECTION LAW, and NOT permitting ILLEGALS to vote.  MANY states provided that evidence... but others, (mostly BLUE States) have NOT ONLY NOT provided evidence, THEY have obtained Judges rulings that "Elections are the responsibility of the STATES "... and REFUSED !

HA!! ...WELL, They fell RIGHT into Donald Trumps TRAP !!The Department of Justice just a few days ago has put state election officials on notice by giving them five days to outline their plan to maintain ‘clean voter lists’ ahead of the elections — and warning that failure to comply could be met with criminal prosecution !!
 The dictum came in the form of a letter signed by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon and sent to election officials in all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia, a spokesperson for the Justice Department confirmed.  They gave election officials a five-day period to detail what steps they are taking to comply with federal, state, and local election laws. ...and they reiterated that election officials could be ‘criminally prosecuted’ for ‘aiding and abetting’ noncitizen voting — a reminder that comes as the Trump administration has sought to crack down on voter security efforts more broadly ahead of the November midterm elections. 
SO, in a NUTSHELL... yes, it's the states "responsibility" to make sure election law is upheld, BUT, if they DO NOT do that... it's the Federal Governments "responsibility" to PROSECUTE those within those states of NOT doing their JOBS.  Donald Trump just let them know, THEY WILL be held to account... and with the PROOF (i.e. election ballots) already under the control of the federal government (via raids all across the country)... and presumably have been evaluated and the evidence already secured... TRUMP is telling them... "THEY WILL be held to account" !!

GOOD LUCK DUMMY-CRATS !!

https://www.dailymail.com/news/us-polit ... urity.html

What does the Constitution say about the role of the Executive Branch in national elections?

Blackvegetable » 14 Jul 2026, 7:03 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 7:03 am

What does the Constitution say about the role of the Executive Branch in national elections?

The U.S. Constitution assigns the Executive Branch the responsibility to enforce federal law.  The key constitutional provision is Article II, Section 3, which states that the President:

"shall take Care that the Laws are faithfully executed..."

 This is commonly called the Take Care Clause. It means the President is responsible for ensuring that laws passed by Congress are carried out by the executive agencies and departments of the federal government.

AND SO, the "States" do NOT have the right to thumb their noses at Federal laws that might EXPOSE them as the "Anti Democratic", "CORRUPT", and TRAITOROUS SOB's that they REALLY are !! 

...NOT EVEN if they REALLY don't WANT TO, and/or IF it might expose the ENTIRE CORRUPT CABAL, that they have spent YEARS carefully building !!

EOM
 
 
 

Trump is one desperate ****.
And he's just blowing hot air.
He can say anything he likes but it being true is another thing.
In other words states can tell him to **** off like they have been and there isn't a thing he can do.

Squatchman » 14 Jul 2026, 8:46 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 8:46 am

Trump is one desperate ****.
And he's just blowing hot air.
He can say anything he likes but it being true is another thing.
In other words states can tell him to **** off like they have been and there isn't a thing he can do.

Blowing hot air?

FACT:  Democrat States are potentially trying to HIDE Election FRAUD, and USING it to STEAL elections...

THEY COULD comply (and prove Trump is wrong if they wanted to), many states ALREADY HAVE complied, BUT those remaining States (most of them Blue) seem TERRIFIED of the prospect... AND it's the KIND of FEAR that DOES NOT correspond with PROVING INNOCENCE.. but MORE HIDING the TRUTH !

Whats MORE... the "U.S. CONSTITUTION" Gives the POTUS the RESPONSIBILITY to MAKE SURE that the states are following the LAW... Trump has given them the opportunity to do that the easy way... AND NOW, comes the Federal HAMMER, that the POTUS has to "MAKE SURE the states are complying" !!

"states can tell him to **** off like they have been and there isn't a thing he can do."

