this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2026
708 points (98.9% liked)

News

36160 readers
3909 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Washington Post reported that activists are working with the White House on an executive order to declare a “national emergency” over America’s elections and pave the way for a power grab.

“Pro-Trump activists who say they are in coordination with the White House are circulating a 17-page draft executive order that claims China interfered in the 2020 election as a basis to declare a national emergency that would unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting,” reported the Post‘s Isaac Arnsdorf. “President Donald Trump has repeatedly previewed a plan to mandate voter ID and ban mail ballots in November’s midterm elections, and the activists expect their draft will figure into Trump’s promised executive order on the issue.”

Peter Ticktin, a MAGA activist in favor of the executive order, told the Post that “we have a situation where the president is aware that there are foreign interests that are interfering in our election processes,” and that “the president has to be able to deal with it,” including by banning mail-in ballots and certain voting machines.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] maxxadrenaline@lemmy.world 1 points 31 minutes ago

Trump is the national emergency we need ceda An emergency funds to deal with him

[–] AlexLost@lemmy.world 27 points 7 hours ago

States should declare emergencies first and protect themselves from the fed. Elections are handled by each state, not the government.

[–] nulluser@lemmy.world 30 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

The only thing holding a lot of Americans back from violence is the knowledge that that's exactly the excuse the regime wants to declare martial law and suspend elections. If they just jump to suspending fair elections anyway, then there will be nothing to stop the gloves from coming off. The billionaires and Congress creatures better run for their bunkers. Anybody that the people perceive as having a hand in getting us to this point, either through direct action or failure to react, won't be safe.

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 18 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

The only thing holding a lot of Americans back from violence is the knowledge that that's exactly the excuse the regime wants to declare martial law and suspend elections.

The only things holding Americans back from violence are relatively abundant food, entertainment and comfort. All of which will still continue to exist once free elections are gone. Plus what they replace them with will be branded super duper free elections, and that will be enough for a lot of people.

There is little to no evidence that the 1/3rd of eligible voters who didn't vote in Nov 2024 are any more engaged with what is happening than they were back then.

All they have to do is orchestrate this coup in a somewhat intelligent way that doesn't immediately collapse the economy and they can absolutely pull it off.

Most Americans are not going to fight for abstract rights when their immediate tangible needs are being met.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 hours ago

“…duas tantum res anxius optat, panem et circenses.”

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 11 points 8 hours ago

Sounds like an excuse, no dictator has ever been held at bay by lack of action and this regime is not shy of pulling stuff directly from their asses.

[–] Vytle@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

All-in on Nothing

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 13 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Bold move in a nation with more guns than people.

I'm not against a Gaddafi or Mussolini ending at all.

[–] pachrist@lemmy.world 11 points 6 hours ago

The ending is OK. It's the journey there we all want to avoid.

[–] neuromorph@lemmy.world 29 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

we held elections during a literal civil war. What "emergency" could trump that with all our modern life improvements and.... checks notes. No civil war in America...

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 hours ago

What "emergency" could trump that with

He has no trouble pulling random excuses out of his ass.

And on the rare occasion the courts eventually tell him to stop, he will have been doing whatever he wants for months and moths before he is told to stop.

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 13 points 9 hours ago

You're the first Republican President since the civil rights act passed to have negative approval among white voters.

You won the popular vote because for the first time in memory, high propensity voters are going for the Democrats and low propensity voters went for Republicans.

Whatever you're planning won't be enough.

[–] DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 15 points 10 hours ago

if this happens it’s over They are limiting who can give passports, some states are cancelling driver licenses of certain groups… they will choose who can vote or not

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

What will the US military with their oath to protect the US Constitution?

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 hours ago

Probably not.

I would love to be proven wrong, but the evidence of the last year tells me I won't be.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 0 points 4 hours ago

The only way the US military would ever -MAYBE - intervene is if Trump openly and unambiguously violated a direct order from the Supreme Court. If SCOTUS directly prohibited Trump from seizing control of elections, and Trump just ordered the military to intervene, that might be enough to make them refuse orders.

But that's unlikely to happen. First, SCOTUS will likely just slow walk this until after the election, refusing to rule on it while also not allowing any injunctions. Three months after the election they rule against it.

Or, even if SCOTUS does strike it down, Trump can rely on ambiguity. The court strikes this one down? Three weeks before the election, Trump issues a new executive order. This does much the same thing as the one the court struck down, but it's based on a completely different legal authority. The military then no longer has a clear unambiguous ruling from the court on how to act.

The only way the military might refuse to follow orders is if Trump openly and clearly violates a direct SCOTUS ruling. And Trump can simply engineer things so that such a clear unambiguous case never happens. It's one thing for a group of soldiers to cite a direct court ruling in their refusal to follow orders. It's another for some 19 year olds to decide the constitutionality of a presidential action by themselves and refuse to intervene.

[–] Jaysyn@lemmy.world 30 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

Prediction: None of this so called evidence will ever make an appearance in a court room.

[–] groolthedemon@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago

And even if it does it will be a Trump Crony Judge that just goes... yeah sure, be a dictator buddy!

[–] pebbles@sh.itjust.works 5 points 12 hours ago

Unfortunately we have been boned since the immunity ruling.

[–] tonytins@pawb.social 2 points 10 hours ago

His lawyers don't exactly have high hopes.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 18 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

If he starts the civil war by ending our vote, do we get to start hitting Ice agents with our cars?

Also make sure to be going 40 or over or they get back up.

[–] AlexLost@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago

You already can! Are you worried about repercussions? They aren't.

[–] TheMinister@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 hours ago

Or just don’t forget to backup yourself

[–] Ksin@lemmy.world 24 points 13 hours ago

By Wikipedias count there are presently 51 on-going national emergencies in USA, 19 of them have been declared by Trump.

The oldest still active one was made by Carter in 1979, it's a sanction on Iran.

[–] TerdFerguson@lemmy.world 19 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

we have a situation where the president is aware that there are foreign interests that are interfering in our election processes

Of course he is, he benefitted from it. America ain't coming back until the people take it back, and that's gonna be done the hard way.

[–] mcv@lemmy.zip 29 points 15 hours ago

Donald Trump is the national emergency.

[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 25 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

If this happens and civil war doesn't break out than I fear good people will have lost.

[–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 9 points 13 hours ago

"They say evil wins when good people do nothing. I disagree, it should just be 'evil wins'."

So I'm of the opinion that it should be as costly a victory for the bastards as possible.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 43 points 18 hours ago (8 children)

The Chinese government hates the US and, if they interfered successfully, would have done so to get Trump into office, since that would cause the most damage.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›