Home Blog

House GOP Launches Probe Into Peltola Campaign

0
Political representation of parties making money

President Donald Trump is calling for consequences after allegations surfaced that Democratic operatives tried to confuse Alaska voters by recruiting a candidate with the same name as a Republican senator.

House Republicans have launched a congressional investigation into allegations that Democratic Senate candidate Mary Peltola’s campaign helped orchestrate a plan to confuse Alaska voters and siphon support away from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan.

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) announced the investigation Thursday, escalating a controversy that has already drawn sharp criticism from President Donald Trump and prompted a separate state investigation.

At the center of the dispute is an unusual political maneuver: Two candidates named Dan Sullivan appearing on the same Senate ballot.

A New York Times investigation published Wednesday reported that Democratic operatives worked to recruit another candidate sharing the Republican incumbent’s name, potentially splitting his support in Alaska’s closely watched Senate race.

Peltola’s campaign and national Democrats have denied involvement in recruiting the additional candidate.

But Comer says Congress wants answers.

“Democrats are the party of fraud,” Comer declared Thursday, accusing Democratic operatives of attempting to manipulate the election by deliberately confusing voters.

“Americans deserve answers about this latest attempt by Democrats to defraud the American people, and we will get them,” he added.

House GOP Demands Testimony Over Alleged Plot

Comer is seeking testimony from two Democratic operatives identified in reporting about the alleged recruitment effort.

The Oversight Committee sent letters to Elisa Rios, Peltola’s former campaign manager, and Jerid Kurtz, a Democratic strategist reportedly involved in the effort.

Rios has been asked to appear for a transcribed interview on November 5, while Kurtz has been requested to testify on November 6.

Both dates fall immediately after the November 3 midterm elections.

Comer warned that the committee could consider subpoenas if the two refuse to cooperate voluntarily.

The investigation follows reporting that Democratic operatives conducted what was internally described as a “ballot composition project,” seeking candidates who could draw votes away from Sullivan.

According to the New York Times investigation, operatives searched for Alaska residents sharing the senator’s name and eventually identified Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., a retired teacher from Petersburg.

The additional Sullivan qualified for the ballot, creating the unusual situation of two Senate candidates with nearly identical names competing in the same election.

The congressional inquiry will examine the alleged recruitment effort and the involvement of individuals associated with Peltola’s campaign.

Trump Demands Peltola Face Consequences

President Trump responded forcefully to the allegations Wednesday, accusing Democrats of attempting to interfere with the Senate race.

“The Democrats cheated!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

He alleged that Democratic operatives recruited another Dan Sullivan to confuse voters and accused those involved of misleading the courts.

“She shouldn’t be allowed to run, and neither should the FAKE Dan Sullivan!” Trump declared.

In another post, Trump called the alleged operation “ELECTION FRAUD” and argued that Peltola should face legal and political consequences.

Speaking with reporters Wednesday, the president went even further.

“I think she should be prosecuted criminally,” Trump said.

The president’s remarks significantly raised the stakes of the controversy, placing the White House directly into a dispute over one of the country’s closely watched Senate contests.

However, Trump’s accusations of election fraud and perjury have not been established in court, and the legality of recruiting additional candidates remains disputed.

Alaska Governor Orders Separate Investigation

The congressional inquiry is not the only investigation examining the controversy.

Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy, a Republican, has directed the state’s Department of Public Safety to investigate whether the alleged recruitment effort violated state law.

Dunleavy said officials should determine whether criminal charges or civil action are warranted.

The governor argued that voters must be able to cast ballots for their intended candidates without being misled by confusing names.

The controversy has also reached federal court.

The Trump administration’s Justice Department filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent Alaska from certifying a Peltola victory under certain circumstances, particularly if the margin separating her from the incumbent is smaller than the number of votes received by the other Sullivan.

But legal experts have questioned whether federal authorities have grounds to intervene.

Alaska’s Supreme Court previously allowed the additional Sullivan to remain on the ballot, and state election officials have defended the legal process governing his candidacy.

Democrats Deny Involvement as Election Nears

Peltola’s campaign and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee have denied participating in the recruitment effort.

Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., the additional candidate, has also maintained that he entered the race independently.

The New York Times reported that its investigation included interviews and internal communications concerning the alleged operation.

Former campaign manager Rios told the newspaper that voters deserved a fuller understanding of how the additional candidate entered the race.

The reported strategy, commonly known as ballot stacking, involves recruiting additional candidates who might draw support away from an opponent.

Such tactics are not automatically illegal, and questions remain about whether any laws were violated in this case.