Hmmm... SO, there isn't a THING the POTUS can do?  HOW ABOUT?:
1. Federal Enforcement Agencies
2. Department of Justice Lawsuits
3. Federal Court Orders
4. Withholding Federal Funds
5. Federal Preemption
6. Use of Federal Troops or the National Guard, and
7. ALL OF IT in FULL VIEW of the American public !! 

JUST because Democrats DON'T WANT Donald Trump to do his JOB !!
 
 
 

Blackvegetable » 14 Jul 2026, 7:03 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 7:03 am

What does the Constitution say about the role of the Executive Branch in national elections?

It would take him 5 weeks to answer that..

The U.S. Constitution does not grant the Executive Branch (the President) any independent authority to administer or regulate national elections. Instead, the Constitution establishes a decentralized system where states hold the primary responsibility for running elections.Here is a breakdown of what the Constitution dictates regarding elections and the Executive Branch:1. No Election Administration PowersThe Constitution does not assign the President or the Executive Branch any role in setting voting rules, establishing ballot procedures, or counting votes. According to Article I, Section 4, the power to determine the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections lies with the individual state legislatures, with Congress holding the power to override or alter these regulations if it chooses.2. The Presidential Selection ProcessThe only direct connection between the Executive Branch and elections outlined in the Constitution is the process by which the President and Vice President themselves are chosen:The Electoral College: Article II, Section 1 dictates that the President is not elected by popular vote. Instead, each state appoints a number of electors equal to its total number of Senators and Representatives in Congress.State Control: The Constitution gives each state legislature the absolute authority to decide how these electors are chosen.3. Legislative and Executive ChecksThe President does not have the power to unilaterally alter, cancel, or overturn election results. The Executive Branch's only involvement in federal election laws is legislative:Signing/Vetoing: The President may sign or veto federal legislation passed by Congress that sets baseline national election standards.Enforcing Statutes: The Executive Branch is responsible for enforcing any election-related laws created by Congress, such as the Voting Rights Act or the National Voter Registration Act.For more details on the balance of election powers, you can review the National Constitution Center's Article II Guide or read the Congressional Research Service Overview of the Executive Vesting Clause.
 
 

Squatchman » 14 Jul 2026, 8:46 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 8:46 am

Trump is one desperate ****.
And he's just blowing hot air.
He can say anything he likes but it being true is another thing.
In other words states can tell him to **** off like they have been and there isn't a thing he can do.

I see me in DC Friday Morning..

Squatchman » 14 Jul 2026, 8:46 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 8:46 am

Trump is one desperate ****.
And he's just blowing hot air.
He can say anything he likes but it being true is another thing.
In other words states can tell him to **** off like they have been and there isn't a thing he can do.

Speaking of hot air, your Governor has been strangely silent after the election.....someone cut her tongue out?

JohnnyYou » 14 Jul 2026, 11:02 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 11:02 am

I see me in DC Friday Morning..

What are you up to,  Luigi?

JohnnyYou » 14 Jul 2026, 11:01 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 11:01 am

It would take him 5 weeks to answer that..

The U.S. Constitution does not grant the Executive Branch (the President) any independent authority to administer or regulate national elections. Instead, the Constitution establishes a decentralized system where states hold the primary responsibility for running elections.Here is a breakdown of what the Constitution dictates regarding elections and the Executive Branch:1. No Election Administration PowersThe Constitution does not assign the President or the Executive Branch any role in setting voting rules, establishing ballot procedures, or counting votes. According to Article I, Section 4, the power to determine the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections lies with the individual state legislatures, with Congress holding the power to override or alter these regulations if it chooses.2. The Presidential Selection ProcessThe only direct connection between the Executive Branch and elections outlined in the Constitution is the process by which the President and Vice President themselves are chosen:The Electoral College: Article II, Section 1 dictates that the President is not elected by popular vote. Instead, each state appoints a number of electors equal to its total number of Senators and Representatives in Congress.State Control: The Constitution gives each state legislature the absolute authority to decide how these electors are chosen.3. Legislative and Executive ChecksThe President does not have the power to unilaterally alter, cancel, or overturn election results. The Executive Branch's only involvement in federal election laws is legislative:Signing/Vetoing: The President may sign or veto federal legislation passed by Congress that sets baseline national election standards.Enforcing Statutes: The Executive Branch is responsible for enforcing any election-related laws created by Congress, such as the Voting Rights Act or the National Voter Registration Act.For more details on the balance of election powers, you can review the National Constitution Center's Article II Guide or read the Congressional Research Service Overview of the Executive Vesting Clause.

