Chump's DESPERATION TOUR continues. 17 days left in the tour. As the crowds continue to dwindle, some are seeing it as his unplanned FAREWELL TOUR. Tim Balk (NEW YORK TIMES) notes new stage patter from Chump:
The message delivered by a president during a high-stakes midterm campaign can be critical.
As President Trump travels the country ahead of this year’s elections, he might focus on selling Americans on how he will bring the Iran war to a close, or control rising prices.
But in a puzzling approach, at some recent rallies he has instead started his often-meandering remarks by effusing about the physical appearances of other men and, more rarely, finding fault with them.
Mr. Trump has long marveled at the physical appearance of some men, sometimes gravitating to a favored phrase to describe men whose looks he appreciates: straight from “central casting.”
But lately Mr. Trump has been particularly quick to gush about male bodies. Here are five times the ever-unscripted president has hailed or assailed men for the way they look in recent months.
And as he does, he reawakens the rumors from the early 80s about the same-sex attraction with the soap opera actor in NYC. It's as though his dementia has weakened some of the barriers he put in place for public consumption. Jon Husted, the man Chump damped his shorts for the most this week even looks a little like the soap opera actor did by the '00s. Greg Sargent (THE NEW REPUBLIC) notes:
Donald Trump held a rally on Monday in Youngstown, the eastern Ohio town that has come to symbolize postindustrial Rust Belt decline. It didn’t go well: Trump mumbled about GOP Senator Jon Husted’s “ass” to a sparsely filled arena. But in Trump’s head, the event was a triumph that gave Husted a huge boost. As Trump subsequently claimed: “I heard he went up nine points.”
News flash: That didn’t happen. But Trump has good reason to pretend it did. Mahoning County, whose seat is Youngstown, has taken on immense significance for the political classes. Ever since Trump in 2016 began transforming the broader Mahoning Valley region into a GOP stronghold, Youngstown and Mahoning County have become a benchmark for reporters to interpret Trump’s inroads with the Midwestern working class. The constant media visits to Mahoning helped launch the meme of the “Trump diner safari.”
But numerous Democrats tell me they’re cautiously optimistic that they might flip Mahoning County once again. Sherrod Brown and Amy Acton—who are running for Senate and governor—are both heavily competing in the region, and both have profiles well suited to winning it back. If even one of them pulls this off, it will constitute yet another potent sign of Trumpism’s decline.
New internal data from Democrats helps explain this cautious optimism. Veteran Democratic pollster Margie Omero just did polling on Trump in the three counties that make up the broader Youngstown media market—Mahoning, Trumbull, and Columbiana counties. Omero found that Trump’s favorable rating in them is 11 points underwater, at 43–54. The poll, which came out of the field this week, was conducted for national Democrats, and it’s helping fuel their optimism.
“Trump is unpopular in this region because he’s broken his promises to make things more affordable,” Omero told me. “And people are really struggling here.”
As the audiences dwindle for the DESPERATION TOUR, so do the onstage guests. Bennito L. Kelty (RAW STORY) reports an event has been cancelled:
A planned campaign stop featuring President Donald Trump in a crucial swing state fell apart while Republican candidates debated whether to show up.
Trump's team had been mapping out a Michigan visit, possibly on the western side of the state, when GOP candidates across the ballot found themselves unsure whether they should be seen with the president, Politico reported Saturday, citing three Republicans with direct knowledge of the discussions. The candidates worried about being tied to Trump's tariffs, which have battered Michigan, and to high fuel prices linked to the war with Iran.
Trump officials ultimately scrapped the event and said the president would return later in the month. He is now slated to rally in Michigan on October 25.
Not a headliner anymore, Chump.
Meanwhile, Miss Sassy JD Vance continues his mall tour. He goes to smaller places. In Tyler, Texas, for instance, he turned out a small crowd -- of hoods, they punched a woman in a wheel chair. That's the type of person who is a bobby soxer for JD.
