Trump Has Meltdown on Meet the Press, “You’re Either Crooked or Stupid”

Trump walked off a Meet the Press interview after being challenged to present evidence of voter fraud.

Trump on Meet the Press

When asked “where’s the evidence” Trump presented none. When pressed, he called Meet the Press White House Correspondent Kristen Welker crooked or stupid.

This is the same playbook forever. It’s all allegations but no evidence.

Trump is something like 0-50 in the courts.

Q: Why?
A: It’s a crime to lie to a judge. So Trump’s attorney generally don’t.

Trump’s lawyers never present solid evidence in real courts. Instead, they make absurd claims in the circus-court of public opinion.

Lies on No More Wars

Lost Not Stolen

Please consider LOST, NOT STOLEN: The Conservative Case that Trump Lost and Biden Won the 2020 Presidential Election.

We are political conservatives who have spent most of our adult lives working to support the Constitution and the conservative principles upon which it is based: limited government, liberty, equality of opportunity, freedom of religion, a strong national defense, and the rule of law.

We have become deeply troubled by efforts to overturn or discredit the results of the 2020 Presidential Election. There is no principle of our Republic more fundamental than the right of the People to elect our leaders and for their votes to be counted accurately. Efforts to thwart the People’s choice are deeply undemocratic and unpatriotic. Claims that an election was stolen, or that the outcome resulted from fraud, are deadly serious and should be made only on the basis of real and powerful evidence. If the American people lose trust that our elections are free and fair, we will lose our democracy. As Jonathan Haidt observed, “We just don’t know what a democracy looks like when you drain all the trust out of the system.” Paul Kelly, “Very Good Chance” Democracy Is Doomed in America, Says Haidt, AUSTRALIAN (July 20, 2019).

We therefore have undertaken an examination of every claim of fraud and miscount put forward by former President Trump and his advocates, and now put the results of those investigations before the American people, and especially before fellow conservatives who may be uncertain about what and whom to believe. Our conclusion is unequivocal: Joe Biden was the choice of a majority of the Electors, who themselves were the choice of the majority of voters in their states. Biden’s victory is easily explained by a political landscape that was much different in 2020 than it was when President Trump narrowly won the presidency in 2016. President Trump waged his campaign for re-election during a devastating worldwide pandemic that caused a severe downturn in the global economy. This, coupled with an electorate that included a small but statistically significant number willing to vote for other Republican candidates on the ballot but not for President Trump, are the reasons his campaign fell short, not a fraudulent election.

Donald Trump and his supporters have failed to present evidence of fraud or inaccurate results significant enough to invalidate the results of the 2020 Presidential Election.

We do not claim that election administration is perfect. Election fraud is a real thing; there are prosecutions in almost every election year, and no doubt some election fraud goes undetected. Nor do we disparage attempts to reduce fraud. States should continue to do what they can do to eliminate opportunities for election fraud and to punish it when it occurs.

But there is absolutely no evidence of fraud in the 2020 Presidential Election on the magnitude necessary to shift the result in any state, let alone the nation as a whole. In fact, there was no fraud that changed the outcome in even a single precinct. It is wrong, and bad for our country, for people to propagate baseless claims that President Biden’s election was not legitimate.

Executive Summary

This Report takes a hard look at the very serious charges made by Trump and his supporters. The consequences of a president and a major party candidate making such charges are monumental. If true, our electoral system is in desperate need of repair. If not true, that must be said because such false charges corrode our democracy and leave a significant share of the population doubting the legitimacy of our system, seriously weakening the country.

Every member of this informal group has worked in Republican politics, been appointed to office by Republicans, or is otherwise associated with the Party. None have shifted loyalties to the Democratic Party, and none bear any ill will toward Trump and especially not toward his sincere supporters. Many of us have worked over the years in polling places as part of Republican Election Day Operations looking for the same sort of fraud and irregularities Donald Trump claimed in 2020. Such vigilance is entirely appropriate and must not be stigmatized as “voter suppression.”

Fraud, irregularities, and procedural deficiencies formed the basis for challenging the results in five of the six highly contested Electoral College battleground states of Arizona (page 7), Georgia (page 27), Michigan (page 36), Nevada (page 47), and Wisconsin (page 64). In Pennsylvania (page 53), Trump verbally attacked the elections as fraudulent, but his lawyers never filed such charges in court.

Of the 64 cases brought by Trump and his supporters, twenty were dismissed before a hearing on the merits, fourteen were voluntarily dismissed by Trump and his supporters before a hearing on the merits, and 30 cases included a hearing on the merits.

Only in one Pennsylvania case involving far too few votes to overturn the results did Trump and his supporters prevail. Repetition of these false charges causes real harm to the basic foundations of the country, with 30 percent of the population lacking faith in the results of our elections.

Post-election reviews and audits: In addition to the numerous legal cases, the six states conducted post-election reviews at the insistence of or because of the Trump allegations. This Report discusses those efforts, which also failed to support the allegations from Trump and his supporters.