"5 weeks" ?   HA!!

I answered "that" before YOU even POSTED YOUR piece of TRASH, above !!   YOU MIGHT want to take a look at it BEFORE you continue SPEWING things YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T KNOW $HIT ABOUT !!

In a Nut Shell... the POTUS DEFINITELY has ABSOLUTE authority to ASSURE the LAW is being followed... and JUST because YOU don't know ANYTHING about the U.S. Constitution, DOES NOT mean HE CAN'T DO IT !!
 

The President of the United States doesn't have "ANY AUTHORITY to IMPOSE the LAW"?

WHAT a MOROOON !!

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxGgnI6kCrs
 

ConservativeWave » 14 Jul 2026, 6:53 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 6:53 am

Over the last few months, Donald Trump has been pushing the states to provide evidence they are abiding by ELECTION LAW, and NOT permitting ILLEGALS to vote.  MANY states provided that evidence... but others, (mostly BLUE States) have NOT ONLY NOT provided evidence, THEY have obtained Judges rulings that "Elections are the responsibility of the STATES "... and REFUSED !

HA!! ...WELL, They fell RIGHT into Donald Trumps TRAP !!The Department of Justice just a few days ago has put state election officials on notice by giving them five days to outline their plan to maintain ‘clean voter lists’ ahead of the elections — and warning that failure to comply could be met with criminal prosecution !!
 The dictum came in the form of a letter signed by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon and sent to election officials in all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia, a spokesperson for the Justice Department confirmed.  They gave election officials a five-day period to detail what steps they are taking to comply with federal, state, and local election laws. ...and they reiterated that election officials could be ‘criminally prosecuted’ for ‘aiding and abetting’ noncitizen voting — a reminder that comes as the Trump administration has sought to crack down on voter security efforts more broadly ahead of the November midterm elections. 
SO, in a NUTSHELL... yes, it's the states "responsibility" to make sure election law is upheld, BUT, if they DO NOT do that... it's the Federal Governments "responsibility" to PROSECUTE those within those states of NOT doing their JOBS.  Donald Trump just let them know, THEY WILL be held to account... and with the PROOF (i.e. election ballots) already under the control of the federal government (via raids all across the country)... and presumably have been evaluated and the evidence already secured... TRUMP is telling them... "THEY WILL be held to account" !!

GOOD LUCK DUMMY-CRATS !!

https://www.dailymail.com/news/us-polit ... urity.html

Of course we know they’ll slow-walk it claiming not enough time, crying like little browns, then tie it up in court…

Yep.
Just hot air.
The president doesn't have power over how elections are run. That's up to the individual states.
Apparently he and his minions haven't heard of states rights along with the constitution.
What a bunch of losers.
 

The Usual Suspects:

Which states don’t require an ID to vote?

Only 12 states and the District of Columbia will, with few exceptions, let you vote at the polls without any documentation under certain circumstances.

That includes California, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, and Vermont.
 

Squatchman » 14 Jul 2026, 12:37 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 12:37 pm

Yep.
Just hot air.
The president doesn't have power over how elections are run. That's up to the individual states.
Apparently he and his minions haven't heard of states rights along with the constitution.
What a bunch of losers.

Hot Air?  NO... Read it and WEEP... Per AI, Trump CAN:
If a President believes that federal law is not being followed, the Constitution gives the Executive Branch several tools, but they vary depending on the situation.The Constitution states that the President "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" (Article II, Section 3). This is often called the Take Care Clause.  Some of the President's options include:

1. Direct Federal Agencies to Enforce the Law.   The President oversees executive agencies such as:

• Department of Justice (DOJ)
• FBI
• Department of Homeland Security
• IRS
• Environmental Protection Agency

These agencies can investigate violations and bring civil or criminal actions when federal law authorizes it.