They both need p.r. make overs but America's really not in the mood to refashion political nut jobs who preach hate. It's not working out for that Mother Tucker Carlson. David Corn (MOTHER JONES) notes:
Last month, when The New York Times published a news article reporting on Tucker Carlson’s recent statements defending Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, the progressive Democratic Senate candidate in Michigan, and assailing former Rep. Mike Rogers, the GOP contender in that race, the paper described the former Fox host as an “influential far-right podcaster…known for his nativist rhetoric [who] once said immigrants were making the United States ‘poorer and dirtier.’” (Carlson had slammed Rogers as a “toady to Israel” and the “embodiment of the cruelty and stupidity of the national security state.”)
A few days later, NPR named Carlson a “Newsmaker”—that is, one of the “most influential people of our time”—and posted an hourlong interview with him conducted by host Steve Inskeep. At the start, Inskeep introduced Carlson as a commentator who “has commanded an audience for decades as a cable TV pundit, as a Fox News star, and then, after his firing, as the head of an independent network frequently broadcasting from this barn in Maine.” During the interview, Carlson argued that President Donald Trump should be removed from office for launching the war in Iran (“the most profoundly destructive thing any—any single decision a president has made in our history”) and for threatening to annihilate that country with nuclear weapons. He railed against Israel and its influence on US policy, denied he was antisemitic, and slammed Trump for being corrupt. (He also called the Trump–Russia scandal a “totally absurd plot to discredit Trump.”) At the end of their conversation, Inskeep said to Carlson, “You’re a thoughtful guy.”
In both The New York Times piece and the NPR interview—especially the latter—Carlson’s bigotry and conspiracy kookery were downplayed, and he was cast as a respectable political opinion influencer. The Times did note that Carlson has embraced conspiracy theories, been accused of antisemitism, and once “conducted a friendly interview” with Nick Fuentes, a Holocaust denier. But even that does not capture the fullness of his extremism.
In recent years, Carlson has become a leading champion of right-wing racism and nuttery—a matter Inskeep avoided in the one-on-one. He has been a proponent of the “great replacement theory,” which claims nefarious elites are trying to replace white Americans with dark-skinned migrants. (Some ultra-right adherents of this notion assert Jews are responsible for this anti-white plot.) When he was a Fox host, Carlson supported the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump, though he privately denigrated election denialists pushing that crap. He peddled the bonkers idea that the January 6 riot was a false flag operation orchestrated by the Deep State so it could round up Trump supporters, and he said the rioters were “right” to believe the election had been rigged.
There’s practically no limit to Carlson’s ideological thuggery. Two years ago, he hosted on his podcast Darryl Cooper, a Nazi apologist, who claimed that Winston Churchill, not Adolf Hitler, was the “chief villain of the Second World War” and that the Holocaust was merely the result of poor planning on the part of Hitler’s regime. The Nazis, Cooper said, “launched a war where they were completely unprepared to deal with the millions and millions of prisoners of war, of local political prisoners…They went in with no plan for that and just threw these people into camps.” Accidental concentration camps, right? That was why “millions of people ended up dead there.” Carlson disgustingly called Cooper “the most important popular historian working in the United States today.”
And Carlson has been an adoring fan of Vladimir Putin. Prior to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, he noted he would root for Russia over Ukraine in any war between the two nations, and, once Putin attacked Ukraine, he amplified Kremlin disinformation that claimed the United States had been operating biological weapons facilities within Ukraine.
All that's really happened is Tucker stuck his finger in the wind. He caught a sense of the public mood and is reshaping himself as he always does. He's always a jerk and always a conspiracy theorist but he chooses his peer group based on where he can grift the most money. And it's not with Chump right now. Harold Meyerson (THE AMERICAN PROSPECT) noted earlier this month:
One of the most prominent shibboleths in the media’s assessment of what ails America is that both parties have become too extreme. We are polarized, we’ve read time and again, because the Democrats and Republicans are equally culpable of hewing to ideological fringes, giving centrist voters no real options when elections rolled around.
