USPS whistleblower describes new plans for voting by mail hidden from the public

[u/One-Emu-1103]

https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/01/politics/usps-whistleblower-mail-ballot-rules-trump

[u/therealruin]

Because we have a reactive legal system, not a proactive one. They get to break the law and then we have to prove it and then they get held accountable. Meanwhile, all of their illegal shit gets to stand just long enough to do the damage it needs to do. By the time we catch up and legally declare it illegal, the damage is done and the perpetrators have moved on.

This is what an organized bloodless non-militarized civil(?) coup looks like. Our country is currently under attack from foreign and domestic adversaries who believe Democracy in the West must be destroyed. We’re a decade into this being public knowledge and people still don’t get it.

[u/bernmont2016 → u/therealruin]

and then they get held accountable

Well, and then they might eventually get held accountable, after years of appeals.

[u/therealruin → u/bernmont2016]

I’m using procedural language here, not moralistic. I’m saying that our legal system works like this: Public Accusation > Proven Verdict > Rendered Judgment. It was deliberately oversimplified because it’s supporting evidence, not the main point.

[u/Lordofd511 → u/therealruin]

I dunno, I think the uncertainty is a valid addition. They get to break the law, and then we have an opportunity to prove it, and then there's a chance they get held accountable. Not saying you're wrong at all, it's just a clarification on the incentives and disincentives at work here.

[u/therealruin → u/Lordofd511]

I think it’s a perfectly valid addition in a completely different conversation… which was the point of my previous comment.

[u/mmmsoap → u/therealruin]

Case in point: the recent case that went up to SCOTUS where they decided that states didn’t have standing to sue because they hadn’t been harmed yet by the postal system’s rules, and because USPS hadn’t released their proposed rules at the time of the filing, even though they had been released before the actually ruling was made. Logic was “you weren’t harmed yet and we can’t possibly know if you could be harmed because we refuse to consider any info other than what the Trump admin claims to be true”.

[u/Dull_Bid6002 → u/therealruin]

Oh trust me, it won't be bloodless 

[u/therealruin → u/Dull_Bid6002]

Fair, that’s me misspeaking. I meant to say (in a way I can’t find the words for right now) that there won’t be militaries involved… that the battlefield and weapons are primarily non-violent instruments being used… can we say, nefariously?

All to “prove” that the very idea of Democracy is as dangerous and unsustainable as the American arrogance that spread it across the globe.

[u/robocoplawyer → u/therealruin]

I think they're referring to the infamous quote of one of the Project 2025 engineers that "the second American revolution will be bloodless, if the left allows it." or something along those lines. I think they mean that we're not going to sit back and take it.

[u/therealruin → u/robocoplawyer]

Another excellent point. Nothing happens in a bubble.

[u/onimush115 → u/therealruin]

The East Wing is a perfect example of this.