The Dictatorship
Trump’s Thursday speech should be recognized for what it truly was
ByNina Jankowicz
2026 has been a difficult year for President Donald Trump. He is losing a deeply unpopular war. Gas prices are still painful. Federal law enforcement officers have killed multiple people in cold blood. His approval numbers have reached historic lows ahead of this fall’s midterm elections.
In his address to the nation Thursday, Trump returned to a favorite topic: conspiracy theories about the 2020 presidential election. The president made sweeping claims about a broad Chinese campaign to access voter records, agitate against his candidacy and interfere in the election. But the claims are not borne out by the evidence, including the intelligence documents he declassified as “proof.” The speech was a desperate attempt to undermine confidence in our democratic system and lay the groundwork for an unprecedented and illegal attempt to control elections from the White House itself.
The U.S. intelligence community, researchers and journalists have recognized China as a threat for years.
Americans who might be confused about the president’s claims should know a few things. First, the U.S. intelligence community, researchers and journalists have recognized China as a threat for years. China is one of our country’s most advanced cyber adversaries and is constantly probing IT systems of the U.S. government, the private sector and influential individuals for vulnerabilities. Beijing also deploys influence operations to attempt to change American policy in its favor.
However, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s 2020 Election Threat report assessed with high confidence (the highest level of confidence assigned) “that China did not deploy interference efforts” — attempts to change voter rolls or tallies — “and considered but did not deploy influence efforts intended to change the outcome of the US presidential election.” The same report included a moderate-confidence “minority view” from the national intelligence officer for China that Beijing “took at least some steps to undermine former President Trump’s reelection chances, primarily through social media and official public statements and media.”
Throughout his speech, Trump couched his claims of widespread Chinese influence and interference activities as “attempts” that China was “working on,” or influence that China “sought,” because even he knows his allegations are not borne out by the evidence.
The documents he declassified don’t show some conspiracy by the intelligence community to hide information from the president. They show intelligence professionals doing their jobs: assessing sources, debating the reliability of reports and making judgment calls about when it is necessary to publicly sound an alarm. Disagreement is not a sign of a cover-up, as the president alleged, but a hallmark of intelligence professionals doing their jobs. Disclosing every detected foreign influence campaign, no matter how minor, would risk seriously undermining the American people’s confidence in our elections — exactly as the president did this week.
Second, regarding Chinese accession of voter information, Americans should know that basic voter rolls are public information, and detailed voter files — along with lots of other personal details — can be purchased online for a fee. It’s not shocking that our adversaries are weaponizing the United States’ lack of individual privacy protections and a lucrative market for data brokers to compile detailed pictures of American voters.
Trump and his acolytes believe any election he and his allies win is free and fair, while those they lose are fraudulent and corrupt.
This information might be used to inform Chinese policy or target Americans with propaganda, but it doesn’t mean that Beijing ever had access to voting machines or internal vote tabulation systems, or successfully interfered in the outcome of U.S. elections. Even the documents Trump released confirm that it did not.
Third, the intelligence community is constantly probing the security of U.S. voting systems and cataloging attempted breaches by our adversaries. All digital systems contain vulnerabilities that can be exploited by bad actors, and the documents Trump declassified show efforts to keep abreast of those vulnerabilities and to work with state and local election administrators and cybersecurity experts on addressing them. Ironically, though Trump claimed that the United States “deserve[s] the most secure, honest and fair election system anywhere in the world,” he fired most of the people keeping it that way and disbanded the teams they worked on. Our defenses are down, and our adversaries — including China — are celebrating.
Finally, voters should remember who was president in 2020: Trump. If he had serious concerns about Chinese election interference and influence during his first term, he made no moves to raise them. That would be a dereliction of his duty to keep our nation secure. But the past six years have taught us that neither this president nor his allies are seriously concerned with the security of elections — they are concerned only with the outcome. Trump and his acolytes believe any election he and his allies win is free and fair, while those they lose are fraudulent and corrupt.
While Trump’s speech was embarrassing, it nevertheless must be taken seriously as preparation for a new election interference campaign. The White House and Republican operatives continue to float ideas like invoking emergency powers to seize control of election administration from the states, which is unconstitutional, or sending law enforcement to the polls, which is illegal. All the while, they denigrate our intelligence professionals and undermine trust in the democratic process.
As the midterms approach, it’s critical that the American people stay vigilant and recognize Trump’s speech, and any actions that follow, for what they are: a cynical ploy to weaponize a serious national security threat as a pretext to deprive us of our rights.
