Prepare for Trump to Try to Steal the Midterms

The Bulwark · collected 2026-08-26 · by Mona Charen commentary
Read the original at The Bulwark ↗

Summary

The article reports on President Trump's efforts to potentially subvert the 2022 midterm elections through various means. Despite a recent Supreme Court decision staying a lower court injunction related to mail-in ballots, the author argues this is not a definitive win for Trump and notes he remains determined to prevent a free and fair election if possible. The article also mentions other attempts by the administration to obtain voter rolls from states and compromise election security, citing specific instances where these efforts were made since 2020. Overall, the article frames itself as an opinion piece warning readers that Trump may try to steal the midterms.
Written by the local model on 2026-08-26, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event (that is the story summary below).

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
58
claim-shaped sentences
Uncertain
22%
13 of 58 hedged
Leaning
Leans strongly left
expected in commentary, which argues a position
Publisher trust
not scored
Commentary is not rated for newsroom trust
Outlets on this story
15
Politics
Narrative spread
1
articles carrying this framing
Analyzed 2026-08-26 · how these are computed

AI analysis (generated at analysis time, not now)

Story summary

Here's a summary of the real-world news story:

What happened: The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to move forward with its plan to restrict mail-in voting, despite opposition from Democratic-led states and election officials. This decision allows the administration to implement new rules for mail ballot delivery, which would require states to use specific formatting for mail ballot envelopes and an electronic system to track ballots.

Why it matters: The ruling has sparked concerns about potential chaos in the upcoming midterm elections, as many voters rely on mail-in voting. California and other Democratic-led states have vowed to sue again to block the Trump administration's plan, which they argue is an attempt to restrict voting rights.

Key players

Timeline: The Supreme Court made its decision on Monday, allowing the Trump administration's plan to move forward. Democratic-led states have since filed a fresh lawsuit to block the US Postal Service from carrying out the plan.

Written for “Trump's Mail-In Ballot Restrictions” on 2026-08-31, grounded in this article and the 14 other(s) covering the same event.
Why this leaning score
The article's own words the score was based on. Each is quoted verbatim and was checked against the article text before being stored, so you can find it in the original.
Score -0.75 Confidence high 2 quote(s) discarded as not found in the article
Leaning score -0.75 for article 2440 (high confidence, 3 verified quotes) · logged 2026-08-27

Story

📰 Trump's Mail-In Ballot Restrictions
Politics · 15 article(s) covering the same event.

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans strongly left and hedges 22% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
NBC News Top Stories
⚖️ Leans right further right than this 🔴 4% hedged 1 of 26 📰 publisher trust 96
“Both articles report on the Supreme Court's decision to lift an injunction and allow key aspects of Trump's executive order on mail-in ballots to go into effect, citing a 6-3 vote along ideological lines.”
World & Nation
⚖️ Leans strongly left 🔴 7% hedged 4 of 54 📰 publisher trust 95
“Both articles describe the Supreme Court's temporary procedural decision to allow President Trump to continue seeking new limits on mail ballots, and California's intention to sue again, all happening around the same time.”
The Bulwark
⚖️ Leans right further right than this 🔴 0% hedged 0 of 4
“Article A reports on a recent Supreme Court decision allowing Trump to restrict mail-in voting, while Article B mentions the same topic but interprets it as a temporary procedural win for Trump and not a permission slip.”
Latest & Breaking News on Fox News
⚖️ Leans right further right than this 🔴 12% hedged 4 of 32 📰 publisher trust 93
“The events described in both articles are related but occur at different times and have different outcomes, as Article A mentions a temporary procedural win for Trump while Article B describes the next phase of his effort after a 'largely favorable ruling'”
The Bulwark
⚖️ Leans strongly left 🔴 11% hedged 5 of 46
“Article A reports on a stay of an injunction allowing Trump to build a White House ballroom and bunker, while Article B mentions a Supreme Court action related to mail-in ballots and Trump's efforts to suppress them”
Mother Jones
⚖️ Leans strongly left 🔴 18% hedged 7 of 39 📰 publisher trust 95
“Both articles describe the Supreme Court's decision to temporarily stay a lower court injunction regarding Trump's executive order restricting mail-in voting, with the same time frame (2026) and context (midterm elections)”
The Independent World
⚖️ Leans left further right than this 🔴 10% hedged 4 of 41 📰 publisher trust 95
“Both articles describe a Supreme Court decision related to Trump's mail-voting order on August 25, with Article B providing more context and analysis of the ruling.”
US news | The Guardian
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 13% hedged 19 of 150 📰 publisher trust 95
“Although both articles mention a recent Supreme Court ruling on mail-in voting, they describe different aspects of it and do not clearly report on the same specific occurrence.”
US news | The Guardian
⚖️ Leans strongly left 🔴 13% hedged 23 of 175 📰 publisher trust 95
“Both articles report on the Supreme Court's decision regarding Trump's executive order restricting mail voting, specifically mentioning the lifting of an injunction and the ongoing legality of the order.”
NBC News Top Stories
⚖️ Leans left further right than this 🔴 17% hedged 3 of 18 📰 publisher trust 96
“Article A discusses the Supreme Court's decision to stay an injunction, while Article B describes a federal judge blocking a Postal Service regulation”