Alaska’s election system adds another wrinkle: The state uses a nonpartisan primary that advances four candidates to a ranked-choice general election, where voters can rank candidates in order of preference.

That means the presence of another candidate with the same name does not necessarily translate directly into votes lost by the incumbent. A New Election Fight for Trump and House Republicans

With the November 3 midterms approaching, the allegations have transformed Alaska’s Senate contest into a broader dispute over election integrity, campaign tactics and the limits of federal intervention.

Trump has demanded consequences for Peltola, while Comer is moving ahead with a congressional investigation that could continue well beyond Election Day.

For now, no court has established that Peltola or her campaign committed election fraud.

But the allegations have already triggered investigations at both the state and federal levels, a lawsuit involving the Justice Department and renewed scrutiny of Democratic campaign operations.

The immediate question is whether investigators can establish who recruited the second Dan Sullivan, what role Peltola’s campaign played and whether any laws were broken.

Marjorie Taylor Greene Unleashes Brutal Trump Insult as GOP Faces Midterm Showdown

0
Marjorie Taylor Greene -Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, via Wikimedia Commons

The former MAGA firebrand is taking another swing at President Donald Trump, warning that his influence could spell disaster for Republican candidates just days before voters head to the polls.

Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) is escalating her bitter feud with President Donald Trump, delivering a blistering insult that could deepen divisions within the Republican Party just days before the November midterm elections.

Once among Trump’s most outspoken allies, Greene now claims the president has become a political liability for the very Republicans he is campaigning to elect.

“Trump has become a curse to Republican candidates and it will be worse in ’28,” Greene wrote on X.

The extraordinary attack came after Trump suggested during a Georgia campaign rally that his willingness to help the state could depend on his relationship with its elected representatives.

Greene accused the president of putting personal grievances ahead of the needs of Georgia residents, marking another dramatic escalation in their increasingly hostile relationship.

Greene Blasts Trump Over Georgia Rally Remarks

The latest confrontation began after Trump appeared at a Saturday rally in Perry, Georgia, to boost Republican candidates ahead of the November 3 elections.

During his remarks, Trump emphasized the importance of electing lawmakers who maintain a strong working relationship with the White House.

The president praised Rep. Mike Collins (R-Ga.), the Republican Senate nominee challenging Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff, and suggested Collins would have no trouble reaching him when Georgia needed assistance.

“Collins could call me anytime he wants,” Trump told supporters.

But Trump quickly shifted gears, mocking Ossoff with a reference to the television character Pee-wee Herman and suggesting he would be less receptive to requests from political opponents.

“But he needs money for Georgia. I don’t give a damn what he wants. I’m not in,” Trump said while describing how he might respond to a request from someone he disliked.

Greene seized on those remarks, accusing Trump of threatening to withhold assistance from Georgia over personal political differences.

“He has no idea how bad he is doing in GA,” Greene wrote.

She went on to argue that Trump’s comments demonstrated a lack of concern for ordinary Georgians before delivering her stinging assessment of his political influence.

Her criticism reflects her interpretation of Trump’s remarks. The president did not announce a formal policy to withhold federal funding from Georgia.

From MAGA Loyalist to Fierce Trump Critic

Greene’s latest broadside is particularly striking given her history as one of Trump’s most aggressive defenders on Capitol Hill.

The former Georgia congresswoman built her political reputation championing Trump’s America First agenda, attacking his Democratic opponents and defending him through some of his most contentious political battles.

But their alliance unraveled in late 2025.

Trump withdrew his endorsement of Greene in November after the two clashed over several issues, including the administration’s handling of documents related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Greene also accused the president of failing to devote enough attention to the rising cost of living, an issue that has become increasingly important to voters ahead of the midterms.

Their feud intensified until Greene resigned from Congress in January 2026.

By April, she was openly questioning whether the president still represented the political movement she had spent years defending.

“This is not the same man that we supported,” Greene said at the time.

Trump has hardly remained silent.

During an October 16 rally in Dalton, Georgia, the president mocked his former ally by calling her “Marjorie Taylor Brown” and referring to her as a “whack job.”

He also celebrated Republican Clay Fuller’s victory in the race to succeed Greene in Congress, underscoring just how far their once-close political relationship has deteriorated.

Greene Warns Republicans Could Pay the Price

Greene’s latest attack comes as Republicans fight to preserve their congressional majorities in a challenging political environment.

With Election Day approaching, Trump has been traveling across the country to rally supporters and boost Republican candidates in competitive races.

But Greene argues that the president’s involvement could ultimately hurt the party rather than help it.

