RIGGED BY DESIGN

Episode 16 — Show NotesAired: April 23, 2026

Due to CNN’s reporting on what’s now being referred to as “Rape Academy,” this episode pivoted early from the original topic, because there are moments where what’s in front of you is too significant to ignore. What’s being exposed is not fringe behavior sitting on the edges of society. It is happening at a scale that should force a reckoning, yet somehow it isn’t.

We’re talking about networks of men openly sharing tactics on how to drug women, how to sexually exploit them, how to record it, and how to profit from it. Not hidden in the way people like to imagine these things exist, but normalized within spaces that continue to operate without meaningful disruption.

Inside ICE detention centers, reports of sexual abuse involving women and children continue to surface. These are not new allegations. They have been documented, raised, dismissed, buried, and then repeated over years. The pattern is not subtle, and it is not isolated. Sexual abuse is an act of violence — point blank. Stripping it down to anything less is a deliberate minimization of what is actually happening.

During the same period as the CNN report, platforms continue to elevate and normalize the very culture that feeds this — rape culture. You now have figures like Andrew Tate not pushed to the margins, but given space, visibility, and in many cases, monetization. The manosphere isn’t some abstract corner of the internet anymore. It is being absorbed into mainstream platforms and treated as just another perspective.

So the episode starts here, not because it is comfortable, but because it is necessary. Because ignoring it is not neutrality, it is participation in the silence that allows it to continue. At some point, you have to sit with what is being allowed to exist in plain sight and stop asking whether it’s real, and start asking why it is still being allowed to happen.

As Congress reconvenes, the question of priorities becomes unavoidable. While systemic abuse, exploitation, and violence continue in plain sight, the focus shifts to symbolic actions and procedural movement, creating the appearance of governance without addressing the substance of what is unfolding. Surveillance expands, policies move forward, and power consolidates, yet the issues that demand confrontation remain largely untouched. What is addressed, what is delayed, and what is ignored altogether reflects a system that manages narrative as much as it manages policy.

Upcoming — Join Us

Episode 17: We are continuing this conversation on Wednesday, April 22, 2026 at 10:05 a.m. PST / 1:05 p.m. EST with our special guest Jenn Budd former Border Patrol agent turned whistleblower, bringing insider context to the systems we began unpacking during our livestream.

Episode 18: On Thursday, April 23, 2026 at 10:05 a.m. PST / 1:05 p.m. EST, we shift into elections with This Will Hold, focusing on Michigan and continuing the broader investigation into systemic vulnerabilities and data concerns.

Thank you to everyone who tuned into into Rigged by Design with Jason and me.

Truth doesn’t come in neutral — Zorha.

If this work matters to you, support it.

Subscribe to Jason or me as we continue documenting what others rush past or refuse to touch. This isn’t content for the sake of content. It’s ongoing, time-intensive work that requires digging, verifying, and staying on stories long after they fall out of the news cycle.

If you’re able to support this work, consider becoming a paid subscriber. If a subscription isn’t feasible, you can still help support independent reporting with a one-time Buy Me a Coffee contribution.

RIGGED BY DESIGN

Episode 15 — Show Notes

Aired: April 10, 2026

Opening — Accountability Before Narrative

The episode opened with a direct correction from the prior broadcast. A claim that U.S. oil reserves would last two years was revised to a more accurate estimate of roughly 90 to 125 days. The previous episode was intentionally withheld until that correction could be made on record. That decision reflects a core principle behind the show. If something is wrong, it is addressed publicly before moving forward. In a media environment where narratives are often adjusted without acknowledgment, the act of correction becomes part of the argument itself. Verification still matters, even when systems around it do not operate that way.