Publisher

The Bulwark · 35 article(s) · 0 correction(s) detected

Commentary. The three signals behind a trust score all measure a newsroom's record with its own reporting, so they are not computed for this source. How trust is scored.

No corrections detected for this publisher. That may mean careful reporting, or simply that nothing has been checked.

Who wrote this

Mona Charen
1 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 In broad outline, the Court stayed a lower court injunction while the legality of Trump’s attempted interference will be decided later.
2026-08-26 · mixed framing · Prepare for Trump to Try to Steal the Midterms
The only article under this byline in the corpus.

Topics

Constitution Court THE SUPREME COURT The Roberts Court Trump

Subjects

Trump PERSON · 11× Court ORG · 3× Democratic NORP · 2× THE SUPREME COURT ORG · 2× Andrew Egger PERSON · 1× Congress ORG · 1× Democrats NORP · 1× The Roberts Court ORG · 1× the Justice Department ORG · 1× the Postal Service ORG · 1×

Narrative

Instead, then-Attorney General Pam Bondi sent Gov. Tim Walz a letter offering to suspend Operation Metro Surge if Minnesota agreed to end its sanctuary city policies and hand over its voter registration rolls and the names and addresses of its Medicaid and SNAP enrollees.
framing: mixed · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-08-26
🔮 In broad outline, the Court stayed a lower court injunction while the legality of Trump’s attempted interference will be decided later.
2026-08-26 · The Bulwark
Prepare for Trump to Try to Steal the Midterms · mixed framing

Claims (58 extracted, 13 hedged)

