Trump’s claim of election fraud in California doesn’t even make sense
Trump’s claim of election fraud in California doesn’t even make sense
The president wants to convince people that any election Republicans don’t win is illegitimate. But his motivations may go even deeper.
Anyone who played youth sports knows the type: The whiny kid of marginal skill who constantly complained to the referee over imaginary fouls, then when they lost, shouted, “No fair! This is bull! We should have won!” We call that person a sore loser, and everyone generally dislikes them.
The president of the United States may be the sorest loser in the history of American politics, so much so that he starts his sore losing even before he has lost. With the votes still being counted after the California primaries, Trump went on one of his late-night posting whine-a-thons, saying the election was being stolen from his chosen candidates.
Imagine you spent the past year warning Americans about Donald Trump’s “creeping authoritarianism.” You described the president as “a wannabe dictator who is trying to take over cities and rule by instilling terror in the hearts of American people.” You noted that “he has single-handedly begun to dismantle our democracy.” If you believe such things about any president, then you should be against that president surreptitiously searching Americans’ communications without a warrant. This is especially so after a federal district court ruling last year that warrantless searches of Americans’ communications under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, are a clear violation of the privacy rights protected by the Fourth Amendment. (The ruling is currently pending appeal.)
It’s true that counting in California is going slowly — because it always does.
“The Dumocrats are at it again! They are trying to STEAL THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA PRIMARY, AND THE MAYOR OF LOS ANGELES, PRIMARY, AWAY FROM TWO GREAT REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES. Here we go with the very late and massive numbers of MAIL IN BALLOTS,” he typed (or shouted into his phone) just before 1 a.m. on Thursday. He followed that up a few minutes later with this: “There’s BIG cheating by the Dumocrats in California. Votes are all tied up. May not be in for weeks. Under investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles. Why the vote counting DELAY???”
There is, of course, no evidence of anything fraudulent happening, but what’s remarkable is that Trump’s favored candidates aren’t even losing. And the California “jungle primary” system — in which all candidates run together in the primary, and then the top two finishers go on to the general election regardless of party — gives Republicans an advantage they wouldn’t otherwise enjoy.
So what is Trump up to? On the surface, it seems like the latest iteration of an old story. Trump wants to convince people that any election Republicans don’t win is illegitimate. He’s making the argument preemptively before the results are complete, just in case things don’t go his way.
Play
Lawrence: Trump is a big loser in California and in CongressJune 4, 2026 / 06:43
But it may go even deeper than that. As his party faces tough headwinds as the midterm elections approach, followed by the end of his presidency two years later, the president seems convinced that all elections — and therefore democracy itself — are rotten to the core. Wouldn’t it be better if we just had a king? Like him?
It’s true that counting in California is going slowly — because it always does. California has more votes to count than any other state, by far. Most of its citizens vote by mail, and mail votes take longer to process, including verifying signatures and handling all that paper. In addition, under state law, a vote that is postmarked by Election Day but arrives up to seven days later still counts, because it isn’t the voter’s fault if the Postal Service moves a little slow. That means election officials have to wait for those straggling votes to arrive. As Eric McGhee, research director at the Public Policy Institute of California, told me, “California has always taken the position that it’s better to err on the side of access than to err on the side of speed.”
That’s not to say California couldn’t make its counting system more efficient; it could spend more money on election administration to enable overstretched registrars to hire more staff and buy more equipment.
“We ask a lot of registrars, but don’t necessarily give them the resources to pull it off quickly,” McGhee said. But a slow count is better than an inaccurate one.
When California went to a jungle primary after a voter referendum in 2010, some Republicans feared that in a state dominated by Democrats, they would get shut out of potentially winnable races when two Democrats made the general election. But it turned out that while there have been races for the state legislature and Congress in which the top two finishers were from one party, most of those have been in uncompetitive districts. And as a report from the Public Policy Institute of California found, “In eight November races, two candidates from the same party ran in a competitive district or a district that actually favored the other side. All but one of those races featured two Republicans.”
