The New York Times on Wednesday published a blockbuster story claiming that multiple former staffers on the campaign of Alaska Democratic Senatorial nominee Mary Peltola implicated her and others in the effort to confuse voters with decoy “Dan Sullivan” candidates. Peltola has long denied knowledge or involvement, but the Times reported that she was allegedly aware of the effort that also involved campaign officials, its lawyers and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Rounding out the array of “usual suspects” is the Marc Elias Group. Elias was involved in the Russian hoax and has been previously sanctioned in court. The Times reported that Peltola’s campaign manager told it that “Alaskan voters need to know.”
Democrats like Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) immediately ran out to do damage control and depict Rio as a “disgruntled former employee.” The problem is that it is not just Rio. The Times referenced multiple campaign workers and brought receipts.
The Times names Democratic operative Jerid Kurtz, who allegedly worked with and communicated with Rios and others on the campaign, including Anton McParland, who at the time was Ms. Peltola’s chief of staff. It also states that campaign lawyers were involved in this despicable dirty trick to get voters to cast mistaken ballots.
The Times reported that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, chaired by Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), was aware of and involved in the effort. The effort was allegedly called “a ballot composition” project and Kurtz was allegedly paid through a pro-Peltola fund.
The Times details the effort to conceal it. For example, the paper reports:
The Peltola aides worried at times that Mr. Kurtz’s efforts would be discovered, such as when he posted an image of the Anchorage airport on his Instagram account.
“I am hearing that our friend in the state is being noticed,” Mr. McParland wrote in a text message in January reviewed by The Times. Andrew Piatt, the D.S.C.C.’s director of campaigns, replied: “We will check in.”
Peltola refused to address specifics in response to the story. She attacked the liberal New York Times for just trying “to sell newspapers” and dismissed the story by saying that “Nobody’s waking up worried about ballot composition. Not even me. I’m worried about my bills. I’m worried about affordability in health care.”
Peltola is clearly hoping to ride this out for the last week. However, it could snowball legally. The staff was aware of past public denials and the likelihood of an investigation. Indeed, the Justice Department filed to try to address the confusion, but Peltola filed to block the effort and declared in court filings that the allegations were “baseless.”
There may be questions as to whether the lawyers and staff were forthcoming in such filings,
It is not a crime to help engineer decoy candidates, even if it is viewed as the lowest form of dirty politics. Lying about your knowledge or involvement only magnifies the unethical conduct.
However, it is easy to trip a legal wire in such efforts. Campaign filings must be true and correct. Indeed, Elias and the Clinton campaign were later sanctioned for hiding the funding of the infamous Steele dossier as a legal expense. (The Clinton campaign denied such involvement until after the election). The Times refers to the Elias Group as opposed to Elias as an individual in the account of this effort to confuse voters.
There can be allegations of not only misrepresentations in filings but possible violations in the pressuring of potential witnesses, destruction of evidence, or false statements to federal investigators.
The risk of such allegations should lead the Peltola lawyers to withdraw from further work, as they could become potential witnesses and targets in state or federal investigations. Reports indicate grand jury subpoenas are expected in the coming days.
There are also questions about the past interactions of the decoy Dan Sullivan, who insisted that the idea to run was his own idea and that he did not have communications with the Democrats on such an effort. He also has not responded to the story.
Yet, the Times reports an extensive effort to coordinate and communicate with decoys:
The operation began in the summer of 2025 to lure potential spoiler candidates onto the state’s unusual four-person ballot, Ms. Rios said. …
Months later, in early 2026, Mr. Kurtz participated in a video call with members of the ballot composition team, Ms. Rios said. He told the group he had made contact with one of the Dan Sullivans. This Mr. Sullivan lived in the tiny village of Petersburg, and Mr. Kurtz described him as amenable to running if it would help Ms. Peltola, Ms. Rios said.
Mr. Kurtz “told us when he found him,” she said. He said Mr. Sullivan “said he hated Trump, and if it was going to help Mary, he liked Mary. He didn’t have any interest in being a politician, but if this could help.”
Mr. Sullivan, who has maintained that he entered the race of his own volition, did not respond to repeated requests for comment over the past week.
