Ask the average person what they are most worried about having stolen from them, and you will likely get answers about credit cards, money, cars or family heirlooms. Yet for a growing number of Americans, the answer is something less tangible but much more consequential: fair elections.

“Mail boxes will be robbed, ballots will be forged & even illegally printed out & fraudulently signed,” warned United States President Donald Trump in a tweet on May 26. “The Governor of California is sending Ballots to millions of people, anyone living in the state, no matter who they are or how they got there, will get one.” As always, the president’s tweets drew ire and applause. Twitter passed its verdict on his comments immediately, posting a fact-checking link that directed readers to articles contradicting him.

Are President Trump’s warnings about Democrats attempting to rig the 2020 elections empty bluster, as many claim? Or is there truth to them?

This question needs to be asked, whether the bill passes the Senate or not. If his warnings are true, this is a serious attack on democracy.

Some commentators do take the president’s warning seriously. “The ‘heroes Act’ introduced Tuesday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi should erase any doubt that the Democrats hope to leverage voting by mail and ballot harvesting into a November victory,” wrote David Catron at the American Spectator. He called it a “$3 trillion wish list that would strip the states of the power to determine how they conduct elections.” The main dispute is about “no excuse” absentee voting—that is, anyone who mails in a ballot may vote, without providing proof of identity. Nobody can be rejected.

Coronavirus, which may be all but forgotten by November, is at best only part of the reason this bill exists. Are the Democrats trying to tilt the November elections in their favor? It’s not as far-fetched as it may sound.

1. Take Advantage of a Crisis

For a coronavirus relief package, Nancy Pelosi’s 1,815-page bill contains a surprising number of laws on elections and Democrat-backed social projects. The part of interest runs from page 1,452 through 1,526.

Section 322 calls for “uniform availability of absentee voting to all voters” in the context of the controversial mail-in votes. It specifically cites the November elections and the coronavirus, using it as a reason to bring in nationwide mail-in voting. The laws will also apply to any future election, whether for president, governor or judicial positions. “If an individual in a state is eligible to cast a vote in an election for federal office, the state may not impose any additional conditions or requirements on the eligibility of the individual to cast the vote in such election by absentee ballot by mail,” states the bill.

Some states have already done this. On May 8, California Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order to mail every registered voter a ballot before the presidential election in November.

Virtually anyone can vote. “A state may not require an individual to provide any form of identification as a condition of obtaining an absentee ballot,” states the bill. The only identification that could be required would be a sworn written statement with a signature. This would be the only identification available to be compared with the database of registered voters. However, it would be difficult for anyone to challenge its validity, because there must be two poll officers who make the challenge, and both must be officially trained in signature recognition. The bill also allows anyone to drop off the ballot at the polling station. Mail-in votes aren’t just aimed at protecting the elderly: A federal judge struck down a Texas law that required voters to be over age 65 to receive a mail-in ballot.

With no requirements for ID, some worry that illegal immigrants would be able to vote. In April, a federal appeals court ruled that a Kansas law requiring voters to display proof of citizenship was unconstitutional. There would be nothing to stop undocumented migrants from voting, and no way to know that it even happened, let alone how many ineligible people voted.

A subsection, dealing with elections during pandemics or natural disasters, makes allowances for nearly anyone to work at polling stations. “The contingency plan … shall include initiatives by the chief state election official and local election officials to recruit poll workers from resilient or unaffected populations, which may include … in the case in which an infectious disease poses significant increased health risks to elderly individuals, students of secondary schools and institutions of higher education in the state.”

Untrained high school students and university freshmen handling federal polling results? Is that better for democracy than simply postponing an election? Those who work at polling stations take an oath before counting the votes. These hastily drafted individuals would have little motivation to set aside their biases and respect the seriousness of the democratic process. In fact, during a pandemic or disaster, they might be motivated to do the exact opposite.

