The Atlantic: Why, Yes, The Point Of Lawfare Is To Overturn Any Elections Republicans Win
The Atlantic reports the avalanche of leftist lawsuits are cut-and-paste operations designed to overturn election results Democrats don't like.The Atlantic reports the avalanche of leftist lawsuits are cut-and-paste operations designed to overturn election results Democrats don't like.Sanctuary cities fail — but Karen Bass keeps pushing the lie
In yet another low point for Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass (D), she marched into the drug-ridden chaos of MacArthur Park — press corps in tow — to join a protest last week against federal immigration enforcement. She demanded that agents leave the area immediately. The stunt accomplished nothing beyond generating a photo op and pushing the false narrative that Bass stood for her city’s “honor.”
In reality, her appearance exposed a familiar truth: Sanctuary city mayors like Bass offer no real solutions to the crises they helped create. Worse, they routinely display ignorance of how federalism actually works.
The 2024 election was a clear rebuke of sanctuary city policies and the broader anti-borders agenda that Bass represents.
The Supremacy Clause — Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution — makes clear that federal law overrides state and local laws when they conflict. Immigration policy, long upheld by the courts as a federal responsibility, lies squarely within Washington’s authority. In Arizona v. United States (2012), the Supreme Court reaffirmed that states and localities cannot pursue policies that obstruct federal immigration enforcement.
By declaring Los Angeles a sanctuary city and demanding that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents stand down, Bass didn’t just express a policy preference. She tried to seize power that the Constitution explicitly grants to the federal government.
This isn’t a symbolic squabble. Immigration enforcement involves national security, public safety, and international diplomacy. Local governments lack both the authority and the expertise to handle these matters on their own.
Sanctuary cities in crisis
The leftist mayor’s public campaign against ICE is especially galling considering that the agency’s presence in Los Angeles stems directly from the city’s sanctuary policies. For years, Los Angeles has limited cooperation with federal immigration authorities, refusing to honor ICE detainers and withholding information when illegal aliens are released from custody.
Bass and her predecessors created the very conditions that now require federal intervention. Far from “overstepping” in L.A., ICE is responding to a city government that harbors people who violate federal immigration law, including those with serious criminal records.
RELATED: Karen Bass says LA anti-ICE riots ‘never happened’ as the media reported them
The consequences of sanctuary policies have been devastating. Los Angeles, once a beacon of prosperity and opportunity, is struggling with high crime rates, strained public services, and a ballooning budget deficit.
According to the Los Angeles Police Department, violent crime in the city increased by 11.6% from 2020 to 2022, with homicides spiking to levels not seen in over a decade. The city’s homeless population, which includes a significant number of illegal aliens, has surged to more than 75,000, overwhelming shelters and defiling public spaces.
Sanctuary policies worsen the crisis by cutting off cooperation with federal immigration authorities, giving criminal elements more room to operate unchecked. The burden on public resources grows heavier by the day. Los Angeles expects a $400 million budget shortfall in 2025, yet city leaders continue pouring funds into programs for illegal aliens, including legal aid and housing. These decisions reflect an ideological agenda that leaves taxpaying citizens footing the bill for rising crime and collapsing public services.
Bass’ posture isn’t just another act of left-wing defiance. It’s a warning sign of a national policy failure. Cities like San Francisco, Chicago, and New York have followed the same sanctuary script, and the results are as predictable as they are destructive: higher crime, strained infrastructure, and a public rapidly losing faith in its leaders.
In New York City, for instance, the influx of immigrants has pushed the city to the brink, with Mayor Eric Adams admitting in 2023 that the crisis could “destroy” the city. New York is no outlier. It is what happens when a city abandons order for lawlessness.
Enough is enough
Americans have had enough. The 2024 presidential election was a clear rebuke of sanctuary city policies and the broader anti-borders agenda that Bass represents. The L.A. mayor’s defiance of ICE is not just a legal overreach; it is a rejection of the democratic will of the American people, who have made it clear that they want safe streets, secure borders, and accountable leaders.