Her warning extends beyond November’s elections, suggesting that Republicans could face even greater difficulties during the 2028 presidential race.

Greene has repeatedly criticized the administration’s handling of the war with Iran, the Epstein files and economic concerns, arguing that Republicans have strayed from the promises that helped return Trump to the White House.

On Monday, she issued another warning, predicting that voters would deliver a message to Republicans on November 3.

“There is a powerful lesson that voters are going to send to Republicans on Nov 3rd, but I’m not confident they will learn the lesson,” Greene wrote.

Her comments reflect a growing personal dispute with Trump, although they do not necessarily represent the views of the broader Republican electorate.

Trump Pushes Forward as Election Day Nears

Despite Greene’s criticism, Trump remains deeply involved in the Republican Party’s final midterm push.

The president has campaigned for candidates across several battleground states, including Georgia, where Collins is attempting to unseat Ossoff in one of the nation’s closely watched Senate contests.

Trump has also emphasized his ability to deliver political support and federal attention to states represented by Republican allies.

For Greene, however, the president’s latest Georgia remarks were another sign that personal loyalty has become too important in his political calculations.

The former congresswoman’s attack adds a new layer of drama to an already tense election season, with Republicans attempting to maintain party unity as Democrats seek to capitalize on voter dissatisfaction over economic conditions and the administration’s policies.

Whether Greene’s criticism resonates with Republican voters remains uncertain.

But one thing is clear: The political alliance that once made Greene one of Trump’s loudest defenders has become one of the Republican Party’s most bitter public feuds.

Hillary Clinton Reveals Major Regret About James Comey as Former FBI Director Faces New Legal Trouble

0
Hillary Clinton via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Nearly 10 years after losing the White House to Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton is still revisiting the FBI controversy that rocked her campaign. Now, the former director at the center of it is facing fresh legal trouble.

Hillary Clinton is taking another shot at former FBI Director James Comey, admitting she wishes she had confronted him more aggressively before her stunning 2016 election defeat to President Donald Trump.

The former secretary of state made the surprising admission during a Wednesday appearance on Kara Swisher’s High Stakes podcast, accusing Comey of breaking Justice Department norms and suggesting he was trying to win favor with Republicans.

“I wish somebody had told me that I needed to take on Jim Comey,” Clinton said.

Her remarks come at a particularly explosive moment for Comey, who is now battling fresh federal allegations brought by Trump’s Justice Department over an alleged leak of sensitive national defense information.

And the timing is difficult to ignore: A decade after Comey’s actions helped ignite a political firestorm surrounding Clinton, both are once again making headlines over the same turbulent election year.

Clinton Admits She Wishes She Had Fought Back

Clinton’s latest criticism centers on Comey’s controversial decision to reopen scrutiny of her private email server just days before the 2016 presidential election.

On October 28, 2016, Comey notified Congress that the FBI was reviewing newly discovered emails potentially connected to its investigation into Clinton’s handling of government communications.

The announcement landed just 11 days before Election Day, thrusting the email scandal back into the national spotlight as Clinton battled Trump for the presidency.

Although Comey informed Congress on November 6 that the FBI’s findings remained unchanged and criminal charges were not warranted, Clinton has repeatedly argued that the political damage was already done.

Now, 10 years later, she says she should have gone on the offensive.

“Did I want to pick a fight with the director of the FBI? Well, in retrospect, yeah, I did,” Clinton acknowledged.

She also accused Comey of making a calculated political decision that violated the Justice Department’s longstanding practice of avoiding interference in elections.

Clinton suggested that her unwillingness to confront the FBI director reflected a broader failure to recognize how dramatically American politics had changed.

“I’ve been the do-right person for way too long when it comes to not fighting back,” she said.

The comments mark another chapter in Clinton’s long-running criticism of the FBI’s handling of the investigation, which became one of the defining controversies of Trump’s first presidential victory.

Trump’s Bitter Feud With Comey Takes Another Turn

Comey’s political troubles did not end with Clinton’s defeat.

Although Trump initially praised the FBI director’s decision to revisit Clinton’s emails, their relationship quickly deteriorated after Trump entered the White House.

Comey continued overseeing the FBI’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, including possible connections involving members of Trump’s campaign.

In May 2017, Trump fired Comey, setting off a political firestorm that ultimately led to the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller.

Mueller’s investigation documented Russian election interference but did not establish a criminal conspiracy between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

Comey subsequently became one of Trump’s most outspoken critics, frequently challenging the president’s conduct and defending his own leadership of the FBI.

Trump, meanwhile, has repeatedly accused Comey of misconduct and questioned his integrity.

That bitter feud has now spilled into another federal courtroom battle.