Empirical research has long debunked this bilgewater. Fourteen years ago, in their book It’s Even Worse Than It Looks, two congressional scholars, Tom Mann and Norm Ornstein, looked at the votes cast by House and Senate members since the 1990s and concluded that while Republicans had shifted to the ultra-right in their voting, there was no correspondingly ultra shift of Democrats to their left. This had no effect on lazier political commentators, who apparently will always be with us, and it has been the constant and primary mission of Fox News and its ilk to find two or three left lunatics whom it can misrepresent as Democratic standard-bearers and a threat to the Republic. But six years of Trump and MAGA governance (most particularly the last two years) seems to have convinced the American public, as a Gallup poll out this week makes abundantly clear, that it’s the Republicans who are America’s real extremists.
The poll’s headline items are the public’s preference for Democrats over Republicans when it comes to “keeping the country prosperous” (a 14 percentage-point lead) and on “protecting the U.S. from international terrorism” (a four percentage-point lead on a question that Republicans have almost always led on previously, despite W’s administration having been asleep at the switch in the run-up to 9/11).
More revealingly (though given the past two years of Trump & Co., not all that surprisingly), Gallup now finds those who view the Republicans as “too extreme” to be at 59 percent, the highest level for either party during this century. Just 43 percent thought the Democrats to be “too extreme.” When Gallup put the same question to Americans in 2022, 49 percent judged the Democrats as too extreme, as against 46 percent who thought the same of Republicans.
Meanwhile, a new brewing scandal for the Chump administration, Tyler Pager and Anatoly Kurmanaev (NEW YORK TIMES) report:
The White House investigation into a dispute between two prominent Trump supporters, Richard Grenell and Alina Habba Mildon, centers on a bank transfer from the Democratic Republic of Congo to a Texas defense company, people familiar with the matter said.
Mrs. Mildon, a former personal lawyer for President Trump, stormed into the Oval Office last week accusing Mr. Grenell of siphoning millions of dollars from a business transaction in 2025 organized by a Turkish investor who later became her husband. Part of the money, she claimed, was meant to be set aside for a donation to the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts but was never delivered to the institution. Mr. Grenell ran the Kennedy Center at the time.
Responding to questions from The New York Times, Mr. Grenell denied all accusations, calling them absurd. Mr. and Mrs. Mildon didn’t respond to requests for comment. The White House also did not respond.
The dispute and resulting investigation have unfolded at a time of internal turmoil for the Trump administration, with the dramatic exit of his new press secretary and officials with ties to the president.
Mrs. Mildon and Mr. Grenell had once been close friends but have fallen out in recent months over Mr. Mildon’s business dealings. Their feud became public in recent days, after The Times began to inquire about Mr. Mildon’s business activities and his contributions to the Kennedy Center. The questions prompted Mrs. Mildon to relay her accusations directly to Mr. Trump last Friday.
Mrs. Mildon initially told White House officials that the money, $17.6 million, came from her now-husband, Turhan Mildon, whom she married last month. The initial set of documents that her husband’s lawyer submitted to the White House, however, redacted the name of the sender, according to the people familiar with the matter.
The White House later learned that the transfer was made from a bank account affiliated with the Congolese government, the people said. Mr. Mildon has previously acknowledged to The Times, through a spokesman, that he serves as an adviser to the Congolese president and holds a diplomatic passport of the country.
No Kings rally took place across the country today ahead of the midterms. AP notes:
Rallies organized by the No Kings network opposed to President Donald Trump were held Saturday in cities and communities across the U.S., with an aim of getting people out to vote early in the midterm elections.
The hundreds of planned events were billed as nonpartisan, though they sought to build on nearly two years' worth of No Kings marches and demonstrations by people upset with Trump's presidency.
A band entertained what appeared to be a few hundred people in caps and coats at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington. Despite the chilly weather, many in the crowd danced to the tunes. "VOTE EARLY" and "HANDS OFF MY VOTE!" were among the many signs held aloft.
At an Atlanta rally, City Councilman Michael Julian Bond told the crowd to urge others to vote ahead of the Nov. 3 general election.
"The Constitution gives you one power, right? That is the power to vote. Are you gonna use that power?" he said.
"You don't see Superman giving up his power," Bond continued. "You don't see Black Panther giving up his power. You don't see Wonder Woman giving up her magic lasso. So why would you give up your right, your power, your obligation to vote? Be a super hero, use your power. Go to the polls and vote."