2. Ask the Department of Justice to Sue If a state, local government, business, or individual is violating federal law, the DOJ may file lawsuits in federal court seeking:

• Injunctions
• Court orders
• Financial penalties
• Other remedies provided by law

3. Withhold Certain Federal Funds (When Authorized by Law)Congress sometimes conditions federal funding on compliance with federal requirements. If a state fails to meet those conditions, federal funds may be reduced or withheld, subject to statutory and constitutional limits.

4. Federal Court EnforcementThe President cannot personally decide guilt or impose punishment. The Executive Branch generally must go through the courts. Federal judges can issue orders requiring compliance with federal law.

5. Federalize Certain Functions in Limited CircumstancesUnder specific statutes, the President may:

• Deploy federal law enforcement resources.
• In rare circumstances invoke authorities such as the Insurrection Act when conditions specified by Congress are met.

6. Recommend New Legislation... If existing laws are inadequate, the President can ask Congress to pass new legislation or amend existing laws.

When States Are Involved. The federal government cannot simply command states to do whatever it wants. The U.S. system is based on federalism, meaning states retain significant powers.  However, under the Supremacy Clause (Article VI), valid federal laws and constitutional requirements generally take precedence over conflicting state laws.  If a state refuses to comply with federal law, the usual process is:

1. Federal investigation.
2. Lawsuit by the Department of Justice.
3. Federal court ruling.
4. Court-ordered remedies and appeals if necessary.

Historically, Presidents have sometimes used federal authority to enforce court orders, such as during school desegregation in the 1950s and 1960s when states resisted federal court rulings.  
 

Fuelman » 14 Jul 2026, 3:03 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 3:03 pm

The Usual Suspects:

Which states don’t require an ID to vote?

Only 12 states and the District of Columbia will, with few exceptions, let you vote at the polls without any documentation under certain circumstances.

That includes California, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, and Vermont.

 

• As of June 2026, federal law prohibited noncitizens from voting in any federal election.

https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_permitting ... ted_States
 

https://www.brennancenter.org/series/vo ... itizenship

Despite this, certain politicians frequently claim that it is happening on a significant scale, attempting to turn immigrants into a scapegoat as a way to drum up support and undermine trust in the election system. Then if they lose, they can call for the election to be overturned.

ConservativeWave » 14 Jul 2026, 6:53 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 6:53 am

Over the last few months, Donald Trump has been pushing the states to provide evidence they are abiding by ELECTION LAW, and NOT permitting ILLEGALS to vote.  MANY states provided that evidence... but others, (mostly BLUE States) have NOT ONLY NOT provided evidence, THEY have obtained Judges rulings that "Elections are the responsibility of the STATES "... and REFUSED !

HA!! ...WELL, They fell RIGHT into Donald Trumps TRAP !!

The Department of Justice just a few days ago has put state election officials on notice by giving them five days to outline their plan to maintain ‘clean voter lists’ ahead of the elections — and warning that failure to comply could be met with criminal prosecution !!

 The dictum came in the form of a letter signed by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon and sent to election officials in all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia, a spokesperson for the Justice Department confirmed.  They gave election officials a five-day period to detail what steps they are taking to comply with federal, state, and local election laws. ...and they reiterated that election officials could be ‘criminally prosecuted’ for ‘aiding and abetting’ noncitizen voting — a reminder that comes as the Trump administration has sought to crack down on voter security efforts more broadly ahead of the November midterm elections. 

SO, in a NUTSHELL... yes, it's the states "responsibility" to make sure election law is upheld, BUT, if they DO NOT do that... it's the Federal Governments "responsibility" to PROSECUTE those within those states of NOT doing their JOBS.  Donald Trump just let them know, THEY WILL be held to account... and with the PROOF (i.e. election ballots) already under the control of the federal government (via raids all across the country)... and presumably have been evaluated and the evidence already secured... TRUMP is telling them... "THEY WILL be held to account" !!