Instead of confronting the crime, homelessness, and fiscal crises fueled by her city’s policies, Bass chose to cling to a failed ideology. Her call for ICE to leave is not a defense of compassion but a surrender to anarchy. Americans deserve leaders who respect the Constitution rather than cling to a discredited sanctuary city experiment.
Deep-staters threaten to use color revolution tactics against Trump admin: Report
Despite delays in mass layoffs ordered by a Clinton judge, the Trump administration has already managed some significant housecleaning at the U.S. State Department.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has, for instance, fired scores of contractors who supposedly worked abroad building up civil society and democratic practices, and shuttered the rebrand of both the censorious Global Engagement Center and the U.S. Agency for International Development.
These actions, coupled with Rubio's plan to can thousands of State Department employees, have enraged all the right people — including the Democratic lawmakers in Congress who claimed in a June 27 letter that large-scale reductions in force of America's diplomatic workforce would "leave the U.S. with limited tools to engage as a leader on the world stage during this critical juncture."
It appears that the changes have angered bad actors besides those in Congress — some of whom intend to respond with something more serious than sternly written letters.
'They've done a very foolish thing.'
A number of anonymous former USAID and State Department officials recently told the Allbritton Journalism Institute's publication NOTUS about their plans to undermine the Trump administration.
While it largely sounds like a revival of the "resistance" that undermined the first Trump administration, this group of would-be saboteurs appears keen on using nation-destabilizing tactics practiced abroad on their own government.
RELATED: 'Nothing to be proud of': State Department spits on USAID's grave following Bono, Obama eulogies
According to NOTUS, some jilted establishmentarians who were previously "stationed across the globe actively supporting opposition movements in autocratic nations" are now building a network of federal workers who are "willing to engage in even minor acts of rebellion in the office" — what BlazeTV host Auron MacIntyre and other critics have alternatively characterized as "treason."
"They were so quick to disband AID, the group that supposedly instigates color revolutions," a currently employed federal official told NOTUS. "But they've done a very foolish thing. You just released a bunch of well-trained individuals into your population. If you kept our offices going and had us play solitaire in the office, it might have been safer to keep your regime."
Color revolutions — such as the 2003 Rose Revolution in Georgia, the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine, and the 2005 Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan — are political upheavals aimed at toppling supposedly illegitimate or abusive regimes and replacing them with supposedly liberal democratic regimes.
Blaze News previously highlighted that in many cases, color revolutionaries were afforded help and direction by state actors and/or by nongovernmental organizations.
The Washington Post's David Ignatius described such efforts plainly in a 1991 column about successful efforts undertaken at the time in Russia, noting that instead of engaging in Cold War-style covert operations, overt operatives "have been doing in public what the CIA used to do in private — providing money and moral support for pro-democracy groups, training resistance fighters, working to subvert communist rule."
Although the current Republican administration was given a clear mandate by the American people to rule, it may have repeated the error made by other sovereign governments targeted by color revolutions: Its agenda is not aligned with that of a clique of unelected bureaucrats in the District of Columbia.
RELATED: Flipping cars for ‘justice’ — then back to poli-sci class
Those now plotting against the American government were once paid by the federal government to push Latin American militants to overthrow supposed dictators and to support African secessionist movements. They also apparently helped kick off "an ultimately successful uprising in the Middle East," according to the NOTUS report.
It's unclear whether that "successful" Middle Eastern uprising is the same one that resulted in both a civil war that claimed the lives of over 600,000 people and Islamic terrorists running Syria.
'Today it starts with four, but tomorrow it's 10.'
Former State Department officials told NOTUS that they are holding "noncooperation" training sessions, attempting to set the stage for a nationwide general strike, and circulating copies of the CIA's Simple Sabotage Field Manual, which notes that "acts of simple sabotage, multiplied by thousands of citizen-saboteurs, can be an effective weapon against the enemy" and will "demoralize enemy administrators."
The manual provides tips for interfering with organizations and productions, such as bringing up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible; haggling over the precise wordings of communications, minutes, and resolutions; advocating caution and generally slowing down processes by any means; demanding written orders; deliberately misunderstanding orders; waiting until current stocks of necessary materials are exhausted before ordering new materials; giving incomplete or misleading instructions to new workers; and holding "conferences when there is more critical work to be done."