THE SUPREME COURT GAVE US A START this week with what looked, at first glance, like a win for Trump’s efforts to suppress mail-in ballots. asserted
what → give → ballots
But, as Andrew Egger explained, that isn’t quite what happened. asserted
what → explain → ?
In broad outline, the Court stayed a lower court injunction while the legality of Trump’s attempted interference will be decided later. asserted
legality → stay → interference
After the 2024 immunity ruling, you’d be ill advised to assume anything about this Court. asserted
you → advise → Court
The Roberts Court undermined that key principle. asserted
Court → undermine → principle
And here too, it seems an open-and-shut case that the Constitution grants power over elections to the Congress and the states, not to the executive branch. asserted
Constitution → seem → branch
But we’ll see. asserted
we → see → ?
Still, the Court’s little summer fright is a good reminder that early voting will begin in some places in as little as four weeks, and while the polls and projections look good for Democrats, this is not an ordinary election year. asserted
this → begin → Democrats
Trump is weakened and flailing, yes, but he remains determined to prevent a free and fair election in November if he possibly can. uncertain
he → weaken → November
And he does not lack for lackeys. asserted
he → lack → lackeys
The Supreme Court touched on just one of his efforts to subvert the election: his executive order directing the Postal Service to work with states to determine whether voters requesting mail-in ballots were citizens. asserted
voters → touch → ballots
Since 2025, the Justice Department has demanded voter rolls from forty-eight states. asserted
Department → demand → states
Nearly all states are resisting and the matter is in litigation. asserted
matter → resist → litigation
Recall that after immigration officers shot and killed Alex Pretti in Minneapolis and feelings were running high, the administration didn’t express regret or apologize. asserted
administration → recall → regret
Nor did they announce an investigation. asserted
they → announce → investigation
Instead, then-Attorney General Pam Bondi sent Gov. Tim Walz a letter offering to suspend Operation Metro Surge if Minnesota agreed to end its sanctuary city policies and hand over its voter registration rolls and the names and addresses of its Medicaid and SNAP enrollees. asserted
Minnesota → send → enrollees
And here you thought the ICE raids were all about finding the “worst of the worst.” asserted
raids → think → worst
Christopher Krebs, director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency in Trump’s first term, became a target of his wrath because he truthfully testified that the 2020 election was free and fair. asserted
election → become → wrath
In the second term, Trump has gutted the agency Krebs had helmed, denying to states and the federal government key tools to detect foreign election interference. asserted
Krebs → gutte → interference
Strange priority for someone who is so consumed with anger at the accusation that he benefited from Russian interference in the 2016 election. asserted
he → consume → election
In July, the president announced a major primetime address that would contain a “bombshell” and then rambled incoherently for what seemed like hours about an “unprecedented election security nightmare.” asserted
what → announce → nightmare
It was China, he claimed, that had actually intervened in the 2020 election. asserted
that → claim → election
The speech was immediately forgotten, but perhaps it ought not to be. asserted
it → forget → ?
Trump rarely gives primetime speeches. asserted
Trump → give → speeches
He may have been preparing the ground for some declaration to come. uncertain
He → prepare → declaration
Meanwhile, Trump instructed Republicans in red states to engage in naked, midcycle gerrymandering. asserted
Trump → instruct → gerrymandering
There was no pretense that this was an effort to respond to Democratic gerrymandering. asserted
this → be → gerrymandering
Several states with Democratic majorities like California and Virginia had recently taken steps to limit partisan gerrymandering. asserted
states → take → gerrymandering
Regarding Texas, which was the first state to salute smartly and carry out Trump’s wishes, Trump said: “Just a simple redrawing; we pick up five seats.” asserted
we → regard → seats
Trump has never ruled out using force to affect the election outcome. asserted
Trump → rule → outcome
He attempted it with the Capitol mob in 2021, and even in the past year and a half, he has expressed regret that he didn’t take Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn’s advice and use troops to confiscate every voting machine in the country in 2020. asserted
he → attempt → 2020
Asked in May whether he would consider using the National Guard or ICE to patrol polling places, he said, “I’d do anything necessary to make sure we have honest elections.” uncertain
we → ask → elections
In February of this year, he told talk-show host (and former deputy director of the FBI) Dan Bongino that Republicans “should take over the voting in at least many—fifteen places. asserted
Republicans → tell → places
The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting.” asserted
Republicans → nationalize → voting
And in a meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump mused that we might pause our elections “if we happen to be in a war with somebody.” uncertain
we → muse → somebody
Trump’s factotums have also signaled a certain insouciance about the possibility of sending armed officers to polling places. asserted
factotums → signal → places
At his confirmation hearing, Todd Blanche asked: “Why is there an objection to sending ICE to polling stations? asserted
Blanche → ask → stations
Illegals can’t vote. asserted
Illegals → vote → ?
It doesn’t make any sense.” Feigned confusion to one side, Blanche knows exactly why sending ICE to polling places would be outrageous. asserted
sending → make → places
After a two-year spree of arrests, manhandling, family separations, detentions, deportations, and even executions of Hispanic-looking people and others, it would be completely understandable that Hispanic citizens might hesitate to exercise their right to vote if they feared being wrongly caught up in an ICE enforcement action. uncertain
they → look → action
…and 18 more, not listed.
💬 Give feedback
🕘 History 🎫 Support