Segment 1 — The Two-Week Cycle and Manufactured Time

A midweek announcement of a two-week pause in bombing Iran did not land as new information, but as repetition. The language, the timing, and the structure mirrored a pattern used repeatedly over time. Policies, infrastructure, and decisions are always just two weeks away. The deadline never resolves. It simply resets. Within hours of the announcement, activity on the ground contradicted the pause, reinforcing that the timeline itself is not the point. The point is maintaining attention without closure. This pattern creates a controlled sense of anticipation, where the public is kept waiting rather than informed. The result is not confusion by accident, but a steady manipulation of how time is experienced politically.

Segment 2 — Market Movement Behind the Messaging

Attention shifted from the announcement itself to what surrounded it. A public statement highlighting a defense company’s capabilities coincided with a noticeable movement in its stock trajectory. This raised a more important question than the statement itself. Who positioned themselves before the message was made public? The pattern is familiar. Instability suppresses value, insiders move early, and public narratives drive recovery. While the public reacts to headlines, others respond to timing. The broader implication is that moments framed as crisis often operate simultaneously as financial opportunity, with the benefits flowing in one direction while the costs are distributed across everyone else.

Segment 3 — When the System Hits the Grocery Store

The conversation moved from macro systems into daily life, grounding the discussion in rising costs. Food, utilities, and basic goods have increased at a rate that no longer feels temporary. What was once explained as supply chain disruption now reflects something more permanent. Margins have expanded and are not being reversed. The system does not correct itself once pressure subsides. It recalibrates at a higher baseline. In response, behavior begins to shift. Gardening, food independence, and small acts of self-sufficiency are not lifestyle choices in this context. They are adaptations. When people begin finding ways around a system rather than within it, that signals a deeper loss of trust.

Segment 4 — Gaslighting as a System

Gaslighting was identified not as a one-off tactic, but as a layered system operating at different speeds. In its faster form, it replaces observable reality outright. Numbers are revised, narratives are flipped, and contradictions are presented as fact in real time. In its slower form, it works through repetition and subtle shifts, gradually altering what was said and what was meant. The repeated two-week cycle fits into this slower layer, where each iteration slightly rewrites the previous one. Over time, the ability to compare past and present weakens. The goal is not necessarily belief, but disorientation. Once people can no longer anchor themselves to what actually happened, accountability becomes almost impossible to enforce.

Segment 5 — Political Shift and Generational Pressure

The discussion challenged the idea that political responsibility rests solely with older generations. Younger voters are not only present but actively shaping the direction of conversations, particularly around healthcare, corruption, and financial influence in politics. As more voters enter the system, expectations are shifting toward candidates who operate without apology. Traditional funding structures are being rejected in favor of direct, transparent positioning. This shift is less about ideology and more about threshold. A growing segment of voters is no longer willing to accept incremental change when structural issues remain unresolved.

Segment 6 — “Fake Counts” and the Limits of Certification

A warning about potential manipulation of vote counts introduced a contradiction that cannot easily be ignored. Language like fake counts does not exist alongside full confidence in electoral systems without tension. At the same time, efforts to verify results continue to be blocked under the premise that certification finalizes the process. This creates a closed loop where outcomes are declared valid, but cannot be independently confirmed. The distinction becomes critical. Certification is procedural. Verification is evidentiary. When one replaces the other, trust is no longer built on proof, but on acceptance.

Segment 7 — Social Security and the Manufactured Crisis

The conversation returned to structural imbalance within Social Security. The current system caps taxable income, meaning contributions stop at a certain threshold regardless of how much more is earned. This design places a disproportionate burden on those below the cap while limiting contributions from those above it. At the same time, narratives around insolvency continue to build, framing the system as unsustainable. The concern is not just the imbalance itself, but where it leads. When a system is allowed to weaken without structural correction, it creates the conditions to argue that replacement is the only viable solution.

Closing — The Loop

What appears as separate issues such as foreign conflict, rising prices, shifting narratives, and structural policy gaps operates within a repeating loop. Disruption captures attention, messaging reshapes perception, time resets expectations, and the cycle begins again. The system does not rely on resolution. It relies on continuation. The longer the loop runs, the harder it becomes to distinguish between what is happening and what is being presented as happening.

