Birdnow's Aviary

September 16, 2026

Another Massive Screw Job by the Judiciary Leaves Vote Fraud In Tact

Timothy Birdnow

I am thankful I had a busy day yesterday and did not have time to blog; I woas livid at this and would have probably going into atrial fibrillation.

Trump-Appointed Judge Blocks USPS Mail Ballot Rule

His argument is that the USPS "overstepped their authority" by qualifying how mail-in ballots had to be posted.

How does that make any sense? The USPS did not set the rule - the Adminstration did, and they have as much authority to do this as they do to, say, set rules for applying for federal aid.

U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols of the District of Columbia ruled that the USPS has no role in elections. That sounds logical until you remember they are being asked to deliver massive amounts of mail-in ballots and they DO have a role in regulating how the mail is to be delivered - and to prevent mail fraud, which is what unregulated delivery of mail-in ballots is fostering.

The judge had this to snivel:

"Less than three weeks ago, the United States Postal Service adopted a Final Rule requiring that all absentee and mail-in ballots for federal elections—including for the elections occurring in less than sixty days—be transmitted only in envelopes satisfying new design requirements and be transmitted only to voters who are verified by the Postal Service to have been enrolled in a newly created ‘Federal Ballot Mail Portal,’” the judge’s 24-page opinion says. "As the government concedes, the Postal Service could issue (and enforce) the Rule only if Congress gave it the authority to do so, but here no statute grants the Postal Service the power to issue key parts of the rule.”

The opinion adds, "Plaintiffs have therefore demonstrated that they are likely to succeed on their claim that the issuance of the rule was ultra vires, and the record otherwise weighs in favor of preliminary injunctive relief.”

So what does the law ay?

18USC Chapter 63 1342. Fictitious name or address

Whoever, for the purpose of conducting, promoting, or carrying on by means of the Postal Service, any scheme or device mentioned in section 1341 of this title or any other unlawful business, uses or assumes, or requests to be addressed by, any fictitious, false, or assumed title, name, or address or name other than his own proper name, or takes or receives from any post office or authorized depository of mail matter, any letter, postal card, package, or other mail matter addressed to any such fictitious, false, or assumed title, name, or address, or name other than his own proper name, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

So it is clear the law directly addresses mail fraud of the kind being implemented as vote fraud. The USPS is trying to prevent that. I can't imagine how this judge could possibly rule it to be an over-reach when the law is clear in this instance. How do you catch vote fraud if you cannot put in place reasonable precautions to make it easier to detect?

What makes this worse is SCOTUS refused to hear the appeal for this. Brett Kavanaugh signed the ruling in which he admitted the USPS probably has the authority but that there is not sufficient time to implement it - even though they've been implementing it for many months now except where the courts have stopped them. So Kavanaugh is going to let another election be stolen so as not to appear to be partisan.

Let us actually remember what this is all about. During the Pandemic the Democratic-controlled states implemented mail-in voting, ostensibly because they wanted to keep peole away from the polls and thus not transmit Covid 19. Mail-in voting is something no nation does because it is not secure and subject to fraud. Former President Jimmy Carter and former Republican Senator James Baker co-chaired a commission on elections after the photo-finish in 2000, and they heartily recommended against mail-in ballots. America alway had absentee ballots which were transmitted in the mail, but they were not mail-in ballots so much; there were strict rules on who received them and on how they were processed. There were controls in place.

So along comes Covid and the Democrats had a golden opportunity. They implemented mail-in voting and won big - everywhere. Joe Biden, who did not even campaign, won by the biggest landslide in history, even though Donald Trump won more votes in 2020 than any other candidate in history - Biden received comfortably more ballots. Something was amiss and statisticians like William Briggs looked into it and said there was no way the elections were fair.

No investigation was run in any blue state and anyone who challenged the results was called an election denier and was mocked and ridiculed and blackballed.We were told this was the cleanest, fairest election in history.

Trump's re-election opened the gate on the firewall and it turned out there were all sorts of little irregularities in that election. But the biggest one was the mail-in voting; there was no control, nobody had any idea who actually voted in that election.

So Trump pushed the USPS to regulate the mail-in ballots since the U.S. Senate simply refused to take up the SAVE America Act for some baffling reason. All Trump was asking was for the USPS to maintain a database that checked names on mail-in ballots with voter rolls to make sure there was no fraud, and to have official documentation on any ballots sent out - they had to be stamped properly to prove they were being sent out by the secretary of state's offices and not some partisan third party.

That was too much for these democrat judges, who issued injunctions. And SCOTUS refused to act to rein these lower courts in because they don't want to be thought to be interfering with an election.

Now, there is no reason why mail-in ballots cannot be sent out by UPS or Fedex if they are really that important and the USPS rules are so onerous. It probably wouldn't cost much more either. BUT the rules that apply to USPS also apply to other parcel delivery companies and they are going to be more diligent in verifying there is no fraud going on. The Democrassholes know that; they've long had de-facto control of the USPS, that being one of their traditional power bases.

So Brett Kavanaugh, who owes his position to President Trump, is too cowardly to stop another election cycle fraud. And so too is this judge Nichols, which should be his salary and not his name.

This is amazing because I have no doubt that had Obama or Biden issues such a rule the courts would have deferred to him as the head of the executive banch of government.

Remember, the USPS is not a government agency under the authority of Congress but rather is a quasi-private corporation wholly owned by the United States and as such Congress has different regulatory powers than it does over, say, the Department of Energy. Trump has more direct control over it.

Then there is this:

On December 20, 2006, President Bush signed into law the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act

(PAEA) of 2006, making the most sweeping changes to postal law since the PRA. That law required the

Postal Service to accelerate the prefunding of 100 percent of our expected retiree health benefits

obligations, imposed a rigid price cap on most services for at least 10 years, and prohibited us from

offering new products and services beyond core shipping and mailing services.

end

Isn't asking the USPS to deliver millions of mail-in ballots a violation of this law? We are asking them to essentially be a polling place, clearly mission creep.

There is zero reason why the USPS should be dealing with anything other than very restricted absentee ballots. The rest is "offering new products and services beyond core shipping and mailing services".

This is NOT impinging on how states run their election schemes - it is merely setting qualifications for the delivery of mail. These states are free to run their elections as they see fit, but not with the forced assistance of the USPS, that's all. If they want to send out ballots they can do so by sending them Fedex or they can use easy pick up stations and drop-boxes, which many of them have in the past. How much easier do they need to make it? At what point do we stop does it move from facilitating to manipulating? Voting should not be that easy; people so lazy they won't go out to vote are people with no idea or understanding of the issues anyway and have no business voting.

So a pox upon these textualist Republicans who can't understand the purpose of the law nor even know it, apparently. If I can find this, being a non-lawyer, why can't they?

BTW Scotusblog says Thomas and Alito dissented, saying this injunction should never have been issued because the League of Women Voters, who brought the case, lacked standing.

BTW Trump signed the EO in March of this year, so there is no excuse for this being overturned so late in the election cycle, none whatsoever. This only sows chaos, which is exactly what the Democrats wanted. Trump, of course, was furious and rightly so.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1575 words, total size 11 kb.

Hide Comments | Add Comment