Tim Balk (NEW YORK TIMES) notes:
The last “No Kings” day, in March, centered in large part on the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown and on the war in Iran, which had started a month earlier.
This time, the centerpiece of the gatherings was a sprawling voter mobilization push. And unlike during the demonstrations in March, there was no massive flagship rally in Minnesota headlined by Bruce Springsteen.
Instead, organizers said there were more than 3,000 events across the country, in what they called the largest single-day voter activation in American history.
“This was intentionally structured as hyperlocal events,” said Leah Greenberg, a co-executive director of Indivisible, a progressive group that helps organize “No Kings” events. “Voting takes place in neighborhoods, and so we were really leaning into asking folks to engage with their own community.”
The gatherings took many forms, including rallies, block parties and small concerts.
Superhero capes and masks were the staple of Cammy Dunford's event in Frisco, Texas. Dunford, a co-leader of Indivisible Frisco, planned a "voting is your superpower" gathering.
"I don't care if you're an independent, first-time voter, Democrat, Republican," Dunford said. "If you are eligible to vote, you need to get out there and vote. Because without everybody voting, we don't have a democracy."
Early voting in Texas does not start until Oct. 19, but Dunford and a group of her neighbors put together 500 goody bags to hand out — filled with QR codes linking to voting information and voting resources.
Tens of thousands of Arizonans rallied and voted early on Saturday as part of the fourth No Kings day of protest that saw 44 demonstrations across the Grand Canyon State in opposition to President Donald Trump and his administration’s policies.
The protests and marches in Arizona were part of some 3,000 similar events planned across the country. The demonstrations are part of a national day of action hoping to harness opposition to Trump to get out the vote. While the three previous No Kings days focused on speaking out against Trump and his allies, Saturday’s events all emphasized the need for participants to exercise their power at the ballot box.
The events drew large crowds all with a central message: vote.
The crowd was full of a diverse set of people from all age ranges and for many, it was not their first No Kings event.
“I feel like AI is really messing with the youth’s intelligence and using all of our water,” 15-year-old Kalli Hester told the Arizona Mirror when asked what brought her to the Saturday event.
It was Hester’s second No Kings rally and she said that if she was old enough to vote, she’d be voting for a straight Democratic ticket.
She also said she hopes more candidates focus on reproductive health going forward.
“It kinda makes me scared for me, my siblings and my cousins,” Hester said while reflecting on the landmark Supreme Court decision to overturn abortion protections in Roe v. Wade.
Danny Peterson and Ariel Salk (Portland, Oregon's KOIN) report:
Several “No Kings! Vote Early!” rallies occurred around the Portland area on Saturday, with thousands in attendance, during a consequential election year.
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against President Donald Trump’s proposal to restrict mail-in voting before the 2026 midterm elections on Nov. 3.
Participants of the “No Kings!” rally say they’re pushing back against Trump and asking for a secure and fair election, with no interference for mail-in voting, the primary way of casting ballots in Oregon. Demonstrators are urging others to vote early and use ballot drop boxes whenever possible.
People lined the sidewalks of a busy Sioux Falls road to take part in the No Kings, Vote Early event.
Organizers and participants are encouraging people to get out and vote in the upcoming election. They lined the sidewalks along east tenth street in Sioux falls Saturday afternoon.
“Because every vote counts, people that don’t vote don’t get a voice in their government and a third of the United States didn’t come out to vote last time so we need everyone to vote.” participant Sue Hagen said.
The organizers behind Calumet County's 'No Kings' protest hope to hold more gatherings in the future.
"We're always open. I'm sure we're going to do this again in the future," said Gary Lemke , a protester from Chilton. "It's been encouraging today and we're small like I said but it can grow and it is growing, the whole movement in this country is growing."
Cheyenne Corin (Philadelphia's WPVI) notes:
Demonstrators gathered outside Philadelphia City Hall on Saturday as part of a nationwide "No Kings: Vote Early" day of action, with organizers encouraging people to take their frustration to the polls this Election Day.
The movement, which has previously organized protests against President Donald Trump and his administration, is now shifting its focus toward increasing voter participation in the midterm elections.