Trump’s DOJ Targets Comey Over Alleged 2016 Leak

On Monday, the Justice Department revealed a new criminal case against Comey involving allegations that he improperly disclosed national defense information while serving as FBI director in October 2016.

According to newly unsealed court documents, federal prosecutors allege Comey directed FBI personnel to share sensitive information with a New York Times reporter while attempting to correct reporting about a government surveillance operation.

Prosecutors filed a two-count criminal information accusing Comey of unlawfully transmitting national defense information and conspiring to disclose it.

The filing represents the Trump administration’s third attempt to pursue federal criminal charges against the former FBI director.

But the latest case has already encountered a major legal fight.

Rather than obtaining a grand jury indictment, prosecutors filed a criminal information in an effort to preserve the allegations before the statute of limitations expired.

Comey’s attorneys argue that the maneuver is legally invalid and that prosecutors cannot proceed with the felony allegations without securing an indictment.

The Justice Department has defended its approach, maintaining that the procedure is permitted under federal law.

Comey has denied wrongdoing and accused the administration of pursuing a politically motivated prosecution.

“I’m still innocent. I’m not afraid of these people,” Comey said in a video statement Monday.

His attorneys have also pointed out that earlier federal investigations into the alleged disclosure did not result in charges.

A federal judge has yet to resolve the latest dispute over whether prosecutors can move forward.

Trump Delivers Another Blunt Verdict

Trump has made no secret of his contempt for the former FBI director.

Asked about the latest legal proceedings this week, the president said he was unfamiliar with the specifics of the new case but offered a harsh assessment of his longtime adversary.

“He’s a dirty cop, James Comey,” Trump told reporters, according to reporting published Wednesday.

The president’s remarks underscore just how deeply the animosity between the two men has persisted since Comey’s dismissal nearly a decade ago.

Comey also faces a separate federal case stemming from a social media post featuring seashells arranged to spell “8647,” which prosecutors interpreted as a threat against Trump. Comey’s attorneys dispute that characterization and are seeking dismissal of the case.

An earlier prosecution involving Comey’s congressional testimony was dismissed after a court found that the prosecutor who brought it had been unlawfully appointed.

The latest legal challenges have placed the former FBI director back at the center of the political battles that defined Trump’s first administration.

Clinton’s 2016 Grievances Refuse to Fade

Clinton’s latest comments also revive a familiar debate over why she lost an election that many political observers expected her to win.

While Clinton has repeatedly criticized Comey’s actions, Republicans have pointed to other factors, including her campaign strategy, failure to visit Wisconsin during the general election and controversial remarks about Trump supporters.

Fox News contributor Joe Concha dismissed her latest complaints, arguing that confronting Comey would not have erased the mistakes that contributed to her defeat.

Concha also criticized Clinton’s handling of classified information and suggested she was attempting to portray herself as a victim of the controversy.

Clinton, however, appears increasingly convinced that she should have taken a more combative approach.

Her latest remarks arrive as Trump prepares for another midterm election and his administration continues pursuing legal action against one of his most prominent former adversaries.

James O’Keefe Faces Felony Charges After Undercover Election Sting Backfires

0
Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC via Wikimedia Commons

Conservative investigative journalist James O’Keefe set out to expose alleged vulnerabilities in Minnesota’s election system. Now, he’s facing felony charges over the very operation he filmed.

O’Keefe, 42, and fellow conservative commentator Cam Higby, 26, were charged Wednesday with unlawful voting and identity theft following an undercover investigation at Minneapolis polling places during Minnesota’s August primary.

The charges come just days before the November midterm elections, raising the stakes in an already heated national debate over election security.

Undercover Election Sting Takes Unexpected Turn

The controversy began August 11, when O’Keefe and Higby entered several Minnesota polling locations wearing what they described as Muslim clothing and speaking in fabricated accents.

Armed with hidden cameras, the pair attempted to demonstrate potential weaknesses in Minnesota’s voter registration system.

Their target was a decades-old state law allowing registered voters to vouch for the residency of other eligible voters who lack conventional proof of residence.

But prosecutors say the operation crossed a legal line.

According to the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, O’Keefe and Higby identified themselves to election workers using the names of actual registered voters without those individuals’ permission.

Neither man ultimately cast a ballot or signed the required voter oath.

Prosecutors argue that distinction doesn’t erase the alleged violation.

“The fundamental issue here is you cannot go into a polling place and misidentify yourself and use other people’s identity,” Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said during Wednesday’s announcement, according to The Hill.