Thank you to everyone who tuned into into Rigged by Design with Jason and me. Join us for my next live video in the app on April 16, 2026 at 10:05 a.m. PST / 1:05 p.m. EST.

Truth doesn’t come in neutral — Zorha.

If this work matters to you, subscribe to Jason and me as we keep documenting what others rush past or refuse to touch.

Support is never expected, but always appreciated. Subscriptions and Buy Me a Coffeehelp keep this work independent, accessible, and ongoing. All core reporting remains free — support simply helps me keep digging.

This week we tried something a little different. Instead of leading with the headlines, we started with the systems underneath them — the ones shaping behavior, biology, and outcomes before most people realize anything is happening.

It looks like four separate topics. It isn’t.

Behavior: Inside the Manosphere (Netflix)

Jason assigned this one as homework, and it delivered. What stands out most watching Inside the Manosphere isn’t the individual influencers — it’s how deliberately the ecosystem is built. The monetization model rewards outrage and identity reinforcement. Platforms optimize for engagement, and rage-baiting misogyny generates engagement. None of this is organic. It is engineered through repetition and reward loops, and it is targeting boys as young as 15 whose prefrontal cortexes are not yet fully developed.

The moment that hit hardest was the mother near the end — the one defending her son’s content as performance, not belief. The lack of accountability there is its own lesson. You don’t get to disclaim the behavior you allowed and encouraged.

The through-line to everything else this week: young men are being shaped by a system most of them can’t see, and can’t name.

Biology: Plastics Detox (Netflix)

Microplastics are now being found in human blood, organs, and reproductive tissue. Declining sperm counts are being studied in connection with exposure levels. In a small preliminary study — six couples, not a peer-reviewed clinical trial, worth flagging clearly — all participants who detoxed their homes from plastics were able to conceive after three months of attempting without success.

The regulatory contrast is worth sitting with: the EU has banned hundreds of plastic compounds. The United States has banned two. The U.S. approach is reactive — wait until harm is proven and visible. The EU approach is precautionary — restrict until safety is established. Same materials, different rules, different outcomes. And the reason for the gap is the same reason it’s always the same reason: the cost of changing is borne by corporations, and corporations have lobbyists.

You don’t have to see a system to be affected by it.

Policy Architecture: Stephen Miller and Plyler v. Doe

The New Republic published a piece on March 24th worth reading in full. On the surface, the Trump administration appears to be pulling back on the visibility of mass deportations — White House chief of staff Suzie Wiles reportedly now views the optics as a midterm liability. But underneath that messaging shift, Miller has been quietly meeting with Texas state legislators and floating the elimination of public school funding for undocumented children.

This is a direct challenge to Plyler v. Doe, the 1982 Supreme Court ruling that held denying public education based on immigration status violates the 14th Amendment’s equal protection guarantee. The goal isn’t just education policy. The goal is to use immigration as a crowbar against the 14th Amendment more broadly — connecting to the birthright citizenship executive order, to tiered citizenship, and to what legal scholars quoted in the piece describe as the construction of a permanent subclass.

The public messaging is pulling back. The structural project is accelerating. These are not the same thing.

System vs. Narrative: Dr. J. Alex Halderman

Halderman is a cybersecurity professor at the University of Michigan who has spent years documenting real, exploitable vulnerabilities in voting machine systems — and who has also been clear, consistently, that identifying vulnerabilities is not the same as proving manipulation occurred. His sealed report in the Georgia Dominion lawsuit found security red flags. It explicitly did not conclude the 2020 election was stolen.

What happened to his work is its own lesson in how technical findings get processed by a polarized media environment: one side dismissed the vulnerabilities entirely, the other treated them as proof of theft. Neither is accurate. The honest read is that the systems have weaknesses serious enough to warrant scrutiny, hand verification, and transparency and that the resistance to that scrutiny is itself worth examining.