Nina Jankowicz
Nina Jankowicz is an internationally-recognized expert on disinformation and democratization, one of TIME magazine’s 100 Most Influential People in AI, and the author of two books: How to Lose the Information War and How to Be A Woman Online. In 2024, she co-founded the American Sunlight Project, a non-profit advocacy group focused on countering disinformation. Jankowicz has advised governments, international organizations, and tech companies, and testified before the US Congress, UK Parliament, and European Parliament.
The Dictatorship
Mullin pushes states to comply with election demands, echoing Trump’s claims about midterm risks
WASHINGTON (AP) — Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin on Friday warned that state officials could lose funding or face investigations if they fail to go along with President Donald Trump’s election security demands, part of the Republican president’s longstanding attempt to undermine Americans’ confidence in the vote.
Experts said the threats — issued just months before midterm elections that will determine control of Congress — were likely hollow because Trump’s voting initiatives have been stalled by judges and the Constitution gives states control over how elections are run.
Nevertheless, Mullin’s remarks, delivered from the White House complex one day after Trump’s primetime address on the topiccould further doubts about election processes and create headaches for states as they prepare for November.
“We absolutely can build confidence in the American people, but the states have to do their part,” Mullin said.
AP AUDIO: Mullin pushes states to comply with election demands, echoing Trump’s claims about midterm risks
AP correspondent Ed Donahue reports a member of President Trump’s cabinet says he is ready to go after voter fraud.
Trump continues to falsely claim that Democrat Joe Biden won only because of fraud in 2020, and he’s tried to marshal the powers of the federal government to rewrite that history since he returned to office last year — even though judges and his own attorney general in his first term concluded the election was legitimate.
Mullin insisted that the president was not relitigating the 2020 election, “although he definitely could at this point.”
“This is just about exposing what took place and making sure it never happens again,” he said.
Mullin’s claims of noncitizen voters rely on incomplete data
During his remarks, Mullin advanced an unsubstantiated claim Trump made Thursday that the federal government had found 250,000 noncitizen voters on the rolls in California, Nevada, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. He said the Department of Homeland Security’s investigation was conducted using public data, which election experts say is insufficiently detailed and updated to properly identify whether a registered voter is a noncitizen.
Election officials in California and Pennsylvania said they would review the Trump administration’s findings but noted that they conduct their own voter list maintenance and noncitizen voting is exceedingly rare. Research has supported that finding.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, responded to Mullin’s threats with a post on social media.
“California has free, fair, and secure elections and we will fight for them,” he wrote. “Try us.”
In Nevada, Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, also a Democrat, said he was confident in the integrity of the state’s voter file.
“We are constantly looking at the information to figure out how many registered voters in Nevada don’t have a Social Security number on file,” he said. “We have done significant work to make sure our voter rolls are as clean as possible.”
Mullin also pledged to aggressively monitor public voter lists to pursue potential voter fraud cases before and after the 2026 election.
“If you are an illegal or you are voting illegally, we will hunt you down, we will find you and we will prosecute you,” he said.
He urged states to participate in DHS’ recently overhauled SAVE program, a federal tool central to the Trump administration’s efforts to nationalize elections. At least 25 states have used it to check their voter rolls since April 2025, after the Trump administration significantly expanded its search abilities, and the Trump administration has demanded that states submit their sensitive voter data to the program to fully audit their voter lists.
Mullin said if state officials don’t participate in SAVE, they could face fines, penalties or prison time.
But the overhauled program’s use was recently blocked by a federal judge over concerns about privacy and wrongful purges of eligible voters. The case included voters whose registrations were wrongly flagged by the program, temporarily threatening their place on the rolls.
David Becker, the executive director of the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research, said Mullin was making empty threats.
“Every court to consider the DOJ’s demands — 15 of them to date, six of those judges appointed by President Trump — have confirmed that the federal government cannot legally demand access to states’ sensitive voter data,” he said. “What he’s suggesting is illegal.”
In addition, Trump’s efforts to pass the SAVE Act, federal legislation that would require proof of citizenship for voter registration, has stalled in the Senate. Republicans don’t have enough votes to change the filibuster rules and pass it without Democratic support.
Cybersecurity support for election officials has been diminished in Trump’s second term
Mullin also elevated Trump’s concerns about vulnerabilities in electronic voting machines — which voting experts have long acknowledged. While Trump suggested Thursday that these risks make it possible to “rig” the vote, election officials say there are numerous safeguards in place to prevent that, including physical security, voting machine tests, postelection reviews and paper ballot backups in most of the country.
To address the concerns, Mullin said the nation’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which sits under DHS, would release an updated election infrastructure plan within 30 days and provide cyber threat resources to election officials if they participate in SAVE.
However, Trump has broadly dismantled the agency’s election security operation.