Prosecutors Say The Sting Went Too Far

Moriarty insisted the charges had nothing to do with the men’s political beliefs, disguises, or motivation for investigating election procedures.

Instead, she argued that Minnesota law prohibits intentionally misrepresenting one’s identity while applying for a ballot, regardless of whether a vote is ultimately cast.

The Hennepin County Attorney’s Office confirmed that both men face felony counts of unlawful voting and identity theft.

Each charge carries a maximum potential penalty of five years in prison and a $10,000 fine, according to The Washington Post.

However, Moriarty told FOX 9 that probation would be the presumptive sentence under Minnesota’s sentencing guidelines.

O’Keefe’s Ally Fires Back

Higby is already pushing back, accusing Minnesota authorities of using the criminal justice system to punish independent journalists who challenge election procedures.

In a statement reported by The Washington Post, Higby maintained that he never voted, signed an affidavit, or broke the law.

He also characterized the prosecution as an attempt to discourage scrutiny of Minnesota’s election system.

Higby has launched a legal defense fundraiser, according to Mediaite.

The pair’s undercover videos were intended to raise questions about Minnesota’s voter-vouching process, which allows a registered voter to verify another eligible voter’s residence.

Critics have argued the provision creates opportunities for abuse. State election officials maintain that safeguards exist to prevent fraudulent voting.

According to Moriarty, vouching accounted for approximately 0.6% of votes cast in Minnesota during the 2024 election.

One Voter Says The System Worked

The sting also drew scrutiny from voters whose identities were allegedly used without authorization.

CBS News Minnesota previously interviewed William Pomeranz, a registered voter whose name O’Keefe allegedly used during the operation.

Pomeranz said he learned about the impersonation after someone alerted him to the footage.

Despite the incident, he was able to cast his ballot without difficulty.

“Kudos to the poll workers. They reported it afterwards,” Pomeranz told CBS News Minnesota.

The encounter has become a central point of disagreement: O’Keefe and Higby sought to highlight vulnerabilities, while Minnesota officials argue the episode demonstrates that election safeguards functioned as intended.

Court Showdown Looms Before Midterms

The timing adds another layer of controversy.

With Election Day less than a week away, the prosecution puts one of conservative media’s best-known undercover operatives at the center of a fresh election-security battle.

Moriarty maintains the timing of the charges was coincidental.

O’Keefe and Higby have not been taken into custody and are scheduled to make their initial court appearances November 16.

For now, an operation intended to expose alleged flaws in Minnesota’s voting system has turned into a legal fight over how far undercover investigators can go before their methods become criminal conduct.

Trump Administration Boots Cuban Diplomat After Explosive UN Showdown

2

A fiery confrontation at the United Nations has ended with the Trump administration ordering a Cuban diplomat out of the United States after he allegedly shoved an American official during a heated exchange with U.S. Ambassador Mike Waltz.

Waltz revealed Tuesday night that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had signed paperwork to expel the Cuban representative following a chaotic shouting match on the floor of the United Nations General Assembly.

The confrontation erupted as Waltz criticized Cuba’s communist leadership, prompting an angry response from Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla and other members of the country’s delegation.

Appearing on Fox News’ Hannity, Waltz made clear that the Trump administration would not tolerate the alleged physical confrontation.

“He’s gone. He is going to be on a plane to Havana within the next 24 hours,” Waltz told host Sean Hannity, according to Mediaite.

“You lay a hand on an American here in the United States, President Trump, Secretary Rubio and myself, we’re not going to stand for it,” he added.

Heated UN Showdown Spirals Out of Control

The diplomatic fireworks began Tuesday as Waltz addressed the General Assembly ahead of a vote on a resolution condemning the longstanding U.S. economic embargo against Cuba.

During his remarks, Waltz accused Cuba’s ruling elite of enjoying lavish lifestyles while ordinary citizens struggled with poverty, shortages and economic hardship.

His criticism quickly drew an angry response.

Members of the Cuban delegation began shouting objections and demanding that Waltz be called to order. Rodríguez Parrilla eventually approached the front of the assembly, accusing the American ambassador of lying.

Waltz refused to back down.

“I’m the representative of the United States of America. Back up,” Waltz declared, according to The National.

“This isn’t Havana. You’re not going to intimidate me,” he added.

The confrontation grew so heated that General Assembly President Khalilur Rahman temporarily suspended proceedings to restore order.

Cuban Diplomat Accused of Crossing the Line

But the shouting match was only part of the controversy.

Waltz later accused another member of the Cuban delegation of physically confronting an American diplomat who was documenting the incident.

Video shared by the ambassador appeared to show a Cuban official placing his hand over an American diplomat’s phone as the confrontation unfolded.