Rosarie Tucci, the former deputy assistant administrator of the now extinct USAID Bureau for Conflict Prevention and Stabilization, is apparently operating "in this space," co-leading a group called DemocracyAID with fellow USAID alumna Denielle Reiff. Their group is reportedly running workshops with those still employed by the federal government.
"The whole point of it is to start off slow," Tucci told NOTUS. "You're building up that muscle and that bravery, and you're building up your numbers. Today it starts with four, but tomorrow it's 10. We're helping them understand that is the organizing, and that is the process to get to a massive strike."
Blaze News has reached out to the State Department for comment.
White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said in a statement to Blaze News, "It is inherently undemocratic for unelected bureaucrats to undermine the duly elected President of the United States and the agenda he was given a mandate to implement."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
No, you’re not a ‘xenophobe.’ You’re just awake.
America is on fire — again. But this time, it’s not just cities burning — it’s our identity.
In Los Angeles, mobs of masked agitators — many waving the Mexican flag, others clutching Palestinian flags, and some burning the American flag — have taken to the streets, firing guns into the air, hurling rocks at ICE vehicles, blocking traffic, and setting fires.
America doesn’t need a savior. It needs a reckoning.
Where is the outrage from the media? Where are the helicopters? The FBI raids? The solitary confinement cells? When a handful of peaceful Americans entered the Capitol on January 6, 2021, a great many politely walking between velvet ropes, they were branded “insurrectionists.” Grandmothers were hunted down. Veterans were jailed without bail. But in Los Angeles, when foreign nationals tear through city streets waving foreign flags, they’re “demonstrators.”
Give me a break.
Illegal alien anarchy
What we saw in California over the weekend was the result of an illegal invasion. And it isn’t new. These aren’t “immigrants.” A great many are illegal aliens — a term defined by law — who have broken federal immigration law, ignored due process, and poured over our borders with the help of a regime that has openly defied the Constitution.
I personally know families who have tried for years to bring a spouse or child to America the legal way. They wait. They pay. They follow the rules. But if you’re an educated Christian refugee from Africa or a skilled engineer from India, you’re told to stand in line. Meanwhile, if you’re a cartel mule from Honduras or a “gotaway” with a gang affiliation, you get flown around the country on the taxpayers’ dime.
We’ve abandoned every principle that once defined American immigration: Learn English. Pledge allegiance. Assimilate. Respect the flag.
Instead, we have mobs chanting slogans that would have triggered national security alerts a decade ago. Now they trigger hashtags. And while President Trump is calling out the National Guard, California’s “leaders” stall, the courts shrug, and citizens remain unprotected.
This isn’t incompetence. It’s sabotage.
Our rights usurped
And the most dangerous part? We’ve been living under a kind of soft martial law for decades.
Since 1938, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure quietly restructured the judiciary under a corporate framework that operates outside the Constitution. These rules merged law and equity courts, nullifying constitutional guarantees and opening the door for administrative tyranny in family courts, juvenile courts, and beyond.
Don’t believe me? Try asserting your First, Fourth, or Fifth Amendment rights in a family court. You’ll be laughed out of the room — if your children haven’t already been taken based on an anonymous tip and a judge’s rubber stamp.
If martial law is officially declared, the Constitution is suspended. That’s not conjecture — that’s legal doctrine. Read Ex parte Milligan (1866), in which the Supreme Court ruled that martial law cannot be imposed where civilian courts are open. Guess what? They’re not “open” any more — they’re rigged, corrupt, and run by private bar guilds with no accountability to the people.
RELATED: The culture war isn’t a distraction — it’s the main front
It’s an old tactic. In 1933, Adolf Hitler used the Reichstag fire to suspend civil liberties and pass the Enabling Act. In 1992, Peru’s President Alberto Fujimori used a wave of urban chaos and domestic terrorism to declare martial law and dissolve the legislature. In post-9/11 America, we got the Patriot Act, a surveillance dragnet sold to us under the guise of “security.” Now we’re watching the same script play out again — engineered chaos followed by calls for federalized control and, eventually, constitutional suspension under the banner of “safety.”