With the reported investigations unfolding, this has the makings of a major scandal with possible criminal and civil elements. It would be wise for staffers to “lawyer up.” The likelihood of state and federal investigations is quite high and it is also likely that some of these same sources will cooperate with investigators. Lawyers tend to minimize the risk for their clients in such investigation. They do not want their client to be the target without a chair when the music stops.
In other words, this is likely to metastasize in the coming weeks. However, with the rapidly approaching election, the die is cast on the ballots. That may be good news for the Democrats for retaking power, but it may not be good news for the potential targets. It will only magnify the costs of this conspiracy if it moves from a political conspiracy to an actual criminal conspiracy.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
It is hard to understand how a more purverse voting system that a top four runoff system followed by a ranked-choice vote could ever be put into practice. Voters in Alaska ought to read Sir Michael Dumments “Principles of Electoral Refor,,” Oxford University Press, 1997 and on Ranked-Choice voting see: https://nationalrenewalpartysite.org/
It is hard to understand how the severely restricted-vote republic form of “democracy” that was created in Greece in 508 B.C. and perpetuated in Rome and the United States of America was ever abandoned.
The Founders’ intent was that voters must be male, European, and 21 with 50 lbs. Sterling, or 50 acres.
They intended for capable, ambitious, and successful people to participate in governance casually and temporarily, allowing the Constitution and Bill of Rights to hold dominion.
Intent to deceive is a key element in many crimes,
Of which crime relevant to the topic of this article is “intent to deceive” an element?
Still being investigated you DF
Then why would Turley write an article alleging criminal activities could be involved BEFORE we have any information?
Have you read his book? This is precisely what he complains fuels the Age of Rage.
We have some information and more being discovered. ANON posts crap daily.
You know what I meant by my post. Quit playing dumb games. You are trying to fuel rage with your stupid questions.
Figure it out BOZO ANON!!!
We know but we’re not going to tell you.
It is a required element – it is not the SOLE element.
Almost all crimes require and act that violates the rights of others.
I am shocked. The NYTs published that article?
Maybe you should read the Old Gray Lady more then?
The Old Gray Lady ain’t what she used to be. .. I, too, am a little shocked this was all the news fit to print.
*I would not be surprised with any Democrat skullduggery, of course, but there is only one Trump .. . and no one could possibly confuse him with Dan.
And Obama owes hundreds of millions on that golden calf he made of himself for which he cannot pay the workers. It is IMP the most hideous monolith swallowing 20 acres of land in world history.
It is good to see the press featuring him condemning Trump for raising private funds for a ballroom to be enjoyed by all future presidents, the media, etc.
Peltola is a dem candidate for Senate and pulled a junior high trick linked to her campaign fund? Did I read it right and there isn’t election interference as a crime? There’s money changing hands. Peltola was a Judge on the reservation?
It’s sunk this low.
Election interference does not occur merely because one candidate encourages another candidate to run for office.
Why could possibly have informed that belief?
You know there is more to it. Quit your phony replies. I see why you post as an ANON
If her campaign paid him to run….
Anyone remember JFK and the two Joe Russos on the ballot in the 1946 Massachusetts district 11 primary election?
Had there been only one Joe Russo on the ballot, we may not have had the Vietnam War and 58,000 young men may still be living today.
“THE BRACERO PROGRAM DID NOT COVER MINING”
The Salud Carbajal Immigration Discrepancy
The specific transition regarding Congressman Salud Carbajal’s father represents the core of a localized investigative controversy. Rep. Carbajal has stated that his family legally immigrated from Mexico to a small copper mining town in Arizona around 1970 (when he was 5 years old) under the auspices of the Bracero Program. The Bracero Program officially ended in December 1964—six years before the family’s reported 1970 arrival, and a month after Carbajal was born. Official biographies note his father worked in an underground copper mine in Arizona before moving to California to do farmwork. THE BRACERO PROGRAM DID NOT COVER MINING. An industrial worker would have required a separate H-2 employer petition or a lawful permanent residency (Green Card) application. In 2019, Carbajal shared a childhood photo on social media, identifying it as the picture from his 1970 Green Card. Local reporting by the Santa Barbara Current pointed out that the ink stamp on the photo translates to the “Department of Police” from Mexico, rather than a U.S. INS entry or permanent residency stamp.