Waltz alleged that the representative also attempted to intimidate UN personnel into cutting off microphones during his speech.

According to Waltz, the official was the first secretary of Cuba’s delegation and had shoved and attempted to assault an American diplomat.

The ambassador said Rubio had already authorized the official’s removal from the country.

The reported expulsion represents a significant escalation in the dispute. Waltz’s announcement established that the administration had ordered the diplomat’s departure, although his actual departure had not yet been independently confirmed.

Washington and Havana Face Off Again

The confrontation comes amid escalating tensions between the Trump administration and Cuba’s communist government.

Washington has intensified economic pressure on Havana, including measures targeting countries that supply the island with oil.

Cuba has blamed American sanctions for worsening economic conditions, while U.S. officials argue that decades of government mismanagement and repression are responsible for much of the country’s suffering.

The dispute has also spilled into the United Nations, where Cuba has repeatedly sought international condemnation of the American embargo.

The General Assembly was scheduled to vote Wednesday on its annual resolution calling for an end to the restrictions. Although the measure is nonbinding, it has historically attracted overwhelming international support.

Tuesday’s confrontation followed another public clash between American and Cuban representatives at the UN the previous week, underscoring the increasingly hostile relationship between the two governments.

For Waltz, however, the latest episode was about more than diplomatic disagreements.

The ambassador said Cuban representatives had attempted to intimidate American officials on U.S. soil — and warned that the Trump administration was prepared to impose consequences.

Trump’s Senate Pick Sparks A Republican Revolt

1
The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

President Donald Trump is going all in for South Carolina’s Republican Senate nominee. The congressman she defeated is sitting this one out—and making sure everyone knows why.

Rep. Ralph Norman told Fox News Digital on Tuesday that he will not campaign for Sen. Darline Graham, accusing Trump and powerful interests of trying to impose their preferred candidate on voters.

The public blowup comes one week before Election Day, with Graham facing Democrat Annie Andrews in a race that has become more competitive than Republicans anticipated.

A Primary Fight That Never Ended

Graham defeated Norman in the August Republican runoff after receiving Trump’s endorsement. But the nomination battle has left a lasting split.

In a text message to Fox, Norman accused special interests and the president of spending millions to promote misleading claims about Graham’s qualifications. He argued that South Carolinians should not have to accept a nominee simply because party leaders demand it.

“Elections have consequences,” Norman told the outlet.

According to Fox, Graham’s campaign manager approached Norman’s chief of staff about having the congressman campaign alongside her. Norman declined—and said another request would not change his answer.

There is a distinction between his campaign boycott and his ballot: Fox reported that Norman previously said he would vote for Graham, even though members of his family would not.

Another Blow From Across the Aisle

Andrews, a pediatrician, has also picked up support from two former South Carolina governors who once represented opposing parties.

Republican David Beasley and Democrat Jim Hodges appeared together in an endorsement video released by Andrews’ campaign Monday, WIS reported. Their joint appearance gives Andrews prominent validators outside the usual Democratic campaign lineup.

Norman’s son, Warren, has separately written that he is leaning toward Andrews, according to Fox’s account of his FITSNews opinion piece.

Trump Doubles Down

Republican leaders are pressing ahead with their case for Graham, who was appointed to the Senate following the death of her brother, Lindsey Graham.

Fox reported that the Senate Leadership Fund, a political action committee aligned with Senate Majority Leader John Thune, pledged $5 million in advertising for the South Carolina contest.

Trump has also campaigned for Graham, while the Republican National Committee argues that defeating Andrews will unite the party.

But the race has tightened enough for the Cook Political Report to move it from “Likely Republican” to “Lean Republican,” according to Fox. That leaves Graham favored, with less breathing room.

Trump helped her win the nomination. With the general election approaching, Norman is making clear that delivering the seat will be someone else’s job.

DeSantis Gives Trump Gold Coin With Defiant Message After Assassination Attempts

0
Ron DeSantis via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis welcomed President Donald Trump to Florida on Friday with an unusual gift: a gold coin depicting the president raising his middle finger beneath a profane message.

The inscription reads, “YOU MISSED BITCHES.”

DeSantis presented the coin as Trump arrived for a campaign appearance in Fort Myers on October 23. Trump subsequently displayed the gift to reporters, according to The Hill’s reporting, republished by AOL.

The governor said he obtained the coin from a friend. Explaining how he requested one, DeSantis recalled saying, “I need to get this to the president. Can I please have one to give to him?” the Washington Examiner reported.

