As the nation debates tariffs, taxes, and foreign wars, major moves by the Trump administration are being overlooked. And these are likely the biggest moves Donald Trump will make as President.
And they all have to do with fair federal elections.
The left has, for years, gamed the electoral system in their favor. Illegals counted in our census, districts apportioned by race, gerrymandering… all these Dem tactics have flown under the radar until the current administration.
The right has finally woken up to it — and has joined battle. Should they succeed, suffice to say that the House will look red for a long, long time.
But will they succeed?
Let’s break it out.
Voting Illegals and Mail-In Ballots
In March 2025, President Donald Trump signed “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections,” an executive order aimed at overhauling voting rules for all federal elections. It required documentary proof of U.S. citizenship—such as a passport or birth certificate—when registering to vote, barred states from counting mail-in ballots arriving after Election Day, and ordered voter rolls to be cross-checked with federal immigration databases so as to disqualify illegals from voting.
Seems like a no-brainer, right?
Guess again — the legal challenges came fast. In April, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in Washington, D.C. (appointed: Bill Clinton) blocked the citizenship proof mandate, ruling the President lacked authority to impose it. In June, U.S. District Judge Denise Casper in Massachusetts (appointed: Obama) issued a broader injunction, halting provisions on mail-in ballot deadlines and other requirements.
The Trump administration has appealed. The fight will determine how far a President can go in shaping federal election procedures—and could have major implications heading into the next election cycle.
The crux of the case: Can a President do this? Or should it be Congress?
Which argues: Why the hell isn’t Congress taking this up — so as to mitigate the legal challenges?
The Census Initiative
On August 7, 2025, President Donald Trump announced a sweeping plan for a new, mid-decade national census—one that would exclude undocumented immigrants from the official count. The administration says the move is necessary to get a “more accurate” read on the number of eligible voters in the country and to ensure congressional seats in the House of Representatives are apportioned based solely on legal residents.
The plan directs the Commerce Department to conduct the census this year, using updated records and modern data-matching tools, including results from the 2024 election. Supporters argue that counting only those eligible to vote will produce fairer representation, preventing states with large undocumented populations from gaining extra congressional seats.
Critics, however, say the effort is unconstitutional. The U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment requires the census to count “the whole number of persons” in each state, and does not mention citizenship status. Civil rights groups and several states are already preparing lawsuits, noting that the Supreme Court blocked similar attempts during Trump’s first term.
If implemented, the new census could shift political power away from states with high immigrant populations, affecting congressional representation and the distribution of federal funds.
For now, the administration appears determined to move quickly—knowing that the results, and the courtroom battles, could reshape the political map well before the next scheduled census in 2030.
Now, gearing up for a census takes a long time — so this one might not matter for 2026. But if the administration manages to tee this up even before 2028… this could be an absolute game-changer.
And once again, the absentee player? Congress. An actual law attempting to get this more-accurate census rolling goes much further than an Executive Order.
Gerrymandering
As we’ve all heard by now, Texas Republicans have recently embarked on a redistricting push designed to carve out five additional GOP‑leaning congressional seats—a move backed (initiated?) by former President Trump.
The resulting plan, unveiled at the end of July, targets Democratic strongholds in Austin, Dallas, Houston, and South Texas, and aims to flip five seats ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. In response, over 50 Texas Democratic legislators fled the state to deny quorum and stall the vote—prompting arrest threats and national debate.
Predictably, the left is in full pearl-clutching mode, arguing that these maps disproportionately dilute Black and Hispanic voting power, effectively undermining fair representation. The same pearl-clutchers, however, supported the same moves in California, Illinois, and New York, of course.
This one, the Trump administration will likely win, and as blue jurisdictions that have already gerrymandered near to their limit attempt to retaliate (to little or no effect), we will see a further polarizing of the electorate.
That the Republican side of the effort would more accurately represent the voting population of this country appears to be a fact of little concern to our media.
