The Constitution Forbids This

Trump Is Going to Try Anyway

By Dr. John Petrone

The Constitution forbids what Donald Trump and his allies are preparing to do.

And he is going to try anyway.

That is the defining danger of this moment. The threat is no longer abstract or theoretical. It is not about what the law allows. It is about whether constitutional limits still function when a president openly signals his willingness to violate them in pursuit of power.

What is taking shape right now is a coordinated effort to use executive authority, emergency declarations, and federal enforcement mechanisms to interfere with and potentially override state control of the upcoming midterm elections. The plan does not depend on winning legal arguments. It depends on acting first and forcing the country to react later.

This is how constitutional systems are stress tested. Too often, they fail not because the law is unclear, but because enforcement lags behind ambition.

The Strategy Is Not New

Authoritarian strategies follow patterns. They always have.

First, delegitimize the system.
Second, manufacture a crisis.
Third, claim extraordinary authority to resolve the crisis.
Finally, frame resistance as disloyalty or obstruction.

Trump has spent years insisting that American elections are inherently corrupt unless he wins. Courts rejected his claims. Recounts disproved them. Audits reinforced the results. But losing on the facts did not end the effort. It simply shifted the timeline.

Instead of contesting outcomes after elections occur, the goal now is to shape the rules, administration, and enforcement mechanisms before voters ever cast ballots.

That shift is critical. It reveals intent.

This is not about correcting past wrongs. It is about preventing future accountability.

What Is Being Discussed Right Now

Trump allies are openly circulating plans to invoke national emergency powers tied to alleged election threats. The stated justification varies, but the objective remains consistent. Centralize authority over elections under the executive branch.

Under this framework, federal agencies could attempt to impose restrictions on voting methods, intervene in ballot handling, pressure state election officials, or assert control over election infrastructure under the guise of security.

None of this requires proof of wrongdoing. Emergency powers are not triggered by evidence. They are triggered by declarations.

Once declared, the burden shifts. States are forced to resist. Courts are forced to respond. Confusion becomes the environment in which power operates.

That confusion is not a byproduct. It is the strategy.

What the Constitution Actually Says

The Constitution is explicit about elections.

States administer them. Congress may regulate limited aspects. The president has no unilateral authority to nationalize, suspend, or control elections.

Emergency powers do not override the Constitution. They do not grant the executive branch the ability to rewrite federalism. They do not allow a president to insert himself into election administration because he distrusts voters.

There is no legal pathway for this. None.

Which is precisely why legality is not the point.

Trump does not need constitutional authority to attempt this. He only needs time, hesitation, and fragmented resistance.

Why Illegality Does Not Prevent Attempt

This is where many people misunderstand how democratic backsliding works.

Unconstitutional actions do not fail automatically. They fail only when institutions respond quickly and decisively.

Courts move slowly. Injunctions take time. Appeals stretch for months. Meanwhile, executive actions can be implemented immediately. Even temporary interference can alter turnout, sow doubt, and weaken trust.

Once voters believe elections are manipulated, participation drops. Once officials fear retaliation, compliance fractures. Once chaos becomes normalized, power consolidates.

By the time a ruling arrives, the damage is often already done.

This is why authoritarians act first. They rely on the lag between action and accountability.

Why Midterms Are the Target

Midterm elections are designed to limit executive power. They are a referendum. A corrective mechanism. A warning system.

That is why they are dangerous to those who govern without consent.

A leader confident in public support does not try to control elections. A leader who fears voters always does.

This effort is not about one cycle. It is about whether elections remain a check on power or become something power manages.

Once that line is crossed, the concept of representative government becomes hollow.

The Silence Is Not Accidental

This should be treated as an immediate constitutional crisis. Instead, it is being discussed cautiously, hedged with language, and framed as speculative.

That restraint is enabling.

Every day this threat is minimized, the window for early resistance narrows. The longer institutions wait, the harder it becomes to stop an action once it is underway.

History does not reward democracies for calm. It rewards them for clarity.

How We Fight Back

First, we name this clearly. It is unconstitutional. There is no gray area.

Second, state leaders must assert their authority now. Governors and secretaries of state must make clear they will not comply with unlawful federal interference.

Third, Congress must treat emergency power abuse as an immediate threat, not a future talking point.

Fourth, election protection efforts must begin now. Litigation, oversight, public pressure, and monitoring cannot wait until Election Day.

And finally, we document everything.

This publication exists to record what is happening as it unfolds, before it can be denied, reframed, or rewritten. If you are reading this and are not subscribed, now is the moment. Not for commentary. For accountability.

The Constitution forbids this.
He is going to try anyway.

P.S. Release All of the Epstein Files Now!