GOOD LUCK DUMMY-CRATS !!

https://www.dailymail.com/news/us-polit ... urity.html

Connie been conned again   



Despite this, certain politicians frequently claim that it is happening on a significant scale, attempting to turn immigrants into a scapegoat as a way to drum up support and undermine trust in the election system. Then if they lose, they can call for the election to be overturned.

https://www.brennancenter.org/series/vo ... itizenship
 

*Roshambo » 14 Jul 2026, 4:14 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 4:14 pm

Connie been conned again   


Despite this, certain politicians frequently claim that it is happening on a significant scale, attempting to turn immigrants into a scapegoat as a way to drum up support and undermine trust in the election system. Then if they lose, they can call for the election to be overturned.

https://www.brennancenter.org/series/vo ... itizenship
 

The LAW IS CLEAR !!

If a President believes that federal law is not being followed, the Constitution gives the Executive Branch several tools, but they vary depending on the situation.The Constitution states that the President "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" (Article II, Section 3). This is often called the Take Care Clause.  Some of the President's options include:

1. Direct Federal Agencies to Enforce the Law.   The President oversees executive agencies such as:

• Department of Justice (DOJ)
• FBI
• Department of Homeland Security
• IRS
• Environmental Protection Agency

These agencies can investigate violations and bring civil or criminal actions when federal law authorizes it.

2. Ask the Department of Justice to Sue If a state, local government, business, or individual is violating federal law, the DOJ may file lawsuits in federal court seeking:

• Injunctions
• Court orders
• Financial penalties
• Other remedies provided by law

3. Withhold Certain Federal Funds (When Authorized by Law)Congress sometimes conditions federal funding on compliance with federal requirements. If a state fails to meet those conditions, federal funds may be reduced or withheld, subject to statutory and constitutional limits.

4. Federal Court EnforcementThe President cannot personally decide guilt or impose punishment. The Executive Branch generally must go through the courts. Federal judges can issue orders requiring compliance with federal law.

5. Federalize Certain Functions in Limited CircumstancesUnder specific statutes, the President may:

• Deploy federal law enforcement resources.
• In rare circumstances invoke authorities such as the Insurrection Act when conditions specified by Congress are met.

6. Recommend New Legislation... If existing laws are inadequate, the President can ask Congress to pass new legislation or amend existing laws.

When States Are Involved. The federal government cannot simply command states to do whatever it wants. The U.S. system is based on federalism, meaning states retain significant powers.  However, under the Supremacy Clause (Article VI), valid federal laws and constitutional requirements generally take precedence over conflicting state laws.  If a state refuses to comply with federal law, the usual process is:

1. Federal investigation.
2. Lawsuit by the Department of Justice.
3. Federal court ruling.
4. Court-ordered remedies and appeals if necessary.

Historically, Presidents have sometimes used federal authority to enforce court orders, such as during school desegregation in the 1950s and 1960s when states resisted federal court rulings.  
 

ConservativeWave » 14 Jul 2026, 4:36 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 4:36 pm

If a President believes

34 felony convictions....

*Roshambo » 14 Jul 2026, 4:12 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2026, 4:12 pm

 

[*]As of June 2026, federal law prohibited noncitizens from voting in any federal election.

What is the obvious result of this one sentence not being discussed by anyone as it involves everyone in the USA?

You avoid stating that only 25% of people to vote for are running for a federal office. 75% aren't local, city, county, state offices illegals are allowed to vote for in states allowing it.

Oops, look what I pointed out ignored for over a century of the same arguments done in the last 5 generations doing the same things over and over expecting 7 better days ahead than the time they received adapting in plain sight equally created since conception.

Literal time works in a clockwise movement social minds pretend anything else is possible, evolving happens on a planet rotating counter clockwise revolving around the star counter clockwise.