The window for voting will also change. Early voting can start “the 15th day before the date of the election (or, at the option of the state, on a day prior to the 15th day before the date of the election) ….” These polling stations must be open for a minimum of 10 hours. Then, votes would still be counted 10 days after election day. A voter could wait until the exit polls were published, and then cast a vote for the candidate of his choice.

The heroes Act would overrule state election laws, which is unconstitutional. There are numerous small conditions these voting contingency plans impose, like mandating they be near public transit. Of themselves, some of these may be harmless. The main issue is that the federal government would be dictating these conditions to the states, which sets a dangerous precedent.

2. Accuse the Opposition of Interfering

In an election surrounded by the tense racial issues of today, it is not hard to see how claims of election rigging could stoke tensions to a flashpoint.

National Review wrote on May 18 that “we have no need to speculate about what an attack on the sanctity of the electoral process would look like, since Democrats have been delegitimizing a valid election for the past four years.” The main way they have done this is by accusations of election interference by Russia. When that failed, they considered starting another impeachment process over Trump’s response to coronavirus.

Accusations of rigged elections tend to be more prevalent and bitter when absentee ballots are involved. The media first drew attention to the issue when Georgia Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams lost the race for governor in 2018. She accused Republican Gov. Brian Kemp and his party of “voter suppression” because he had been state secretary during her campaign. No evidence of this has ever been found, but the Democrats ran with it. According to the Washington Post, those who support the assertion of “voter suppression” claim voting station closures in Georgia stopped an estimated 54,000 to 85,000 people from voting for Abrams. They also point to rejected absentee ballots and problems with digital voting machines. This is why Pelosi’s bill aims to strike down nearly all requirements for validating mail-in ballots.

“If [Abrams] had a fair election, she already would have won,” stated Hillary Clinton in a speech to the University of Texas’s lbj School of Public Affairs on Nov. 13, 2018. Pete Buttigieg, who was then the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, also condemned the vote. He stated that “racially motivated patterns of voter suppression are responsible for Stacey Abrams not being governor of Georgia right now.” Hillary Clinton has also blamed “voter suppression” for her 2016 loss in Wisconsin, and Sen. Cory Booker claimed that Russia-led efforts to suppress African-American votes caused Clinton to lose in Michigan that year.

Even if every rejected absentee ballot and every uncounted provisional ballot had been given to Abrams, and even if all polling stations had been available, Abrams still would have lost, reported the Washington Post.

What were these tactics of “voter suppression” employed by the devious Republicans? The grievance revolves around Kemp’s “aggressive” effort to remove the dead, those who had left the state, and those who were imprisoned, from the list of eligible voters.

Accusations about the inaccuracy of mail-in votes could lead to federal judges challenging the legitimacy of a democratically elected president. The result? Further polarization of an already divided nation. And if they successfully overturn the result of a democratic election, potentially worse civil unrest than ever before.

If people receive mail-in ballots because they are on a list of eligible voters, won’t that eliminate the potential for abuse or the need for identification? Far from it. Governor Kemp’s cleanup of the voting registry was rare. The database of registered voters in many states is inaccurate to a degree that could easily tilt the election.

The bill would encourage unprecedented levels of mail-in voting—especially if people can be encouraged to stay at home to avoid a “second wave” of coronavirus. It is easy to see how election authorities, having never dealt with this level of mail-ins, would be overwhelmed. It would be easy to throw accusations of miscounting. We would face an endless level of court cases challenging the votes.

3. Do Nothing About Inaccurate Data

The number of people registered on these systems as eligible voters often exceeds the actual number of eligible people by a concerning margin. In California, the number of people eligible to vote is equal to around 101 percent of the total possible number of voters. There is a sizable number of people who are on the voter rolls in error. A 2012 Pew Research study found that 24 million voter registrations in the U.S., or nearly 1 in 8, are “no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.” This is more than the entire population of New York State.

If people receive an extra ballot sent mistakenly to a dead relative, there is nothing to stop them from casting an extra vote. Not everyone will. But what will stop anyone who decides they are entitled to an extra vote? With mail-in ballots and no ID requirement, nothing.