"It takes one person to start a revolution, and here we are," said Dana Shensky of Northeast Philadelphia.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Alex Padilla's office:
Following new DOJ demand to block certain ballots in California, Senators urge DOJ to follow the law and reaffirm its longstanding election non-interference policy ahead of 2026 midterm elections, warning that “DOJ action that could spoil an election would be one of the most serious constitutional violations imaginable.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration with jurisdiction over federal elections, Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Ranking Member of the Senate Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action and Federal Rights, demanded that Attorney General Todd Blanche confirm that the Department of Justice (DOJ) will not seize ballots, voting machines, or other election materials in connection with the 2026 midterm elections. Padilla recently secured a commitment under oath from Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Kash Patel that the FBI would not interfere in this year’s midterms, specifically that it would not seize ballots or voting equipment before an election is certified. The letter was sent the same day that the DOJ sued California to block the state from counting alleged noncitizen mail-in ballots less than three weeks before the midterm elections.
In the letter to Blanche, the Senators pressed him to reaffirm DOJ’s longstanding policy of election non-interference and commit that it will not pursue any effort to seize ballots or other election materials until all elections have concluded and election results have been certified, given DOJ leadership’s lack of response to earlier inquiries and troubling actions and statements by DOJ when it comes to elections. The letter follows the unprecedented demand by DOJ to the California Secretary of State and Los Angeles County to withhold and segregate ballots from individuals on a list on a USB thumb drive provided by DOJ less than three weeks before Election Day.
“Mail and absentee ballots have already been sent out to millions of voters, and early voting has begun in several states,” wrote the Senators. “However, the Department has failed to affirm its election non-interference policy against a backdrop of the recent weakening of DOJ policies, upheaval in the agency’s workforce, DOJ’s seizure of 2020 election materials in Georgia and Arizona, personal calls by President Trump directly to DOJ attorneys to influence election-related investigations in California and elsewhere, as well as unprecedented partisan political activity by DOJ leadership. A clear and immediate response from the Department is necessary.”
The Senators highlighted several reasons to be concerned about the Trump Administration’s election interference efforts, including DOJ’s quiet removal of the most recent version of the Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses manual from its website without explanation. They further outlined DOJ’s lack of explanation when pressed for answers and reiterated the unlawfulness of any DOJ effort to interfere in the 2026 midterm elections.
“Removing ballots from the officials legally charged with maintaining their custody could prevent election officials from satisfying statutory deadlines, interfere with recount or contest procedures, and even prevent lawful votes from being counted or an election from being certified,” continued the Senators. “Any DOJ action that could spoil an election would be one of the most serious constitutional violations imaginable.”
The Senators reiterated the importance of the DOJ reaffirming its election non-interference policy with less than 20 days until Election Day.
“The 2026 midterm elections have begun. We urge you to immediately reaffirm that the Department will forgo any actions that would interfere with the lawful administration of the 2026 elections, including the seizure of ballots, election materials, or election equipment prior to the certification of the 2026 midterm elections,” the Senators concluded.
As Ranking Member of the Senate Rules Committee and California’s former Secretary of State and chief election officer, Padilla has fought relentlessly to protect our elections and strengthen voting rights.
- Last month, Padilla introduced the Freedom from Intimidation in Elections Act, legislation to protect voters and election workers from intimidation and threats of violence at polling places.
- Padilla also led the congressional response to the bombshell whistleblower report that DHS agents violated state laws as part of the “Unlawful Voter Initiative” and called for an immediate investigation into the agency’s misconduct. He also urged California’s Attorney General to investigate the effects these actions could have on Californians.
- Also last month, Padilla convened some of the country’s top labor leaders to discuss how to strengthen our democracy and mobilize against election interference.
- In August, he led 27 of his Senate colleagues in demanding the Trump Administration stop its illegal voter roll purges before Election Day.
- Padilla also joined Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) in launching the first-ever Senate Election Observer Program to protect the 2026 midterms and maintain election integrity nationwide and serves as part of the Senate Democrats’ Election Protection Task Force. This week, Padilla announced that more than 100 Senate Democratic staff have been recruited and trained as official congressional election observers to be deployed to polling sites across nine states.