This connects directly to the Trifecta Files.

Trifecta Files Update

Part 1 is published. It covers Pennsylvania, Nevada, and Georgia — three states where the congressional results deserve the same scrutiny we’ve been applying to the presidential race. Part 2 covers Michigan, California, and Texas and is in progress.

Pennsylvania remains the epicenter. It delivered one of the two Senate seats that completed the Republican trifecta. The numbers in that race, and the conditions around it — ballot challenges, procedural suppression, a governor who has shown no appetite for examination — don’t add up cleanly.

If you have data, CVRs, or sourced information from any of these states, send it over.

Thank you Lizzy B, Sue O', Becky in Fla 💜, Dina b Porter and many others for tuning into Rigged by Design with Jason and me. Join us for my next live video in the app on April 3, 2026 at 10:05 a.m. PST / 1:05 p.m. EST.

Truth doesn’t come in neutral — Zorha.

If this work matters to you, subscribe to Jason and me as we keep documenting what others rush past or refuse to touch.

Support is never expected, but always appreciated. Subscriptions and Buy Me a Coffee help keep this work independent, accessible, and ongoing. All core reporting remains free — support simply helps me keep digging.

Source receipts:

“Trump Throws Stephen Miller Under the Bus in Surprise Show of Panic” — The New Republic / Greg Sargent, March 24, 2026:

“University of Michigan Professor Embroiled in Georgia Election Lawsuit” — WDIV / Grant Hermes, January 28, 2022

Inside the Manosphere — Netflix documentary

Plastics Detox — Netflix documentary

Note on the plastics segment: the fertility study discussed involved six couples and does not meet the threshold for a peer-reviewed clinical study. It is cited here as preliminary and directional.

Rigged by Design is now available on Apple Podcasts for those who prefer to listen.

Episode 11 felt like one of our strongest conversations yet.

Jason and I started with the Trifecta Files investigation — not just the presidency, but the congressional races that actually determine how power gets exercised. Because without the House and Senate, nothing moves.

From there, the conversation shifted into something just as important but less talked about how money flows through elections at every level, including local races. That’s where we brought in the discussion around Illinois and the growing influence of crypto and outside funding.

At one point, I admitted I don’t fully understand “cyber money,” which honestly made the conversation better. Because the real issue isn’t mastering the technology but understanding how it’s being used.

We also moved into the Iranian crisis, including questions being raised about a girls’ school that was bombed and whether modern targeting systems — potentially supported by AI — are relying on outdated or flawed data.

And later in the episode, we took a step back and talked about something just as critical: how quickly misleading narratives can spread, especially when information is repackaged and presented as something it’s not.

Different topics, but the same underlying question kept coming up:

Who controls the systems — and who verifies them?

We didn’t cover everything. We never do.

But we connected enough dots to make it worth the conversation.

Many thanks to Judith Gray, Jordan Greaney, Dina b Porter, Viva Democracy and many others for tuning into Rigged by Design with Jason and me. Join us for our next live video in the app on March 19, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. PST / 1:00 p.m. EST.

Truth doesn’t come in neutral — Zorha.

If this work matters to you, subscribe to Jason and me as we keep documenting what others rush past or refuse to touch.

Support is never expected, but always appreciated. Subscriptions and Buy Me a Coffeehelp keep this work independent, accessible, and ongoing. All core reporting remains free — support simply helps me keep digging.

Source referenced:

Qasim Rashid – Substack Note on Illinois elections and crypto influence

This episode began with Social Security projections and expanded into DAC eligibility, administrative pressure, federal voter data access, Project 2025, recount efforts, and concerns about national election control.

Social Security Trust Fund — 2033 / 2034 Projection

The episode opened with discussion of the projected Social Security trust fund depletion date — cited as 2033 or 2034 depending on the study referenced.

Clarification made on air:

* This does not mean checks stop.

* It means the trust fund would contain IOUs rather than liquid funds.