Either Way, Here Comes SCOTUS — To Upend It All
In early 2026 — that is, before the midterms — the U.S. Supreme Court is poised to take up the most consequential voting rights cases in years: a challenge to whether race can be a primary factor in drawing congressional districts.
At the center is Louisiana v. Callais, a dispute over that state’s redrawn congressional map. After a lower court found the old map likely violated a section of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), Louisiana added a second majority-Black district. That move sparked a lawsuit from White voters, who argue the redrawn map is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander under the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
In early August, the Court delayed its decision and called for new briefs, signaling it will hear the case in the 2025–2026 term, with a ruling expected by June 2026 — well-before the midterms.
What’s at stake is the The Voting Rights Act’s long use in justifying majority-minority districts to protect minority voting power. A decision curbing race-based districting would almost certainly reshape redistricting nationwide, potentially reducing the number of minority opportunity districts and significantly altering the balance of political representation.
This case isn’t just about Louisiana — it’s about how the Court defines “fair” representation for the entire country.
So overall, big changes could be coming. All the above initatives are significant because they represent more than just the Trump “agenda” for this term — they represent long-lasting changes to voter representation in this nation.
That more accurate representation would skew to the right tells you how hard a battle getting fairer elections is likely to be.
But at least now… the battle is joined.
Can Donald Trump “Make DC Safe Again”?
So the President has unveiled a sweeping initiative aimed at curbing crime and restoring order in Washington, D.C. Central to the plan is expanded federal law enforcement, including approximately 120 FBI agents deployed to support overnight patrols, alongside Metro Police, Park Police, and ATF agents.
Trump also announced a policy to remove homeless individuals "immediately" from central D.C, relocating them to facilities outside the capital. Moreover, the President signaled a strong push to federalize the city’s law enforcement response, even considering National Guard deployment and a complete federal takeover of the District’s police apparatus—a move that would require congressional approval to override D.C.’s home-rule protections.
Now, despite Trump's rhetoric, local crime data reportedly show recent improvements—violent crime is down by around 26%, and overall crime has decreased approximately 7% in 2025. Note the “reportedly” (see below).
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser has pushed back, highlighting the city’s evident crime reductions and defending local autonomy as federal involvement escalates.
This would be the Muriel Bowser who spent city resources painting the street near the White House with a “Black Lives Matter” mural and renaming the area “Black Lives Matter Plaza” — all as black lives were being erased due to violent crime in her city.
President Trump frames his initiative as a rapid, no-nonsense “crime crackdown,” vowing that “there will be no safe harbor for violent criminals.”
But if crime reduction is going so well in D.C… why would the president need to bother?
Perhaps here’s why….
Are the D.C. Crime Numbers Real?
Just like everything else in Washington DC, it appears that the crime statistics may be a web of lies and deception. Yes, the violent crime statistics in Washington have taken an abrupt downturn over the past two years. But….
Normally we would be applauding that drop in violence, but some recent events give us pause. Yes, we have to question the crime numbers coming out of the Metropolitan Police Department.
The Fraternal Order of Police Chairman, Gregg Pemberton, has accused the leadership of Washington’s Metropolitan Police of fudging the numbers to make Mayor Muriel Bowser’s Administration look competent (that’s a tall order). Pemberton says that MPD brass encourages his officers to falsely downgrade crime to make violent felonies look like misdemeanors.
Union heads making accusations against police brass is nothing new, but the Metropolitan Police gave credence to this accusation when they suspended one of its district commanders last month. Commander Michael Pulliam, head of the 3rd District, was put on leave for allegedly making suspicious changes to his district’s crime stats.
Pulliam’s suspension came a week after he made an Equal Employment Opportunity complaint against his supervisor, Executive Assistant Chief Andre Wright, over the transfer of Pulliam’s wife (also an MPD officer).