CISA was largely absent from its long-held role assisting states in last year’s elections after the Trump administration conducted a review of its election work, placed more than a dozen election-focused staffers on administrative leave and slashed $10 million from two cybersecurity initiatives, including one dedicated to helping state and local election officials. The agency is also still without a Senate-confirmed director and has cycled through a series of acting leaders.
Aguilar said his state has stepped up and will protect its own elections in the absence of federal help.
“The fact that they think they’re going to come in prior to the general election in November and provide us infrastructure, that’s nuts,” he said. “Actions speak louder than words, and in their case, it’s all been talk.”
___
Swenson reported from New York.
The Dictatorship
Trump joins Republicans calling to punish Canada for hazardous wildfire smoke in the U.S.
President Donald Trump is threatening to increase tariffs on Canada over wildfire smoke that has blanketed large swaths of the Midwest and Mid-Atlanticjoining several Republicans who have called for the U.S. ally to be punished for the intense air pollution.
“We are holding Canada responsible for the fact that they are not properly maintaining their Forests, and Brush therein, and the United States is being unnecessarily invaded by filthy, polluted, and unhealthy air, the quality of which is dangerous, and totally unacceptable!” Trump wrote on Truth Socialon Friday, adding: “This is Willful Negligence, and becoming a yearly occurrence, costing the United States Billions of Dollars, which cost of this pollution must of necessity be added to the TARIFFS Canada is currently paying.”
Trump did not elaborate on his tariffs threat.
Smoke from hundreds of Canadian wildfires has caused air quality from Detroit to Washington, D.C., to plummet to unhealthy levels in recent days.
There are dozens of active wildfires in the U.S. as well. A Canadian helicopter pilot was was killed last week in a crash while fighting a fire in Colorado.
Trump is not the only Republican who has criticized Canada over the wildfire smoke. Earlier this week, four House Republicans from Michigan wrote a letter to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney with a warning that appeared to allude to Trump’s threat to annex Canada.
“Sovereignty comes with responsibility,” the lawmakers wrote.
“This is the third consecutive year we have had to write to Canadian officials about a crisis that Canada has the tools to prevent and has chosen not to,” they wrote, later adding: “If Canada will not manage its forests to prevent these fires, the United States will look elsewhere, and act on our own, to protect our people.”
Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, has also said he intends to introduce a bill “to sanction Canada and the responsible Canadian government officials for this atrocity.”
In a statementMoreno’s office said: “Canada’s government failed to invest in wildfire prevention methods including forest thinning, fuel reduction, prescribed burns, and stronger enforcement against arson.”
Hotter temperatures and drier conditions as a result of the climate crisis have been major drivers of recent wildfires in North America. The Trump administration has cut funding for climate science, withdrawn the U.S. from global bodies and agreements aimed at tackling climate change and promoted the fossil fuel industry while rolling back renewable energy initiatives.
In response to the GOP complaints, some Canadian officials have noted that their country has helped with firefighting support in the U.S. during recent wildfires.
“If there’s some politicians out there chirping away, well, maybe what you should do rather than complain is send support, send help,” Ontario Premier Doug Ford said on Friday, “because we have done the exact same thing for our American friends.”
Doug Ford on American complaints over wildfire smoke: “If there’s some politicians out there chirping away, well, maybe what you should do rather than complain is send support, send help. Because we have done the exact same thing for our American friends.” pic.twitter.com/9e2TCVbqxC
— Scott Robertson (@sarobertson_)”https://x.com/sarobertson_/status/2078166329811460324?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>July 17, 2026
Clarissa-Jan Lim is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW. She was previously a senior reporter and editor at BuzzFeed News.
Nothing has absorbed Maine politics like the candidacy of Graham Platner. Almost from the moment he announced his run for the U.S. Senate in mid-August 2025, he drew big crowds and lots of attention. His strongest backers stuck with him through controversy after controversy until Jenny Racicot publicly accused him of sexual assault. Platner denied the allegation, but his support collapsed.
Yet even after Platner officially withdrew as the nominee on July 10 and the Maine Democratic Party began the process of replacing himit seemed like Mainers were going to keep talking about him for a while. Many of his committed voters were deeply disappointed about what they learned; others were very angry that the news had been revealed. Some suggested they might write in Platner’s name or not vote at all in the fall.
Then came an awful event that starkly shifted Mainers’ attention, and moved the focus of the Maine Senate race from Platner to Sen. Susan Collins.
The killing of 26-year-old Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero in Biddeford, Maine, on Monday was a real shock in the state. Maine often has the lowest rate of violent crime nationally and homicides are rare, with only 21 in 2025.
Maine, like Minnesota, is a highly participatory state, and both places responded similarly to ICE incursions this past winter.