That can happen if there are just a couple of candidates from one party, but a lot of contenders from the other party, who split the vote multiple ways. That scenario is just one argument of many to be made against the jungle primary.
But in this primary — at least so far — Republicans are doing remarkably well in the vote. Steve Hilton, the former Fox News personality whom Trump endorsed in the governor’s race, is first in the count and looks headed for the general election. In the LA mayor contest, former reality show villain Spencer Pratt is in second place and stands a decent chance of making it to the general. In other words, both of the inexperienced MAGA TV himbos have been well served by the California system. So what is Trump complaining about?
Play
Trump plays dangerous game with ‘little Trump’ DNI pickJune 4, 2026 / 06:43
Trump’s effort to undermine elections is about more than whining; it’s a comprehensive assault on our electoral system. The administration has demanded that states turn over their voter files to the federal government, including sensitive information such as driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers, so Trump’s lackeys can decide who is and who isn’t eligible to vote. Not only that, the administration has demanded that it be given the authority to kick voters off the rolls; under the terms of the “confidential agreement” they are pushing states to sign, Trump’s Department of Justice would make a list of voters to have their ability to vote revoked, and states would have to comply. So far only Texas and Alaska have agreed to these terms; even some Republican states that turned over their voter rolls have balked at the demand that they cede authority to Trump over who can vote and who can’t.
In other words, Trump is attempting to seize control of the entire country’s elections so he can control who is allowed to vote. This is happening at a time when the MAGA-leaning Supreme Court has eviscerated the Voting Rights Act — and eviscerated the Voting Rights Act so aggressively that it looks like Black representation in Congress from the Deep South could be reduced down to zero for the first time since the end of Jim Crow.
Trump’s enemy isn’t voter fraud, which barely exists; after a decade of tireless effort, Republicans would have found it by now if it was more than a phantom. His enemy isn’t slow vote counting or mail-in ballots. It’s democracy, the ability of Americans to not only choose their leaders, but to limit what those leaders can do and hold them accountable when they commit misdeeds. That’s what Trump hates, and that’s what he’s trying to destroy.
More than 40 Democrats voted to let Trump spy on Americans. They might do it again.
Past administrations have repeatedly abused these spying powers in ways that should alarm anyone who cares about dissent, democracy or free speech.
Section 702 faces scrutiny over warrantless searches of Americans’ communications and privacy concerns under the Fourth Amendment.Carson Elm-Picard / MS NOW: FPG / Archive Photos via Getty Images
Jun. 4, 2026, 2:15 PM EDT
Imagine you spent the past year warning Americans about Donald Trump’s “creeping authoritarianism.” You described the president as “a wannabe dictator who is trying to take over cities and rule by instilling terror in the hearts of American people.” You noted that “he has single-handedly begun to dismantle our democracy.” If you believe such things about any president, then you should be against that president surreptitiously searching Americans’ communications without a warrant. This is especially so after a federal district court ruling last year that warrantless searches of Americans’ communications under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, are a clear violation of the privacy rights protected by the Fourth Amendment. (The ruling is currently pending appeal.)
Section 702 is a mass surveillance program Democratic and Republican presidents have abused.
But 42 Democrats, many of whom have called out Trump’s relentless abuses of power, are among the lawmakers who voted to let the president conduct such surveillance. And they might soon vote for it again. Reauthorization of Section 702, which is set to expire on June 12, is currently being debated on Capitol Hill.
Section 702 is a mass surveillance program Democratic and Republican presidents have abused. Spy agencies such as the FBI, CIA and National Security Agency use Section 702 to collect the communications of hundreds of thousands of people abroad. The government claims that only foreigners abroad can be “targeted” under this authority, but plenty of Americans keep in touch with family, friends, business contacts and others overseas. Virtually any text message, email, call or other communication with someone outside the U.S. could be swept up and accessed by the government without a warrant.
