Former USAID Officials and Military Leaders Discuss ‘Extra-Constitutional’ Plans for America Ahead o

Featured Image: yourNEWS Media Illustration

An investigation into organizations involving former federal employees, military officers and intelligence officials has raised questions about plans for responding to potential election disruptions, including discussions of government legitimacy, military intervention and structural changes to the U.S. political system.

By yourNEWS Media Newsroom

Former U.S. Agency for International Development officials and retired military and intelligence personnel have participated in discussions about responding to potential federal intervention in the 2026 midterm elections, including scenarios involving military deployments, challenges to government legitimacy and possible “extra-constitutional” political changes, according to an investigation published Sunday, Oct. 25.

Investigative researcher Jennica Pounds, known online as DataRepublican, identified connections among organizations involved in election preparedness, political demonstrations and proposals for changing American governing institutions.

The investigation, published by the Daily Caller News Foundation, focuses on Renew to Thrive, National Security Leaders for America and several affiliated advocacy organizations whose members include former government employees and national security officials.

Pounds alleged that the groups’ discussions extend beyond conventional election monitoring and civil disobedience to include preparations for challenging federal authority following the Nov. 3 midterms. Her initial findings circulated on X, drawing attention to recordings of meetings and publicly available organizational materials.

The existence of contingency planning and discussions about constitutional reform is documented. However, the available evidence does not establish that the organizations have agreed to overthrow the government, unlawfully seize power or interfere with election results.

Among the individuals identified in the investigation is Danielle Reiff, whose federal employment records identify her as a former USAID employee.

Reiff has participated in political organizing and democracy-related discussions following the dismantling of USAID under the Trump administration.

One former USAID employee reportedly described the consequences of dismissing personnel experienced in international democracy programs.

“Take it from those of us who worked in authoritarian countries: We’ve become one … they were so quick to disband [The U.S. Agency for International Development], the group that supposedly instigates color revolutions,” the former employee said.

“But they’ve done a very foolish thing. You just released a bunch of well-trained individuals into your population. If you kept our offices going and had us play solitaire in the office, it might have been safer to keep your regime.”

The remarks were presented in the investigation’s collection of recordings, although the identity of the speaker and the full context were not independently established.

The investigation also noted that some activists had circulated the CIA’s historical Simple Sabotage Field Manual, a World War II-era document describing methods of disrupting organizational operations.

The circulation of that document does not by itself establish that recipients engaged in sabotage.

Reiff has reportedly participated in online discussions hosted by the Democratic Constitutional Forum, whose programming has included proposals for reconsidering America’s constitutional structure.

According to a March 25 recording highlighted by Pounds, Reiff discussed the possibility of a legitimacy crisis surrounding the November elections.

“I’m seeing a crisis of legitimacy with the November midterm election … what we really need to do is transform our system,” she reportedly said.

The broader organizational strategy calls for political mobilization, community organizing and structural reforms to American government.

Renew to Thrive has documented connections to democracy-reform conferences and organizations including the 22nd Century Initiative and the No Kings movement.

Its approach emphasizes four activities described as blocking, bridging, belonging and building.

The blocking component includes protecting elections, defending peaceful assembly and opposing perceived government abuses. Its longer-term objectives include changes to political institutions and governance.

“Guarding the old system is not enough,” an organizational strategy statement declares.

In another recording circulated by Pounds, former USAID employee Marcia Mundt reportedly discussed applying methods previously used to evaluate foreign governments to the United States.

“We were never allowed to analyze the United States in this way before because there is this big dividing line between foreign assistance work and domestic work, so I never got to use it for a U.S. context, but now that I no longer have a job, I can use it for whatever I want,” Mundt reportedly said in a recording of the discussion.

The initiative also includes conversations with international organizations experienced in election monitoring and political transitions.

During a July 9 meeting hosted by Reiff, Rast’o Kužel of Slovakia’s Memo 98 Media and Election Monitoring reportedly recommended preparing public responses to anticipated political narratives.

“What I think is needed is prebunking and inoculation, you know, anticipating some of these narratives before they actually dominate the information space,” Kužel said, according to a recording cited by Pounds.

Raša Nedeljkov of Serbia’s CRTA election-monitoring organization emphasized the importance of observers at voting locations.

“We need to be present at every polling station,” Nedeljkov said.

Both organizations have connections to international democracy-assistance programs, including initiatives previously supported by USAID. European Correspondent reporting has documented the effects of withdrawn American assistance on Serbian civic organizations.

Separately, National Security Leaders for America has published a toolkit addressing potential military intervention during the midterm elections.

The organization, whose membership includes retired military and intelligence officials, says the guidance is intended to help local officials respond if federal troops are deployed near polling places or election facilities.

The document examines two principal scenarios: military deployment under the Insurrection Act and military involvement following a claimed foreign attack on voting infrastructure.

It recommends coordination among election administrators, attorneys, law enforcement and local officials to maintain voting access and preserve ballot security.

The publicly available guidance also advises officials not to automatically declare military deployments unlawful. Instead, it recommends documenting events, requesting clarification of federal authority and pursuing appropriate legal remedies.

It specifically discourages confrontations and demonstrations near polling locations.

The investigation further identifies retired Rear Adm. Mike Smith, an NSL4A leader, as a participant in discussions about the Insurrection Act and possible responses to federal intervention.

Reiff reportedly described an August conversation with Smith about the relationship between mass political mobilization and longer-term institutional reform.

“The research all shows you that the blocking community can, like, rid us of a dictator, and the renewal will not happen if there’s not a positive vision and a plan for what to do on the day after,” Reiff attributed to Smith in another recording publicized by Pounds.

Reiff also discussed using a potential political breakdown to pursue a broader transformation.

“We can take that breakdown moment and leverage it for a big structural reform, you know refounding moment,” she reportedly stated.

The most direct reference to operating outside existing constitutional arrangements appeared in Reiff’s reported March 25 remarks about the period following the midterms.

“The conversation centers around what’s going to happen if we go extra-constitutional to create the kind of transformation that we’d all like to see,” she reportedly said.

The statement raises questions about what participants meant by “extra-constitutional” and whether they were discussing theoretical political transitions, constitutional reform or actions outside established legal procedures.

The available excerpts do not establish that such measures have been adopted as organizational policy.

Renew to Thrive and National Security Leaders for America did not immediately respond to requests for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The latest disclosures highlight the involvement of former federal personnel and national security officials in organized efforts to prepare for potential election disruptions and advocate political change.

They also leave unresolved whether the most controversial statements reflect individual speculation or coordinated plans.

With the midterms approaching, the distinction between lawful advocacy, contingency planning and actual efforts to circumvent constitutional authority remains central to evaluating the activities described in the investigation.

Original article

Add as a preferred source on Google

Comments