- In June, Padilla joined his colleagues in introducing the Protect Our Polls Act to protect the integrity of American elections from federal interference by armed military or federal law enforcement.
Full letter is available here or below:
Dear Attorney General Blanche:
As Election Day draws nearer, we urge the Department of Justice (DOJ or Department) to reaffirm its longstanding election non-interference policy and rule out any attempt to seize ballots or any other election materials or equipment before voting, counting, and/or certification are complete. This confirmation is necessary because Department leaders have been sending conflicting public signals.
Make no doubt, the 2026 midterm elections are well underway. Mail and absentee ballots have already been sent out to millions of voters, and early voting has begun in several states. However, the Department has failed to affirm its election non-interference policy against a backdrop of the recent weakening of DOJ policies. A clear and immediate response from the Department is necessary.
Recent Statements Regarding the Department’s Election Non-Interference Policy
In response to a question during a September 15 public hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Kash Patel did confirm under oath that the FBI would comply with the Department’s Justice Manual and not seize ballots, voting machines, or other election-related material prior to certification of an election, matching the commitment by General Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that the U.S. Armed Forces would not interfere with the upcoming election. However, the FBI Director reports to the Attorney General, so his commitment is contingent on your own.
On September 1, Senator Slotkin wrote to you and Director Patel seeking answers to a number of questions, including whether DOJ or the FBI would send armed federal agents to the polls or unlawfully seize election materials of any kind during an active election. To date, neither you nor Director Patel have responded to those letters. Meanwhile, General Caine did respond to a similar letter and reaffirmed the “non-partisan” U.S. Armed Forces’ “steadfast commitment to constitutional principles” and confirmed that the military had “no plans to send Federal military personnel or Federalized members of the National Guard to polling places during the 2026 elections” and “[n]o plans to use such personnel to seize ballots, voting machines, or other election-related material.”
On June 8, 2026, Senators Padilla, Durbin, Whitehouse, and 21 Senators wrote to you regarding the Department’s unexplained removal from its website of the most recent version of the Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses manual (Election Crimes Manual) that has been in place for decades to prevent the Department from interfering or appearing to interfere in elections. The Department’s August 13 response states that the manual “needs revising and updating” but provided no further explanation, and an updated version has yet to be made available to the public.
DOJ Election Interference is Illegal
The law is clear: neither the Department nor any other federal agency has the authority to disrupt the administration of an election, including by seizing ballots or other election materials in a manner that prevents state and local officials from carrying out their lawful duties.
The U.S. Constitution gives primary authority over elections to the states and Congress, not the Executive Branch, and federal law reinforces these constitutional provisions. The Civil Rights Act of 1960 requires election officers to “retain and preserve” covered election records for 22 months following a federal election. If a federal agency seeks access to election materials, the law requires an appropriate written demand, after which covered records are to be made available for federal “inspection, reproduction, and copying” at the principal office of their custodian. Even this authority is limited, as shown by DOJ’s failure to compel Republican and Democratic-led states alike to hand over unredacted voter data for the Trump Administration to create a national voter file and pressure states to purge voters under the guise of list maintenance.
Federal law enforcement must also respect detailed state laws governing custody of ballots and voting equipment. Maintaining an unbroken chain of custody ensures that the ballots ultimately counted are the ballots American voters actually cast. Removing ballots from the officials legally charged with maintaining their custody could prevent election officials from satisfying statutory deadlines, interfere with recount or contest procedures, and even prevent lawful votes from being counted or an election from being certified. Any DOJ action that could spoil an election would be one of the most serious constitutional violations imaginable.