Of course, it wasn’t just Guerrero’s death that was the story, but also who shot him — an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer — and the circumstances of his killing. For one, unlike other shootings by ICE officers, the Department of Homeland Security did not even claim that Guerrero posed any sort of imminent threat or that the shooter feared for their life. Rather, DHS said that Guerrero’s “vehicle attempted to flee the scene and, fearing for public safety, an officer discharged his weapon.”
Moreover, Guerrero was legally in the country, according to local immigrant rights groups. And Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, said Guerrero wasn’t even the person ICE was seeking.
Witnesses were shaken by what they saw. One bystander, Daniel Boucher, “choked up” recounting his experience, reported The Associated Press. “His face was bloody. His head was bloody,” Boucher said of the victim. “I clearly heard the victim say, ‘I tried to stop.’” In Akerleyanother neighbor who heard the shots and looked out the window to see some of what happened, told a local news station, “You know, it shatters the illusion that Maine is safe … I don’t know what he did, but he didn’t deserve to be executed in the street.”
Mainers quickly mobilized, with demonstrations in BiddefordPortlandBangor and Scarborough. “This is a land for people who want to be here,” said one rallygoer. “It doesn’t matter who you are, where you came from, what color your skin is. That’s what America is about.”
Both Senate candidates and members of the public criticized Collins. Protesters in Biddeford crowded the doorway at the senator’s local officeshouting, “Vote her out!” Senate candidate Shenna Bellows argued that she had already acted when, as secretary of state, she blocked ICE from getting undercover license plates and proclaimed, “There should be no secret police in our state.” Another contender, Troy Jackson, referred to “ICE’s rogue actions” and blasted Collins for voting “to send $70 billion dollars to ICE with no reforms.” A third potential Democratic nominee, Nirav Shahcontended, “There is a straight line from Sen. Collins to the lawlessness we saw yesterday.”
While, as I’ve noted, some Platner supporters were deeply unhappy that he wasn’t going to be the Democratic nominee, his absence in the aftermath of the shooting didn’t seem to matter in the least.
And why should it have? Maine, like Minnesota, is a highly participatory state, and both places responded similarly to ICE incursions this past winter.
Collins tried to claim credit for ending the winter surge. But Democrats and immigrant rights leaders were skeptical and pointed to her support for increased ICE funding without any reforms.
In both places, ICE showed up with face masks and randomly detained people, including those in the country legally. Agents smashed in the car windows of a University of Maine-trained civil engineer, Juan Sebastián Carvajal-Muñozand took him away with the car still running. He had a valid permit to work, an engineering job and no criminal record. A man training to be a corrections officer in southern Maine suffered the same fate, and as did others, including asylum seekers.
Then, as now, Mainers came togethersometimes via social media and sometimes through various groups, to try to counteract ICE.
As in Minnesota, ICE was heavy-handed and showed disrespect for civil rights. Two Maine women observing ICE were told they would be put on a domestic terrorist watch list and sued. “Only 11 of the nearly 200 people detained in Maine during a massive January immigration enforcement surge were recorded as having a criminal record,” the Bangor Daily News reportedmaking ICE look even more abusive.
At the time, Collins tried to claim credit for ending the winter surge. But Democrats and immigrant rights leaders were skeptical and pointed to her support for increased ICE funding without any reforms.
Now, Collins is again responding in her classic both-sides way. On the one hand, the incumbent urged DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin “to cease all non-urgent vehicle stops” and tepidly acknowledged that the lack of a recording device on the shooter was “extremely unfortunate.” On the other hand, Collins blamed Democrats for a delay in body cameras and contended that eliminating ICE “would make our country less safe.”
Platner’s fall upended the state’s biggest race for a time. But there are plenty of ICE critics, both political leaders and not, who are taking charge of the response to Collins and the agency.
And, though the Democratic Senate nominee is unknown again, Mainers are rising up, speaking out and moving on.
Amy Fried is professor emerita of political science at the University of Maine. She also has a Substack, Political Sightlines.
- Mullin pushes states to comply with election demands, echoing Trump’s claims about midterm risks
- Senators bullish on chances for a July vote on college sports bill
- Troy Jackson jumps out to big lead in race to replace Graham Platner in Maine
- Senators bullish on chances for a July vote on college sports bill
- Democrats dismiss our constitutional traditions as ‘nostalgia’
- Trump basks in World Cup spotlight, says US should host alone next time
- Epstein survivor says Blanche meeting left her ‘disappointed, disturbed and undaunted’
- Most of Congress backs this bill to support breast cancer patients. Why isn’t it law?
- GLP-1 insurance change impacts millions of Americans: What to know, how to tell if you’re covered
- AIPAC drops online donations to Dems who backed Israel aid cut
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words