* Congress has borrowed from the trust fund for decades, replacing funds with government bonds (IOUs).

The Social Security wage cap was also discussed:

* Contributions are capped (approx. $174,000 referenced in discussion).

DAC (Disabled Adult Child) Benefits

Official SSA DAC information:

http://policy.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0300203040

This is not the public-facing summary page. It is the internal SSA policy manual used to interpret and apply eligibility rules.

Points stated on air:

* Disability must occur before age 22.

* Parent or step-parent must be receiving Social Security.

* DAC does not operate under the same income limits as SSI.

* Administrative staff attempted to apply a support requirement that was argued to be incorrect for DAC eligibility.

The POMS manual was referenced because it is harder to locate through a basic search and reflects the actual rule interpretation used by SSA staff.

Administrative Pressure & AI Concerns

Discussion included:

* Difficulty qualifying for disability.

* Phone calls encouraging return to work despite permanent disability.

* Concern that AI systems may be used to automate benefit determinations and denials.

Minnesota — Hand Counts vs Machine Counts

Irregularities in Minnesota were mentioned, despite Minnesota voting blue.

Election Truth Alliance Report:

https://electiontruthalliance.org/new-special-report-minnesota-hand-counts-vs-machine-counts/

Uploaded Minnesota ETA PDF (referenced):

Minnesota Secretary of State 2024 Precinct Results Spreadsheet:

Nebraska Voter Data Case

We discussed reporting that Nebraska will hand over sensitive voter data — including dates of birth, addresses, and partial Social Security numbers — to the U.S. Department of Justice after losing a court case.

Article referenced:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/nebraska-hand-over-sensitive-voter-223440902ccc.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=ma

The DOJ has filed suits seeking voter roll access in multiple states.

Project 2025 — National Control Concern

Project 2025 was referenced in relation to concerns about elections being run under a more centralized national framework.

The discussion connected:

* Federal voter data access

* Enforcement structure

* National influence over systems that interact with elections

The broader concern raised: when control over data and enforcement shifts, public trust can erode.

Jason’s Letter to Michigan Officials

Referenced on air:

Jason wrote to the Michigan Attorney General, Secretary of State, and Governor requesting review and hand-count verification of select precincts.

Letter:

Key point made:

If elections are free and fair, a limited hand recount should not be controversial.

22-Month Ballot Retention Timeline

It was stated that states must retain ballots for 22 months, with the retention period ending September 2026.

This timeline was cited as a reason for pushing recount efforts now.

This Will Hold — Recount Effort

Petition referenced during the episode:

* Initially for Wisconsin

* Mentioned as potentially including Michigan

* Signature count cited around 1,900 at the time of discussion

Petition:

https://www.thepetitionsite.com/160/567/279/petition-for-hand-count-audits-in-wisconsin/

Anyone may sign.

State-Level Leverage — Related Reading

We discussed leveraging states as a mechanism for accountability.

Related article exploring state-level legislative approaches:

Christopher Armitage — Four Laws To End The Fascist Madness

This article outlines proposed state-based legislative responses concerning election protection and federal accountability.

Pam Bondi Segment — Market vs Accountability

Pam Bondi’s congressional exchange was discussed, including:

* Deflection to stock market performance.

* Exchange with Jamie Raskin.

* Visual observation that she would not look at a victim during testimony.

Referenced commentary:

Discussion contrasted lack of U.S. consequences with investigations occurring in Europe.

Closing Position

What we were really circling today is this: when people start feeling like the safety net is unstable and elections are negotiable, something deeper shifts.

It’s not just about a trust fund projection or a ballot challenge number. It’s about whether institutions feel steady. Because if Social Security can feel like it’s being drained, and voter data can feel like it’s being centralized, and enforcement can feel political, then people start asking a very basic question — what exactly am I participating in? That’s where legitimacy starts to wobble.

And that’s why I keep coming back to the states where authority still exists. If we want accountability, it isn’t going to arrive from Washington but come from pressure applied where leverage still lives.