There must be some pretty solid evidence of statistics manipulation to suspend an officer a week after he made an EEO complaint. No agency wants to be on the losing end of that lawsuit.
A look at the Metropolitan Police’s crime statistics themselves shows some unusual numbers. So far for this year violent crime is down from 2,119 last year to 1,576 this year, a 25.6% decrease. But property crime is only down 14,575 to 13,912, a 4.5% decrease. It is unusual to see such a precipitous dip in violent crime while other crimes are only down slightly.
And when you look at homicides it only deepens suspicion. Homicides are down 11.6% for the year. The homicide number is a tough one to hide – not impossible, but tough. The rest of the violent crime drop more than doubled the homicide dip.
Looking at last year we see a similar story. In 2024 Washington DC violent crime dropped from 5,317 to 3,460, a 34.9% decrease – while property crime only dropped from 28,848 to 25,730, a 10.8% decrease.
And the numbers this year in Commander Pulliam’s 3rd District aren’t too far off from the citywide averages. A 27.7% dip in violent crime and an 8.9% dip in property crime. Perhaps DC crime downgrades ARE widespread.
There has been a dramatic decline in violent crime since November 2023, when the Metropolitan Police Department got a new Chief of Department in Pamela Smith. So maybe that’s the answer? Perhaps she is an experienced crime fighter with a long history of reducing violent crime? And was able to use her experience to create a turnaround that would rival the NYPD’s crime drop of Bill Bratton’s 1st commissionership?
Not exactly. Chief Smith started her career in the United States Park Police, admirably rising to the head of that agency. She received commendations for her work on sobriety checkpoints and community engagement. She was assigned to several units, including canine and the federal police academy’s driving school.
In 2022, she was hired by the Metropolitan Police Department as the Chief Equity Officer, maintaining that position for a year and a half before becoming the Chief of Department.
A nice resume, sure – but not one that would indicate significant experience in combating the substantial amount of violence that mars our nation’s capital.
Hopefully for the citizens of Washington and the officers of the Metropolitan Police, these numbers are legit. We are rooting for cops here at The Ops Desk. If the MPD numbers are in fact accurate, police agencies across the country should be looking at Washington DC for a formula that apparently works wonders.
Let’s see if those numbers hold up.
Trump Strikes Back (he always does…)
The irony of Leticia James and Adam Schiff’s current legal troubles is good for a laugh. We don’t like the weaponization of the justice system any more than when it was used against Trump, but these cases couldn’t be initiated against two people more deserving.
Leticia James won the race for New York State Attorney General with the express promise of investigating Trump. And she fulfilled that campaign promise (note that fulfilling a campaign promise is usually taboo for a New York politician).
She went after Trump, his family, and his businesses for misrepresenting real estate asset values on loan and insurance documents. Now, there was no complaint from the companies supposedly defrauded; it was all the New York State Attorney General. In liberal New York she was able to find a judge to go along with this never-before-seen civil prosecution and won a crippling $454 million judgement against the man she promised to “get.”
And Adam Schiff? If you recall, Schiff repeatedly stated that he had seen evidence of Donald Trump’s collusion with Russia during the 2016 election campaign. He publicly lied to the American people, indicating that he had seen the evidence due to his access as Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
He didn’t see that evidence — because it didn’t exist.
As we are now seeing, it seems like the only collusion going on was between the Democrat Party and members of the U.S. intelligence community. There is serious evidence of a conspiracy, using manipulated intelligence, to tarnish the person chosen by the American people to lead the country.
As for real estate manipulation, it appears like both James and Schiff engaged in some real estate shenanigans of their own. As reported over at whitecollarfraud.com, James misrepresented a Virginia investment property as her primary residence to banks and insurance companies, while also claiming a New York property as her primary residence. She also appears to have lied about the number of apartments in her Brooklyn investment property.
The execrable Adan Schiff is also under investigation by the DOJ for a similar scheme. He seems to have declared both a property in Maryland and a property in California as his primary residence. That has mortgage and tax implications that benefit Schiff.