Welcome to the final phase of the coup.
While MAGA people wait for Trump to ride in on a white horse, they miss the point: He’s not going to save us. He can’t. No one man can reverse decades of infiltration, judicial fraud, and corporatist collusion.
And note to MAGA: Trump gave immunity to the creators of the COVID-19 vaccine, and his “one big, beautiful bill” is fraught with overspending and a government AI takeover, in which all participants have been granted immunity for wrongdoing for a decade.
We’re done being silent
America doesn’t need a savior. It needs a reckoning.
It needs state nullification, legal rebellion, and mass resistance.
If waving a Mexican or Palestinian flag while burning the Stars and Stripes makes you feel at home, then I’ve got a simple solution: Go home.
Because this isn’t your country. You didn’t build it. You’re not assimilating. You’re here to take, not contribute.
And to my liberal neighbors still crying about how “un-American” it is not to allow these criminals to stay: What’s un-American is letting our Constitution be shredded. What’s un-American is flooding our cities with criminals while veterans sleep under bridges.
What’s un-American is weaponizing immigration to collapse a sovereign nation.
We’re not xenophobes. We’re patriots, and we’re done being silent.
'I think he's guilty of treason': Trump orders investigation into former deep-stater, 'Anonymous' official
President Donald Trump signed a pair of executive orders on Wednesday directing his administration to suspend security clearances for a pair of antagonistic officials who served in his first administration.
In addition to severing Miles Taylor and Christopher Krebs from the fount of insider federal knowledge, Trump has directed the relevant authorities in his administration to "take all appropriate action to review" the duo's activities while still government employees.
Trump characterized Krebs, the former head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, in his order as a "significant bad-faith actor who weaponized and abused his Government" and engaged in "abusive conduct."
"Krebs' misconduct involved the censorship of disfavored speech implicating the 2020 election and COVID-19 pandemic," wrote Trump. "CISA, under Krebs' leadership, suppressed conservative viewpoints under the guise of combatting supposed disinformation, and recruited and coerced major social media platforms to further its partisan mission. CISA covertly worked to blind the American public to the controversy surrounding Hunter Biden’s laptop."
The president suggested further that while running the show at CISA, Krebs — a former Microsoft executive who has made no secret of his contempt for Trump and served as a key witness for the Democratic Jan. 6 select committee — promoted the suppression of information about "risks associated with certain voting practices" and "baselessly denied that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen."
Trump announced Krebs' termination via tweet on Nov. 17, 2020, days after CISA distributed a statement asserting both that "the November 3rd election was the most secure in American history" and that "there is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised."
Krebs was portrayed in heroic terms and as a tragic figure by Democrats and other leftists. California Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D), for instance, lauded Krebs for supposedly "speaking truth to power and rejecting Trump's constant campaign of election falsehoods."
'Identify any instances where Krebs' conduct appears to have been contrary to suitability standards for Federal employees.'
Krebs, who went on to call the president a "wannabe tyrant," responded to his termination on X, writing, "We did it right."
Trump has tasked Attorney General Pam Bondi and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem with determining whether Krebs in fact "did it right," directing them to "identify any instances where Krebs' conduct appears to have been contrary to suitability standards for Federal employees, involved the unauthorized dissemination of classified information, or contrary to the purposes and policies identified in Executive Order 14149 of January 20, 2025 (Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship)."
While Trump painted Krebs as a censorious hack potentially guilty of misonduct, he told reporters in the Oval Office Thursday that Taylor might be "guilty of treason" — a potential death-penalty offense.
Taylor served in the Trump DHS from 2017 to 2019. During that time, the former DHS chief of staff worked to undermine the democratically elected president and to "thwart parts of his agenda." Taylor admitted doing so in an anonymous piece in the New York Times titled "I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration."
In the article, Taylor suggested that he and others undermining the administration from within were the "steady state" and were committed to "steer[ing] the administration in the right direction until — one way or another — it's over."
After leaving the Trump administration, Taylor penned a book — again hiding behind the cloak of anonymity — attacking Trump. At the time, the Trump White House called the book, which is replete with disputed claims, "a work of fiction" written by a "coward."