A Message Against The Backdrop Of Political Violence

The New York Post interpreted the inscription as a message to Trump’s would-be assassins. The Hill, however, noted that its precise meaning was unclear. Neither interpretation establishes an explanation from Trump or DeSantis.

Trump survived two assassination attempts during his 2024 presidential campaign.

On July 13, a gunman opened fire during his rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. Trump was struck by a bullet, the FBI confirmed in congressional testimony later that month. The shooting killed attendee Corey Comperatore and wounded David Dutch and James Copenhaver.

A second attempt unfolded September 15 at Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, Florida. According to the Justice Department, a Secret Service agent patrolling ahead of Trump spotted Ryan Wesley Routh aiming a rifle from a concealed position along the course’s fence line. The agent fired, and Routh fled before being apprehended.

Routh was convicted in September 2025 and sentenced February 4, 2026, to life in prison plus seven years, the department said.

Former Rivals Meet Before Florida Rally

Friday’s exchange also brought together two Republicans whose relationship has weathered a bitter presidential primary.

Trump backed DeSantis for governor in 2018. DeSantis later challenged him for the 2024 Republican nomination before withdrawing and endorsing Trump, The Hill reported.

Trump’s latest Florida visit included campaigning for Rep. Byron Donalds, the Republican seeking to succeed the term-limited governor, according to the Washington Examiner.

War Secretary Faces Fresh Impeachment Call

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth visits U.S. Navy Sailors aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) near San Diego, Calif., Oct. 7, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Madelyn Keech)

Rep. Thomas Massie has a message for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth: If you’re still running the Pentagon after the midterms, the impeachment fight is coming back.

The Kentucky Republican indicated Monday that he plans to reintroduce articles of impeachment when Congress returns to Washington following the November elections — adding pressure as new reporting raises questions about whether Hegseth could seek a move to the Senate.

According to The Hill, Massie posted an exchange with an unnamed reporter who asked whether he would revive the effort.

“Will you reintroduce articles of impeachment against SecDef Hegseth when Congress returns to DC?” Massie recounted on X.

His answer was brief: “If he’s still SecDef.”

A Republican Keeps the Pressure On

Massie first introduced eight articles of impeachment against Hegseth in September, accusing the defense secretary of violating constitutional limits and federal law in his handling of military operations.

The Iran war was central to the resolution. Massie alleged that Hegseth continued the conflict without congressional authorization, disregarded Congress’s direction to withdraw and failed to prevent unnecessary civilian casualties. Those are allegations underlying the impeachment effort, rather than findings established by a congressional trial.

The Pentagon defended Hegseth when Massie launched the effort.

“Secretary Hegseth has been a transformative leader for the Department of War,” Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson told ABC News in September. Wilson also said the department stood behind his leadership.

Massie’s latest warning comes as Democrats sharpen their own threats against the Pentagon chief.

The Hill reported Monday that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Democrats would run Hegseth “out of town” if they capture the House. The outlet has also reported that Senate Democrats are discussing his departure as a condition for cooperation on defense issues during the lame-duck session.

The timing matters: Lawmakers returning immediately after the election will still belong to the current Congress. Any newly elected Democratic majority would take power in January.

A Possible Opening in Tennessee

Meanwhile, speculation about Hegseth’s next move has shifted toward Tennessee.

As previously covered by GAND, Puck’s Leigh Ann Caldwell reported that Hegseth has been seeking an appointment to Sen. Marsha Blackburn’s seat should the Tennessee Republican win the governor’s race and leave the Senate. Mediaite’s account of Caldwell’s reporting also identified Rep. Tim Burchett as another interested contender.

That scenario remains speculative. Blackburn would first have to win the governorship, and no appointment of Hegseth has been announced.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell previously rejected the speculation, telling Axios that Hegseth remained focused on leading the department.

An Impeachment Vote Would Be the First Hurdle

Massie’s pledge does not guarantee Hegseth’s removal. The House can impeach an official by a simple majority, but conviction and removal require a two-thirds vote of senators present.

Massie is also approaching the end of his own congressional tenure after losing his Republican primary to a Trump-backed challenger. He nevertheless retains his seat through the remainder of the current term.

His Monday statement makes clear that he intends to use that remaining time to renew the fight — provided Hegseth is still at the Pentagon when lawmakers return.

Judge Rules DOJ Illegally Fired James Comey’s Daughter

3
Image via Wikimedia Commons

A federal judge ruled Monday that the Justice Department unlawfully fired Maurene Comey, the former Manhattan prosecutor and daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, rejecting the Trump administration’s defense of her dismissal.