While it is true that many people may receive more than one ballot, the opposite problem also occurs: Some people never receive a ballot. This also undermines the democratic process, because polling stations face pressure to give everyone a chance to vote before the deadline. As a result, they may lower security standards. This happened in Washington, D.C., during the Democratic presidential primaries on June 2. Facing a time crunch, hundreds of voters who had not received their mail-in ballot were told to vote by e-mail. Normally, this is only permitted for American military personnel or citizens living abroad. Cyber-security experts warn that it opens up the electoral system to espionage, malware and denial-of-service attacks.

Ironically, despite the constant narrative that Russian agents are eagerly interfering in American elections whenever they have a chance, Democrats are suddenly fine with lowering privacy standards for their voters. “I guess there are Russian hackers that can do anything, but I doubt they’re really concerned with the Ward 2 D.C. election,” member of the Board of Elections Elissa Silverman told the Wall Street Journal.

Then there is the unpleasant reality of politically motivated bribery.

On May 21, the Department of Justice announced that former Pennsylvania Judge of Elections Domenick DeMuro had pleaded guilty to illegally adding votes for Democratic candidates running for judicial positions from 2014 to 2016. The doj website explained:

During his guilty plea hearing, DeMuro admitted that an unnamed political consultant gave DeMuro directions and paid him money to illegally add votes for certain Democratic candidates. These candidates were individuals running for judicial office whose campaigns had hired the consultant, as well as other candidates for various federal, state and local elective offices who were preferred by this consultant for a variety of reasons.

The political consultant would solicit monetary payments from his clients in the form of cash or checks as “consulting fees,” and then use portions of these funds to pay Election Board Officials, including DeMuro, in return for tampering with the election results. After receiving payments ranging from between $300 to $5,000 per election from the consultant, DeMuro would add fraudulent votes on the voting machine—also known as “ringing up” votes—for the consultant’s clients and preferred candidates, thereby diluting and distorting the ballots cast by actual voters. DeMuro would add these fraudulent votes to the totals during Election Day, and then would later falsely certify that the voting machine results were accurate.

In this case, it was not hard for DeMuro to do his corrupt deed; all he had to do was stand at the voting machine while nobody was around, and press a button. It was that easy.

What is to stop similar fraud from taking place, especially when so little is being done to verify the accuracy of votes? As in the case of DeMuro, the fraud may not even be detected until years after it was committed.

4. Build on Previous Successes

Of course, the foundations for this unprecedented assault on American democracy go much deeper than the coronavirus relief bill or a cheating judge. Few, even in the media, are aware of its real origin.

The Obama administration had a major part in placing individuals hostile to America’s Constitution, such as DeMuro, in influential government positions. The radical left has since used that power to transform the United States, moving it in the direction of socialism. Given enough time and control, that is exactly what would happen.

“Had Hillary Clinton been elected, the destructive trends that unfolded during the Obama presidency would have continued unchecked, and they surely would have intensified. Many people—including me—believe it would have meant an end to our constitutional republic!” Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry wrote in his May 2018 article “Saving America From the Radical Left—Temporarily.”

While the Democrats were investigating President Trump for Russian collusion, the Trumpet was exposing it as a desperate attempt to gain control of the government. “We are getting a hard look at just what the radical left is willing to do in order to seize power and stay in power,” stated Mr. Flurry.

Since that 2018 article, much more has come to light. The radical left have been trying to render the Electoral College irrelevant by dictating that their delegates all vote for whoever wins the popular vote, no matter how many people in their state vote for that candidate. Voter manipulation also occurs on the state level. Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam and his Democrats aim to redraw the state’s voter boundaries in a way that would ensure the Capitol remains under control of the Democrats.

Back in 2006, when the Democrats won a strong majority in the House of Representatives and Nancy Pelosi became speaker of the House, Mr. Flurry wrote, “Time will prove this to be a deadly curse on the United States!” First impeachment and now the coronavirus bill have proved this true.