That’s the throughline.

Thank you Kami, Dina b Porter, Patricia A. Burgemeister, and many others for tuning into Rigged by Design with Jason and me. Join us for our next live video in the app on Feb 19, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. PST / 1:00 p.m. EST.

Truth doesn’t come in neutral — Zorha.

If this work matters to you, subscribe to Jason and me as we keep documenting what others rush past or refuse to touch.

Support is never expected, but always appreciated. Subscriptions and Buy Me a Coffee help keep this work independent, accessible, and ongoing. All core reporting remains free — support simply helps me keep digging.

This episode started a little rough on my end. Jason joined a few minutes late. There was background noise in my house. While trying to pause and pivot, I accidentally disconnected the first livestream. We restarted, recalibrated, and kept going.

I am naming that upfront because this was the conversation. Chaos was not theoretical but showed up in real time and in real life while you were trying to think, speak, organize, and stay coherent. That was exactly what this episode was about.

Once we got settled, we focused on how chaos functions as a governing strategy right now. We talked about the 2024 election and the road to the midterms. We discussed Epstein document dumps without adjudication, ICE funding theater that does not interrupt enforcement, and the constant deferral of accountability to the next election.

Jason shared that Greg Palast’s “Vigilante Inc.” documentary hit him hard this week. It detailed voter suppression tactics, including a woman in Marjorie Taylor Greene’s district who was able to challenge over 30,000 ballots in Georgia. We discussed how these suppression methods extended to Michigan, where 63,000 mail-in ballots were challenged in a state Trump allegedly won by only 80,000 votes.

We also raised the RNC/DNC hack from years ago. Both parties were hacked, but only DNC information was released. We discussed how prominent Republicans like Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz went from publicly opposing Trump to becoming his staunchest defenders almost overnight after that hack occurred. The pattern suggests blackmail as a governing mechanism, not just chaos.

Roger Stone’s name came up as well. Jason noted Stone has been “quite quiet as of lately” despite his central role in Trump’s political operations and early Q conspiracy manipulation. This connects to the broader pattern: instrumental architects fade from view while chaos keeps attention scattered across multiple fronts.

We also spoke about how Democratic officials are responding to analysis from groups like Election Truth Alliance. Not by engaging the methods, but by dismissing the data as not evidence. Often the response is to suggest that anyone raising questions about 2024 sounds like the 2020 crowd. That comparison itself became part of the discussion being used to shut down scrutiny without actually addressing machines, verification barriers, or precinct level patterns.

We reviewed where power still moves such as California being allowed to proceed with redistricting matters because it shows what structural action looks like at the state level. Actual leverage. Additionally, we spoke about the potential for states to do more to support their people.

This was not a polished episode. It was a real one. If things feel overwhelming or fragmented right now, that is not a personal failure. It is the environment we are operating in.

Do not rank the crises but notice why they are never allowed to resolve.

Articles discussed / promised in the livestream:

California redistricting ruling (state-level structural leverage, not a victory lap):

https://abc7.com/post/supreme-court-allows-new-california-congressional-districts-favor-democrats/18542247/

Michigan article Jason raised (officials pushing back on 2024 doubts and dismissing data through “familiar claims”):

https://michiganadvance.com/2026/01/30/disputed-data-familiar-claims-michigan-officials-push-back-on-2024-election-doubts/

Thank you Wolfgang Mehrmann, Tamera Cunningham, Patricia A. Burgemeister, Sherry@theresnobodytoblame, - - and many others for tuning into Rigged by Design with Jason! Join us for our next live video in the app on Feb 12, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. PST / 1:00 p.m. EST.

Truth doesn’t come in neutral — Zorha.

If this work matters to you, subscribe to Jason and me as we keep documenting what others rush past or refuse to touch.

Support is never expected, but always appreciated. Subscriptions and Buy Me a Coffee help keep this work independent, accessible, and ongoing. All core reporting remains free — support simply helps me keep digging.