After the dismissal of all 64 court cases and state reviews, Trump and his supporters have continued in the sixteen months since Joe Biden’s Inauguration with claims of a fraudulent election. Each has been refuted. ….

Lost Not Stolen Summary

• There is no evidence of any widespread misfeasance or malfeasance that would have affected the result of the 2020 Presidential Election in Arizona.
• Nearly all claims of voter fraud have failed, and no one’s vote was counted more than once.
• The Trump campaign’s claims about the Dominion voting machines were proven false by independent audits.
• The report from the now-defunct Cyber Ninjas has been debunked, and even it reaffirmed Trump’s loss and found 99 additional votes for Biden.
• All legal claims—about Dominion voting machines, ballot counting, mail-in ballots, voter-eligibility requirements, ballot drop boxes, and conduct by poll officials— failed.

The article is 72 pages long.

It refutes Trump’s 6 claims in Arizona, 5 in Michigan, 6 in Georgia, 5 in Nevada, and 5 in Pennsylvania.

In other words, the article refutes, point-by-point, every claim.

This effort was by republicans, not democrats.

Circus-Court of Public Opinion

In circuit courts, Trump backs down. Fourteen claims were dropped by Trump.

However, easily refuted fraud claims circulate constantly in the circus-court of public opinion.

An Amusing Case in Pennsylvania

Please consider The Third Circuit Court of Appeals, DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC.; LAWRENCE ROBERTS; DAVID JOHN HENRY, Appellants v. SECRETARY COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA; ALLEGHENY COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS.

The Trump Presidential Campaign asserts that Pennsylvania’s 2020 election was unfair. But as lawyer Rudolph Giuliani stressed, the Campaign “doesn’t plead fraud. . . . [T]his is not a fraud case.” Mot. to Dismiss Hr’g Tr. 118:19–20, 137:18. Instead, it objects that Pennsylvania’s Secretary of State and some counties restricted poll watchers and let voters fix technical defects in their mail-in ballots. It offers nothing more.

The Campaign tries to repackage these state-law claims as unconstitutional discrimination. Yet its allegations are vague and conclusory. It never alleges that anyone treated the Trump campaign or Trump votes worse than it treated the Biden campaign or Biden votes.

Nor does the Campaign deserve an injunction to undo Pennsylvania’s certification of its votes. The Campaign’s claims have no merit. The number of ballots it specifically challenges is far smaller than the roughly 81,000-vote margin of victory. And it never claims fraud or that any votes were cast by illegal voters. Plus, tossing out millions of mail-in ballots would be drastic and unprecedented, disenfranchising a huge swath of the electorate and upsetting all down-ballot races too. That remedy would be grossly disproportionate to the procedural challenges raised. So we deny the motion for an injunction pending appeal.

How Ridiculous Is That?

This case was appealed despite the fact that Rudolph Giuliani stressed, the Campaign “doesn’t plead fraud. . . . [T]his is not a fraud case.” and the number of votes challenged was far less than the 81,000 margin of victory.

The remedy Trump sought, to throw out all mail-in ballots, was nothing less than an attempt to steal the election.

By the way, that opinion was written by written by Judge Stephanos Bibas, a Trump appointee.

Spotlight Rudy Giuliani

Rudy Giuliani had his law license permanently revoked in both New York and Washington, D.C., due to his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

The court found he repeatedly made false, misleading statements while pushing baseless claims about the 2020 election on behalf of Donald Trump.

The justices determined he deliberately intended to deceive the courts, the public, and actively contributed to national strife.

Every Case Is Similar

Trump says one thing in the Circus Court and another thing in the Circuit Court with real judges.

Giuliani eventually stepped over the line with ridiculous lies and was disbarred.

The rest of the cases were tossed when lawyers wisely refused to lie to judges in real courts.

Question of the Day

Q: Will this change anybody’s mind?
A: Likely not

It certainly will not change the mind of a single die-hard MAGA believer. They are duty bound as a member of the cult to believe any damn thing Trump says no matter how obviously stupid or contradictory.

Q: So what’s the point?
A: I am pleased to provide one comprehensive rebuttal to every preposterous election claim that Trump has made.

When claims of fraud arise, just send them a link to this article.

Effort to Steal the Midterms

To anyone not brain dead, it’s obvious Trump wants to rig the midterm elections.

That is the real purpose behind The Save Act.

That is what’s behind Trump’s appointment of Bill Pulte as his acting Director of National Intelligence after Tulsi Gabbard resigned was forced out.

On June 5, the Wall Street Journal reported Trump Urges ‘Less Shackled’ Pulte to Fire Intelligence-Community Employees

Trump stunned many of his own advisers when he said earlier this week that he was appointing Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, as his intelligence chief. The move was met with skepticism from some Republicans on Capitol Hill, who raised concerns about Pulte’s lack of national-security experience.

The president named Pulte director of national intelligence on an acting basis, a temporary role that doesn’t require Senate confirmation. He can serve in the role for 210 days.

Trump, in the interview, argued that Pulte’s acting status is an asset. “You’re less shackled,” he said. “It sort of gives you more power, you know, for a somewhat limited period of time.”