Perhaps Schiff and James failed to recall the meaning of primary – just like in Highlander, there can be only one.
In a narrative laced with irony, both Schiff and James have claimed the federal investigations are politically motivated. To be clear, we don’t like politically motivated investigations, but no one is above the law.
Now where have I heard that before?
There is a very good chance of indictments here, especially in the James case, where the evidence appears quite compelling. And the fact that Governor Kathy Hochul and the NYS legislature passed a $10 million “fight Trump” fund that James can access doesn’t change the fact that a felony conviction would mean the loss of her law license — and likely, her ability to remain in office.
At which point, she’d no longer be in a position to “get” anyone. Which would mean she’s finally actually managed to deliver some justice.
And Speaking Of Investigations….
As Paul’s made clear during his nightly Big News Recaps, the issue of venue — i.e, where the investigations re: Russiagate will occur — is the whole ball of wax. Watch this one closely, folks. In sum:
The Department of Justice has announce a grand jury investigation into the main culprits of Russiagate — Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Ohr, et al (maybe even Hillary and Obama). If this grand jury sits in Washington, D.C, where much of the alleged malfeasance occurred? We may not even get indictments, never mind real trials. Washington remains over 75% blue — the highest percentage of any U.S. jurisdiction.
If, on the other hand, DOJ somehow manages venue in Florida (perhaps due to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence there), the calculus changes significantly. That is a redder area — meaning indictments would be likely. Which means: pressure for flips, a real chance at criminal convictions, etc.
Earlier last week there was reporting that the Florida venue had indeed been achieved; but since then, nothing.
But since then, J.D. Vance came out and said he, “expects indictments.” And recall: J.D. is an experienced lawyer. If I know all the above, so does he. Which would argue, Florida.
This will all likely be clarified by sometime in September, at the latest (we suspect sooner). But bottom line: this is the real battle. Venue. It starts and ends here.
And if the venue ends up being D.C? Then like most things in that town… expect no more clarity on Russiagate, one of the most shameful events in the history of The Swamp.
Repeat Podcast: Chris Swecker, Former Dep. Director of the FBI
Due to the initial response and the relevance to Russiage, we feel compelled to forego the interview we had tee’d up for this week in order to rerun our interview with former Director Chris Swecker.
Director Swecker breaks out the nuances of Russiagate better than you’ll hear anywhere else in the media landscape. If you care about this case… you need to hear him.
To that end, we are posting this one in front of the firewall.
Click below to be directed to the full pod…!
RIP, Officer Rose
Too many funerals, too many ambushes… too many cops shot. As readers of this space know, last year saw a record number of cops shot and killed in the line of duty.
We just came through the Daridul Islam murder here in New York when we now face the death of another uniformed hero: Police Officer David Rose of The DeKalb County Police Department, shot in Georgia by an apparently unhinged man with a grudge against the Center for Disease Control.
Officer Rose wasn’t there to debate COVID policy or the wearing of masks. He responded to the CDC area to do his job and protect the public from an armed and deranged man. He paid with his life, leaving behind a pregnant wife and two kids.
And the next time a progressive jumps on her soapbox to proclaim how “institutionally racist” our criminal justice system is, you might want to remind that person that, more and more, our fallen officers look like PO Islam and PO Rose.
Here, in fact, are the last 10 officers shot and killed in the line of duty, as per the Officer Down Memorial Page:
It’s a tragic list — and one that more and more reflects the face of American policing in general.
Funny how “diversity” seems to matter a lot less when it comes to the cops who run towards the danger — while the defunders cower in their coffeeshops.
And finally….
We can throw all the resources we have at D.C. crime — but at the end of the day:
Time for some judges down there to become famous.
Thank you.
Much respect for honoring our KIA officers. Ty guys for this comprehensive study.
Defend the 💙 Line.