Prior to the 2020 election, Taylor finally revealed his identity, then endorsed Joe Biden for president.
"I barely remember him. Somebody that went out and wrote a book and said all sorts of terrible things that were all lies," Trump told reporters Wednesday.
'Taylor abandoned his sacred oath.'
"He wrote a book, '[A Warning:] Anonymous,' and I always thought it was terrible," said Trump. "Now we have a chance to find out whether or not it was terrible. But it was a work of fiction."
"I think we have to do something about it," Trump added. "If that happens to other presidents, it wouldn't be sustainable for other presidents. I seem to be able to sustain, but if that happened to other presidents, it's just unfair."
— (@)
In his executive order, Trump noted, "Miles Taylor was entrusted with the solemn responsibility of Federal service, but instead prioritized his own ambition, personal notoriety, and monetary gain over fidelity to his constitutional oath."
"He illegally published classified conversations to sell his book under the pseudonym 'Anonymous,' which is full of falsehoods and fabricated stories," continued Trump. "In so doing, Taylor abandoned his sacred oath and commitment to public service by disclosing sensitive information obtained through unauthorized methods and betrayed the confidence of those with whom he served."
Trump noted further that the improper disclosure of sensitive information for the "purposes of personal enrichment and undermining our foreign policy, national security, and Government effectiveness" could "properly be characterized as treasonous and as possibly violating the Espionage Act."
Taylor tweeted Wednesday, "Dissent isn't unlawful. It certainly isn't treasonous. America is headed down a dark path."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Trump fires Democratic FEC commissioner who repeatedly attacked him. Now she's refusing to leave.
Ellen Weintraub, a Democratic commissioner and chair on the Federal Election Commission, revealed Thursday night that President Donald Trump fired her last week. Weintraub, an outspoken Trump critic whose political bias and routine disparagement of Trump have long sparked controversy, suggested she won't leave her post.
Weintraub, who has served on the nation's civil campaign finance regulator since 2002 and previously worked at the Democratic-aligned firm Perkins Coie, shared an image of a Jan. 31 letter she claimed was from Trump, which stated, "You are hereby removed as a Member of the Federal Election Commission, effective immediately. Thank you for your service on the Commission."
Weintraub noted, "Received a letter from POTUS today purporting to remove me as Commissioner & Chair of FEC. There's a legal way to replace FEC commissioners — this isn't it."
Weintraub's six-year term — a term limit established by the Federal Election Campaign Act — expired nearly two decades ago, back when George W. Bush was still president. However, commissioners can continue in a holdover status. Evidently, the Democratic commissioner from New York wants to keep holding on.
"I've been lucky to serve the American people & stir up some good trouble along the way," continued the Democratic commissioner, who previously accused Trump of damaging American democracy and questioned the legitimacy of the Electoral College. "That's not changing anytime soon."
'Weintraub's statements indicate that she has prematurely judged matters that could come before the FEC, and that she radically rejects any legal perspective other than her own.'
It appears that in order to can a commissioner, the president must first nominate a replacement, then have him confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Accordingly, Weintraub can continue to haunt the commission until her replacement is named and approved.
Former Republican FEC commissioner Caroline Hunter noted in a 2019 op-ed that Weintraub's partisan hackery was "harming the legitimacy of the institution she purports to serve."
"Commissioners are meant to be independent and neutral arbiters of campaign finance law. Yet Weintraub's statements indicate that she has prematurely judged matters that could come before the FEC, and that she radically rejects any legal perspective other than her own," continued Hunter. "Not only that, she risks misleading the public about what the FEC does and what campaign finance law really says."
Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the Biden-pardoned chairman of the Jan. 6 committee, was among the Democrats who had a conniption upon learning that Trump was kicking Weintraub to the curb.
Thompson stated, "Donald Trump is methodically dismantling our democracy. He is firing every person with experience, expertise, character, and commitment to the Constitution in order to replace them with mindless yes-men who will give Donald Trump and Elon Musk carte blanche to break the law and rip off the American people."
The New York Times indicated that the White House had not responded to requests for comment.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com