Looking out for his razor-thin House majority, Speaker Mike Johnson added California to the list. While acknowledging that he lacked any proof for his claim, Johnson suggested that Republicans might have lost three House seats in California due to fraud.
Most recently, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem boasted that “When it gets to Election Day,” her agency has “been proactive to make sure we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders to lead this country.” Noem’s performance and ethics may be under attack, but she knows how to please the boss.
Her statement has three important components. First, she makes clear that she will use the power of the government “proactively.” Second, she will make sure the “right people” are able to vote. Most importantly, she has her eye on the ultimate prize: “electing the right leaders.” She understands that, for Trump, there is no point in having the right people voting if they elect the wrong candidates.
It is not just government officials who are willing to say out loud how they plan to secure a Republican victory. Steve Bannon recently announced that “We’re going to have ICE surround the polls come November.”
When asked about this, professional White House propagandist Karoline Leavitt said that she “can’t guarantee” that ICE agents wouldn’t be near voting locations. In a Senate hearing, the acting head of ICE, Todd Lyons, acknowledged that there would be “no reason” for ICE to be near polling places during voting. However, when asked whether he would disobey an order from Noem to deploy agents to voting locations, he stammered and did not answer directly.
That actually made Lyons unusual. He was not willing to say out loud what is nearly certain to be true: If Trump wants ICE to surround the polls — as Bannon suggests — ICE will surround the polls, and no one in a position to object will do so. I suspect that may end his career with this administration. If you’re not willing to say it out loud, what use does Trump have for you?
It was once taken for granted that the political misuse of government would be done in secret. Nixon did not broadcast the Watergate break-in. Reagan did not advertise the Iran-Contra affair.
This led to a widespread belief in Washington, D.C., that the cover-up is always worse than the crime. Indeed, it was the cover-up that often signaled to the media and the public that there was a serious crime in the first place.
But what if the crime is stealing an election? And what if there is no cover-up because they celebrate what they are doing?
Those of us who care about free and fair elections need to recognize that, in the Trump era, secrecy is not essential to rigging an election. Democracy can die in the plain light of day as easily as it does in darkness. It can be undermined by members of Congress as readily as by mobs storming the Capitol. Cabinet secretaries can be more dangerous than local vote-suppressing vigilantes.
If we’re too focused on listening for whispers from the White House, we will close our ears to what Trump is saying out loud. We must not war-game improbable scenarios when his administration is giving us a playbook of its next moves.
To paraphrase George Orwell, we must not reject the evidence of our own eyes and ears. If we are to survive this period with democracy intact, that is the most essential command.