However, they have run into a roadblock, in the form of President Trump and the people of America who support him. They know that if Trump remains in power, their attempts to “tear down the system and remake it,” as former Barack Obama told Democratic donors last year, will be stiffly opposed whenever possible. Near the beginning of the Trump presidency, we wrote that “conditions in America may improve for a short time” before dramatically worsening again. This has also held true, with the economy improving and America’s willpower gradually returning.

Later in the same article Mr. Flurry wrote, “We are witnessing a government—and a nation—on the verge of collapse! In fact, all this shocking behavior from government officials and the national press shows that the nation only narrowly averted the destruction of the fundamental nature of the constitutional republic! And it will prove to be only a temporary deliverance.”

Ending Election Fraud—Permanently

The U.S. Constitution is a unique document, because many of its laws are based on biblical principles. For over 200 years, these laws brought the U.S. relative peace, prosperity and stability compared to the rest of the world. Democracy, though not perfect by any means, has allowed America to preserve its own freedom and ensure the freedom of other nations in two world wars.

Today, the Democrats are attacking the biblical principles underpinning the Constitution as irrelevant. Those actions are diabolical.

Does the Bible say anything about the world’s greatest superpower, or about the division and corruption on display within its government? All of these forecasts—about America’s slide toward lawlessness, a temporary resurgence, and then worse troubles to come after—are based on the Bible.

Few know that the U.S., along with Britain and its former colonies, are discussed specifically and in detail throughout the Scriptures. Our free book The United States and Britain in Prophecy proves that the U.S. today is descended from biblical Israel. This understanding makes the Bible’s prophecies directly relevant for modern-day America.

The Trump administration has taken America in a different direction from its predecessor. However, that preceding administration is still operating behind the scenes, attempting to subvert and ultimately counteract what Mr. Trump is doing.

In 2 Kings 14, God describes a national resurgence that temporarily saved Israel. “For the Lord saw the affliction of Israel, that it was very bitter: for there was not any shut up, nor any left, nor any helper for Israel. And the Lord said not that he would blot out the name of Israel from under heaven: but he saved them by the hand of Jeroboam the son of Joash” (verses 26-27). Mr. Flurry explained that the spirit of the radical left is one that desires to “blot out” the name of Israel. It wants to wipe out the Constitution, with its biblical principles and laws.

“It is critical that we realize why this resurgence!” wrote Mr. Flurry. “God Himself is pushing back against the Satan-inspired forces that would have destroyed this nation! He is exposing those forces so we can see them clearly. And He is using a man to save the superpower of prophetic Israel, the United States—temporarily.”

After Jeroboam’s successful reign, the next Israelite kings were brought down by domestic turmoil and assassination. Israel was eventually taken captive by Assyria (2 Kings 17). “A similar nightmare fate awaits America!” warned Mr. Flurry. “Dozens of biblical prophecies warn of this truth! God will make America great again! But the Bible shows that He will do so only after hard correction.”

The Bible shows that God will use a man to give America a temporary reprieve from its path to collapse. However, it ends with captivity and the worst suffering ever to come on any nations—and on the entire world (Matthew 24:21-22).

“Conditions in America may improve for a short time,” writes Mr. Flurry in his booklet Great Again. President Trump may have some success battling the mail-in vote bills. And because of the role President Trump specifically plays in a prophecy in the book of Amos, the Trumpet believes he will be reelected. But despite that, just as surely as these prophecies of a temporary recovery were fulfilled, these times will not last.

This does not mean that there is no hope for America or the American people—quite the opposite. Right now, individuals can be protected from the coming captivity if they turn to God in repentance. After the captivity and suffering of the Tribulation, America, along with the rest of the world, will experience a permanent resurgence as they learn God’s laws and come under His government. The election fraud, accusations of collusion, and deceitful political dealings of today will become a thing of the past. A new and lasting era of peace and prosperity will become normal for everyone—so says your Bible.

If you’d like to understand more about how America’s government problems will be permanently solved, request our free booklet Great Again, by Gerald Flurry.