Past administrations have repeatedly abused these spying powers in ways that should alarm anyone who cares about dissent, democracy or free speech. Those administrations have improperly attempted to spy on peaceful protesters, federal and state lawmakers, congressional staff, campaign donors, journalists and even a judge reporting civil rights violations by local police. Opposition to unchecked warrantless surveillance under Section 702 has long united voices across the political spectrum. As House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, wrote in an April 2025 op-ed, “Until we pass a warrant requirement, the government’s powerful surveillance authorities will always be subject to abuse.”
Play
Brennan Center’s Elizabeth Goitein: ‘I worry that (FISA) abuses were the tip of the iceberg’June 4, 2026 / 08:41
The Trump administration’s actions only heighten these concerns. White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller has repeatedly called for investigations of Americans who criticize the government, and he advocates for extending this authority without any reforms. Miller’s history and his views on FISA should set off alarms for anyone who claims to fear the government abusing its power, but it should especially alarm the Democrats who have taken issue with Trump weaponizing executive power to prosecute his political opponents.
Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee and a leading proponent of reauthorization, has suggested that he would know “pretty much in real time” if Trump were to abuse the spy program. The government’s record suggests otherwise. Over the last two years, the FBI failed to track all of its searches for U.S. persons’ communications, as the law requires. That means many of these intrusive queries were never even audited, so we don’t know if any misconduct occurred as a result. And this isn’t just an FBI problem. Recent reporting shows serious oversight problems continue to plague the NSA and CIA as well.
Congress should be demanding answers to multiple questions before extending this authority for another day, much less multiple years.
Section 702 defenders are quick to say we should trust the safeguards. But the safeguards haven’t prevented the litany of abuses we have already seen, and over the last year, the Trump administration dismantled the few safeguards that existed. The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board has been gutted. The watchdog for the Department of Justice was accused by a whistleblower of ignoring 20 instances of possible wrongdoing. The FBI closed an office credited with helping reduce improper Section 702 searches.
More broadly, the court’s oversight is only as strong as the information the government provides. Section 702 depends on the Justice Department and intelligence agencies accurately describing how this power is being used, whether safeguards are working and when violations occur.
Congress should be demanding answers to multiple questions before extending this authority for another day, much less multiple years: How are artificial intelligence systems being used in conjunction with Section 702? Have domestic agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement asked the FBI to run searches for Americans’ communications? Has such authority been used in connection with the administration’s efforts to target activists and nonprofits under the banner of “domestic terrorism”?
Play
Democrats threaten FISA renewal over Pulte DNI nomination: Punchbowl NewsJune 4, 2026 / 08:41
The 42 Democrats who support reauthorization need to explain who in Trump’s administration they trust with this power. FBI Director Kash Patel, whose agents are reportedly searching FBI databases to investigate journalists he doesn’t like? Andrew Bailey, the deputy director of the FBI, who oversaw a raid of the election headquarters in Fulton County, Georgia? Under Section 702 the deputy director is responsible for approving “sensitive searches” such as those targeting elected officials, political candidates and journalists.
May you like
Do these Democrats trust Bill Pulte, who Trump has just named acting director of national intelligence? Pulte is the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency. He has no intelligence experience. As director of the FHFA, he sent criminal referrals to the Justice Department targeting the president’s political enemies, including a sitting senator, a state attorney general and a sitting Federal Reserve governor. Are these Democrats trusting a Department of Justice whose mission seems to have become prosecuting those the president perceives as his political enemies?
The White House can’t ram through an extension of Section 702 without Democrats’ support. Although these 42 House Democrats voted to hand Section 702’s dangerous spying powers to Trump for what would amount to the rest of his time in office, the Senate last month approved only a 45-day extension. That means there is still an opportunity for our representatives to use their power to enact real safeguards, including a warrant requirement. Congress must act to stop Trump — as they should want to stop any president — from getting a blank check to spy on Americans.