The Justice Manual and the Election Crimes Manual
The same commitment made by General Caine and Director Patel should represent the position of the Trump Administration. The Department’s Justice Manual unequivocally recognizes the constitutional requirement that “the States—not the federal government—are responsible for administering elections.” While DOJ’s “non-interference policy” was incorporated into the Justice Manual in 2022, it has been in effect through the DOJ Election Crimes Branch for decades. This enduring bipartisan policy reflects the fundamental principle that DOJ and other law enforcement personnel should not interfere with the will of the American people. The Justice Manual’s “non-interference policy” states that DOJ “should generally avoid interfering or appearing to interfere with election administration, tabulation, validation, or certification.” It further provides that DOJ “should not engage in overt criminal investigative measures in matters involving alleged ballot fraud until the election in question has been concluded, its results certified, and all recounts and election contests concluded.” However, the removal of the Election Crimes Manual from the DOJ website remains of special concern because it contains even more explicit instructions against actions that “may deprive state election and judicial authorities of critical materials needed to resolve election disputes, conduct recounts, and certify ultimate winners.” In addition to avoiding seizures, the Election Crimes Manual further confirms the DOJ policy not to conduct overt investigations until after the outcome of the election has been certified.
Adding to the concern, pending revisions to the Justice Manual are creating new uncertainty. The requirement that prosecutors and agents consult with the Public Integrity Section before opening an election-crime matter or undertaking any potentially overt investigative steps—including issuing grand jury subpoenas and executing search warrants—has been “suspended while revisions are ongoing.” Given that it is too late for revisions ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, DOJ should restore this part of its election policy immediately. Failure to maintain a strong, explicit election non-interference policy exposes DOJ prosecutors to political pressure to interfere in elections at the request of the President or other Administration leaders, political parties, candidates, and other influences.
The Department Must Reaffirm Its Election Non-Interference Policy
The 2026 midterm elections have begun. We urge you to immediately reaffirm that the Department will forgo any actions that would interfere with the lawful administration of the 2026 elections, including the seizure of ballots, election materials, or election equipment prior to the certification of the 2026 midterm elections.
In addition to this immediate public commitment, we request that you provide written responses to the following questions by October 29, 2026:
1) Will you commit that DOJ, the FBI, the U.S. Marshals Service, and other Department components will not attempt to seize or otherwise remove ballots, voting equipment, or other election materials from the lawful custody of state or local election officials while those materials are necessary for voting, counting, canvassing, recounting, auditing, election contests, or certification?
a) Will you commit not to approve or otherwise facilitate any attempts by any other federal law enforcement agency, including components of the Department of Homeland Security, to take similar actions?
2) Does DOJ continue to adhere to the guidance contained in the eighth edition of the Election Crimes Manual that election-related documents generally should not be removed from local election administrators before certification and expiration of the applicable election-contest period, and that election officials should not be deprived of documents necessary to tally or recount ballots or certify election results?
a) What provisions of the Election Crimes Manual require “revising and updating” as stated in the Department’s previous response letter? Does the Election Crimes Manual remain the policy of the Department, and, if not, has the Department rescinded, superseded, amended, or otherwise withdrawn the eighth edition?
b) If revisions are underway, provide the current draft, identify the officials responsible for those revisions, and state when the revised guidance will be made public.
3) Does DOJ continue to adhere fully to Justice Manual §§ 9-85.300 and 9-85.500, including the prohibition that “[f]ederal prosecutors and agents may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party”?
4) Given that the Justice Manual currently states that the election-crimes consultation requirement in § 9-85.210 is suspended while revisions are underway, what review and approval procedures currently govern applications for search warrants, subpoenas, or other overt investigative measures involving ballots, voting equipment, election officials, or other election materials during an active election?
a) When will the revisions of the manual be complete and available to the public?
5) Has the Department, the FBI, any United States Attorney’s Office, or any other Department component developed, discussed, requested, sought judicial authorization for, or approved any plan to seize ballots, voting machines, tabulation equipment, or other election materials relating to the 2026 federal elections before completion of the applicable counting, recounting, canvassing, contest, and certification processes?
a) If so, provide all applicable policies, legal analyses, directives, memoranda, and approval procedures concerning such actions.
Thank you for your prompt response.
###
The following sites updated:
-
-
-
-
-
Is Europe Losing the Future?20 hours ago
-
JD Vance’s Biggest Problem20 hours ago
-
-
Chicken Devan in the Kitchen1 day ago
-
-
Chump's mental decline1 day ago
-
Musk settles lawsuit1 day ago
-
-
-
Estrella: la inmigrante imperfecta1 day ago
-
-
No Kings2 days ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