Thank you Lis Soderberg, Becky 💜, Twyla 🇨🇦, DEBORAH, MisterFuzzyGuy, MS Kohut and many others for tuning into Rigged by Design with Jason and me.

This episode examined how enforcement is stalled, verification is structurally blocked, and narrative control increasingly happens upstream before the public ever sees the facts. We talked through these issues as a live conversation rather than a case briefing, focusing on how systems function in practice and how power is preserved through procedure, timing, and narrative framing.

We experienced intermittent signal and Wi-Fi disruptions during the livestream. Despite this, the conversation remained intact and on track.

We also discussed expanding Rigged by Design to include Tuesday guest conversations, separate from our regular livestream. As part of that format, we mentioned upcoming conversations with Blayne Ashleigh and Anthony Christian as part of that Tuesday format. Scheduling is still being finalized, and details will be shared once confirmed. Please watch for notifications.

We’ll be live again for the next episode of Rigged by Design on Feb 5, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. PST / 1:00 p.m. EST.

Truth doesn’t come in neutral — Zorha.

If this work matters to you, subscribe to Jason and me as we keep documenting what others rush past or refuse to touch.

Support is never expected, but always appreciated. Subscriptions and Buy Me a Coffee help keep this work independent, accessible, and ongoing. All core reporting remains free — support simply helps me keep digging.

Thank you Denise Hofland, Dina b Porter, and many others for tuning into Rigged by Design with Jason and me.

As promised, below are the documents referenced during Episode 4, listed in the order we discussed them, with brief context for how each fits into the conversation.

This episode focused on how courts, deadlines, and jurisdiction are used to block verification — across criminal oversight and elections alike.

1. January 21, 2026 Federal Court Ruling (Epstein Files – Lack of Jurisdiction)

A federal judge ruled that the court lacks jurisdiction to grant Congress’s request to oversee or compel DOJ action related to the Epstein files. This ruling set the frame for the episode: courts acknowledging concern while refusing authority to act.

Case: United States v. Ghislaine MaxwellCourt: U.S. District Court, Southern District of New YorkJudge: Paul A. EngelmayerDate: January 21, 2026

Coverage:

CourtHouse News summary:https://www.courthousenews.com/trumps-doj-wins-bid-to-ice-congressmen-out-of-ghislaine-maxwell-case/

This ruling dismissed Congress’s request procedurally, without reaching the merits.

2. Smart Legislation v. Rockland County, New York (Jurisdictional Dismissal)

A New York court dismissed a challenge brought by Smart Legislation, the litigation arm of Smart Elections, on jurisdictional grounds without reviewing the evidence.

Smart Elections has appealed this ruling. We discussed this case as a parallel to the January 21 decision—different issue, same procedural shutdown.

Case: Smart Legislation v. Rockland County Board of ElectionsCourt: New York Supreme Court (trial level)

Smart Elections case page (includes appeal notice):https://smartelections.us

The judge ruled that the plaintiff lacked standing, and the case was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds. This does not reflect a ruling on the underlying evidence.

3. Ballot Retention vs. Recount Access

(Federal Requirement, State Lockouts

Federal law requires all states to preserve ballots and election records for 22 months after a federal election.

Federal statute: 52 U.S.C. § 20701https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/52/20701

Michigan was discussed as a concrete example of how this preservation requirement collides with state law: ballots are retained, but a presidential recount must be requested within a 48-hour window after certification, and only the candidate has standing to act.

Michigan recount statute: MCL 168.879 (Download PDF Section)https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-168-879

This illustrates retention without access and how certification deadlines end inquiry even when ballots still exist.

4. USPS Postmarking Policy Change (National Impact)

The U.S. Postal Service has changed how postmarks are applied, dating mail when it is processed, not when it is mailed.

We discussed how this policy applies nationally, not just in California, and how it shifts risk onto voters by making timely mailing harder to prove—especially when combined with court challenges to ballot-counting rules.