U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman granted Comey retroactive reinstatement and back pay covering the period from her termination through December 20, 2025, according to Mediaite. The relief covers that past period of employment; it does not establish that she is returning to work as a federal prosecutor today.

ABC News reported that Furman found her termination violated civil service rules. The decision delivers a setback to the administration in a dispute over its authority to dismiss career federal prosecutors.

Judge Rejects Administration’s Defense

The Justice Department defended Comey’s removal under Article II of the Constitution, which establishes the president’s executive authority.

Furman rejected that argument. As quoted by Mediaite, he warned that accepting the government’s position would “unsettle the very equilibrium established by this Nation’s constitutional system.”

The dispute centers on the legal protections afforded career government employees and whether the administration could rely on presidential authority to bypass those protections when removing Comey.

Furman had already allowed her lawsuit to proceed in an April ruling, rejecting the government’s argument that she had to pursue her challenge through the federal Merit Systems Protection Board. He concluded that the administration’s reliance on Article II placed her challenge outside the administrative review process the government said should apply.

Nearly a Decade in the Manhattan Prosecutor’s Office

Comey served as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York for nearly ten years. Her work included the prosecutions of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, according to Mediaite.

She was fired on July 16, 2025, according to Furman’s earlier opinion. That court record establishes a July dismissal date, rather than the August date cited in Mediaite’s account.

The April opinion described Comey as a highly regarded prosecutor who had received strong evaluations. It also noted that she was assigned another prominent case just one day before officials in Washington notified her by email that her employment was ending immediately. The stated basis was Article II.

In her lawsuit, Comey alleged that she was dismissed because of her relationship with her father, her perceived political affiliation and beliefs, or both. Those allegations formed part of her challenge to the firing.

After her dismissal, Comey urged former colleagues to resist letting the episode influence their work. In a farewell message obtained by Politico and quoted by Mediaite, she warned that “fear is the tool of a tyrant.”

Pete Hegseth Reportedly Eyeing Pivot To Senate Seat

0
By Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America - Pete Hegseth, CC BY-SA 2.0

War Secretary Pete Hegseth may have his eye on a different Washington address — and the opening could depend on a fellow Republican’s next move.

Hegseth is reportedly seeking an appointment to the U.S. Senate as concerns mount about a possible impeachment effort after the midterm elections. His potential route runs through Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn, whose seat would become available if she wins the governor’s race and leaves Congress.

In an October 25 report, Puck described Capitol Hill chatter that Hegseth has been pressing for Blackburn to appoint him as her successor. The reporting raises the possibility of a move from President Donald Trump’s Cabinet to the chamber that could otherwise confront an impeachment case against him.

A Senate opening — with competition

The potential appointment comes with a significant complication: Hegseth apparently is not the only Republican interested.

According to Mediaite’s account of Puck’s reporting, Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., also wants the seat.

Puck journalist Leigh Ann Caldwell reported that Hegseth attended a University of Tennessee football game with Blackburn earlier this month, with Burchett alongside them. Caldwell also reported, citing someone familiar with Burchett’s intentions, that the congressman has been campaigning for Blackburn across the state.

That puts a Tennessee lawmaker with an established political network in the mix for the same opportunity reportedly attracting Hegseth.

Caldwell also questioned whether Hegseth’s relatively recent Tennessee residency would carry enough weight.

His time in the state, she wrote, “might not count as real Tennessee roots.”

Impeachment pressure builds

The maneuvering comes as Democrats weigh their next steps against the Pentagon chief.

Puck reported that momentum is building among House Democrats to pursue impeachment when Congress returns after Election Day. Caldwell also reported that some Republicans hope Trump will dismiss Hegseth before an impeachment effort advances, while some senators envision him stepping down before they must confront a trial. Those possibilities remain reported discussions, rather than announced decisions.

The political backdrop is becoming more threatening for Republicans.

CNN chief data analyst Harry Enten said Sunday that the numbers were heading toward “blowout territory,” according to Mediaite. He cited a 69% chance that Democrats would capture at least 230 House seats — a forecast that would put them comfortably above the majority threshold.

That remains a projection. Voters have yet to determine control of the next Congress.

Impeachment would also require separate decisions in each chamber. A House majority can approve articles of impeachment, but conviction and removal require support from two-thirds of senators present. Winning a congressional majority would not, by itself, give Democrats enough votes to remove Hegseth.

The Pentagon has pushed back

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell previously denied the Senate speculation to Axios, saying Hegseth remained focused on leading the department.

For now, the reported Senate route rests on several unresolved decisions: Blackburn must win and vacate her seat, then choose a successor. And on top of it all, Hegseth would also have to leave the Cabinet.