The president said he hopes Pulte can begin making changes across the intelligence community before a permanent intelligence director is confirmed.

“Frankly, it might be good for him to shake it up before people come,” Trump said. “Because, if he [Pulte] reduced the size, in conjunction with me…and in conjunction with possibly the person coming in…he can do a lot of the hard work and we wouldn’t have to saddle somebody that goes in.”

Pulte is one of the least qualified Trump appointments ever. But he is perfect for the job.

Q: Why?
A: He will bend over backwards, even break the law, to do whatever Trump wants.

If you don’t see the threat here, you are a MAGA cultist.

Trump Issues Order Against Mail-In Voting. Supreme Court Will Strike It.

On April 1, 2026, I commented Trump Issues Order Against Mail-In Voting. Supreme Court Will Strike It.

Here’s another set of silly Executive Orders about to be blasted sky high.

Once again, Trump is wrong. Expect an appeal.

The Brennan Center for Justice issued a brief on April 8, 2026, Analyzing the President’s Executive Order on Mail Voting

This bid to seize control of mail voting would wreak havoc on elections and harm American voters.

Last week, President Trump issued a new executive order that aims to illegally rewrite the rules for federal elections. The principal thrust of the order is to charge the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) with determining who may vote by mail and instructs it to refuse to deliver ballots sent by anyone not included on newly created federal mail voter lists. It threatens criminal penalties for election officials, mail carriers, and others who send ballots to or deliver ballots from individuals the administration deems ineligible. Perhaps to facilitate this usurpation of state and federal laws governing mail voting, it also orders the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to compile lists of voting-age U.S. citizens in every state, using incomplete and unreliable federal data sources.

If implemented, the executive order would inject chaos into our elections, block eligible American citizens from voting, undermine voter privacy, and expose election officials and others to criminal prosecution simply for doing their jobs.

Federal Court Hears Challenge to Trump Executive Order

On June 2, the League of Women Voters reported Federal Court Hears Challenge to Trump Executive Order Restricting Mail-in Ballots

A federal District Court heard arguments today in a lawsuit challenging President Trump’s March 31 executive order concerning mail-in voting. Plaintiffs argue that the order violates the US Constitution and federal law and risks mass disenfranchisement of eligible voters.

The Constitution makes clear that only the states and Congress can set the rules for elections. Nevertheless, the executive order attempts to override states’ mail-in voting laws by transforming the US Postal Service from a neutral mail carrier into an arbiter of who may cast a ballot by mail. The order also requires the Department of Homeland Security to build and give to each state a purported list of US citizens over the age of 18.

Plaintiffs asked the court today for a preliminary injunction to block implementation of Section 3 of the order, which directs the Postal Service to create unlawful new rules for the transmission of mail-in ballots.

“The Constitution is clear: the states and Congress — not the president — set the rules for our elections. The Trump administration is attempting to seize that power for itself with an unlawful and dangerous executive order. The order is already interfering with plaintiffs’ essential work helping American citizens vote,” said Attorneys representing the plaintiffs. “Together with our courageous clients, we’re seeking a preliminary injunction to stop further chaos in our elections, uphold the rule of law, and protect the millions of citizens who rely on mail-in voting, including people with disabilities, students, rural voters, and the elderly. We won’t let the Trump administration continue to trample on the fundamental right to vote.”

Unless that executive order is tossed, Trump will steal the election.

For now, I am 95 percent confident the court will strike that order.

I am less confident that rouge USPS workers will not delay or destroy ballots from known-to-be-blue cities.

With that, I repeat my Save Act warning.

The SAVE Act

President Trump, House Speaker Mike Johnson, and Utah Senator Mike Lee are spearheading the SAVE Act.

It’s presented as a fair elections measure. In reality it is a blatantly unconstitutional act that would give Trump ability to steal the election.

Republicans tout the act’s Voter ID provision as if that is all the bill does.

I propose but without overwhelming conviction, that even if it passed, the bill is so obviously unconstitutional, the Supreme Court would kill it.

Three Reasons the Save Act Is Unconstitutional

On March 4, I commented Three Reasons the Save Act Is Unconstitutional

The SAVE Act won’t pass, and that’s a good thing.

On March 11, I noted SAVE Act Silliness: Trump’s “Go for the Gold” Killed It

The SAVE Act is unconstitutional. Trump want to make it worse. Only fools think they know more than Thune.

The Save Act will die because it is not a budget item so it cannot be passed in a budget resolution with just 50 votes.

Moreover, there are a handful of Republican Senators with enough backbone to prevent it. The fallback position is my assertion, hopefully untested, that the Supreme Court would strike it.

Polymarket has the Odds of Save Act Passage at 8 percent, down from 33 percent in February.

Eight percent is about right and that’s what I thought in February.

Regardless, all of these actions by Trump are designed to steal the election.

Three Predictions

1. Trump will continue his efforts to steal the election all the way through the election and beyond.
2. He will fail to steal the election
3. There will be a Republican bloodbath in November

Number one is 100 percent likely. It’s ongoing and obvious.

Assuming number two is correct, I am 85 percent confident of number three.