Coverage of the USPS change and its election impact:

San Francisco Chronicle (Bob Egelko, Jan. 20, 2026):

5. California Cases: Gerrymandering and Vote Counting Before the Supreme Court

a) California Redistricting / Racial Gerrymandering Challenge (Ruled)Before turning to mail-in ballot counting, we discussed a case brought by Republican plaintiffs challenging California’s use of race in redistricting.

A federal court rejected the challenge, allowing California’s maps to proceed.

CBS News summary of the ruling of Prop 50:https://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-can-proceed-with-redrawn-congressional-maps/

SCOTUSblog on Republicans’ emergency filing:https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/01/california-republicans-urge-supreme-court-to-strike-congressional-map-as-racially-discriminatory/

(Response expected on Jan. 29, 2026.)

b) Vote Counting / Post-Election Litigation (Standing Case – Ruled)We then discussed the Supreme Court decision that turns elections into legal battlegrounds after the fact by expanding who has standing to sue over election rules.

Case: Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections

Supreme Court opinion (Jan. 14, 2026):https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-568_gfbh.pdf

Cornell Law summary:https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/24-568

This ruling does not change vote-counting rules itself, but it opens the door to litigation challenging how states count ballots.

c) Mail-In Ballot Deadline Case (Accepted for Review)We also discussed the Supreme Court’s agreement to hear a case that could limit states’ ability to count mail-in ballots received after Election Day, even if mailed on time.

Case: Watson v. Republican National Committeehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watson_v._Republican_National_Committee

This case is pending, but its acceptance alone signals increased judicial scrutiny of vote-by-mail systems.

These are the primary sources referenced during the livestream and are provided to document the mechanics discussed and to show how verification is structurally constrained.

We had a smaller group this week, as Jack Smith was live during the same time slot. I expect we’ll be inundated with hot takes over the next 12 hours. Jason and I will address his testimony next week, but it’s hard to ignore how moments like this add more noise to an already chaotic information environment.

We’ll be live again for the next episode of Rigged by Design on January 29, 2026 at 10:00 a.m PST / 1:00 p.m. EST.

Truth doesn’t come in neutral — Zorha.

If this work matters to you, subscribe to Jason and me as we keep documenting what others rush past or refuse to touch.

Support is never expected, but always appreciated. Subscriptions and Buy Me a Coffee help keep this work independent, accessible, and ongoing. All core reporting remains free — support simply helps me keep digging.

Thank you Wolfgang Mehrmann, Randy S. Eisenberg, LindsayPG, Dina b Porter, and many others for tuning into Rigged by Design with Jason and me.

As promised, here are the three documents referenced in Episode 3:

1. DOJ Use-of-Force PolicyThis is the standard ICE is required to follow.

2. 2024 Election Bomb Threat Tracker (Brennan Center for Justice)227 documented bomb threats targeting election offices and polling locations, concentrated in swing states.

3. ETA Michigan Election Analysis (Wayne County)This report details precinct-level anomalies discussed during the livestream.

These are the primary sources discussed during the livestream.

We’ll be live again on Thursday, January 22 at 10:00 a.m. PST / 1:00 p.m. EST.

Our first “Rigged by Design” series live episode.

We started with Tennessee and followed the pattern outward. You can’t talk about a fast-tracked certification in isolation without confronting the broader mechanics: public gaslighting, votes that don’t simply disappear, Michigan’s flip and why it hurts, and how other countries—like France—can investigate power in ways the United States structurally cannot.

What this became wasn’t a neat breakdown, but a real conversation about normalization, institutional limits, and who benefits from pretending these are isolated events instead of a system doing exactly what it was built to do. Spoiler: our current political structure does not benefit the people it claims to represent.

Thank you Lynn Russell, New Bee, Kathryn, Kevin Powers, pauPOW, and many others for tuning into my live video with Jason! Join me for my next live video in the app.