Because individual immigration files (known as “A-Files”) are protected under strict federal privacy laws, the exact applications, visas, or adjustment forms filed by Carbajal’s father to move between the Arizona mines and California fields remain unreleased to the public.
Sleazeball ANON’S attacking Turley!! Cowards to post as an ANON!! Keyboard warriors thinking they won something.
Dirty tricks from the “virtuous” party against that evil Trump who “cheated” to win his elections. Oh, wait. I guess when Democrats cheat it’s fine because, well, Democrats, and because Trump, and you know victory. Mary Peltola is lying but thinks she can run out the clock. She may be right.
Can the Rs refuse to seat her?
If they control the senate – yes,
But it is unlikely they will. There will be a criminal investigation and if that results in a prosecution – she likely will be forced to resign.
At this point I think it is unlikely that she will win. But we will see
I am not sure that Trump did not “set this up” -= Meaning they knew about this for some time. They timed the lawsuit and leaked enough to NYT that they had to run a story whether they liked it or not or risk getting scooped.
That does not change the fact that the allegations appear to be true.
This is an own goal by Dems and not only will hurt Petola, but other dems in other races.
It also undermines the lefts narative that Dems would not commit fraud to win.
Whether this is a crime or not – it probably isn’t, but likely required other crimes to pull it off, it is a fraud on voters. It is election fraud. even if it is legal election fraud.
John Say, that’s a lot of wishy washy thoughts.
What is happening in Alaska is pure dirty trick politics. It’s completely legal. Republicans are upset about it because it’s not something they expect democrats to do.
Whatever legal challenges they seek will not be addressed by the courts because of the Purcell principle.
Professor Turley,
In your books and your articles, you frequently decry America’s factions devolving to mob mentality before evidence is established to support accusations; yet, here, you do just that. You acknowledge that the public facts concerning do not incur criminal liability, yet, without evidence, you suggest that criminal activity could be afoot.
This is particularly egregious: “There can be allegations of not only misrepresentations in filings but possible violations in the pressuring of potential witnesses, destruction of evidence, or false statements to federal investigators.” What evidence are these based on?
Who has claimed any of that is present? And what have those claims been based on?
This reads not as a measured opinion made by a law professor, but by a tabloid writer seeking clicks. Are you, Professor Turley, fueling the Age of Rage about which you so desperately feign concern?
The answer to your question is most assuredly YES !!
Turley is simply stoking the rage of the MAGA mob, in exactly the same way that so hypocritically decries in others. He is nothing more than a partisan political hack, bought and paid for by Rupert Murdoch, the owner of Fox and NY Post where Turley is such a prolific contributor.
It’s cool when Democrats do it
This is a silly comment. Neither anonymous above said it is “cool” to siphon votes from a GOP candidate by running a dummy candidate.
The issue raised above is that his commentary speculates baselessly about legal issues that could potentially arise.
To show the rank partisanship, can you find me the article that raise the potential legal issues that could arise when Trump claimed he would pay $5K to voters if GOP candidates were elected?
Both are dirty politics that try to deceive ill-informed voters. In the AK election, an informed voter should be able to decipher each candidate on a ballot. In Trump’s case, an informed voter should know he has no authority to make such “dividend” payments.
Neither is illegal. Both could conceivable involve criminal activities, in the same way that any action could involve criminal activities. Going to the grocery store could involve criminal activities, but one would find it weird to speculate that criminal activity could be afoot based solely on the fact that someone entered a grocery store and came back with groceries. That is the best analogy to this situation. AGE OF RAGE.
ANON IS A COWARD BY ATTACKING others by only using anonymous. CHICKEN!!!
Yes, the MAGA mob might get stirred up and get out and vote.
This is an own goal by Petola, but worse still it is an own goal by a large number of democrats.
It will have some impact on this and national elections – how much we will have to see.
It also will with certainty result in investigations and myriads of democrats risking indictment.
And it undermines democrats credibility about election integregity.
You attack Turley yet fail to give your REAL NAME!! COWARD!!!!!!!!!!!!
Turley is suggesting that there are likely criminal issues – because even if the top level overt conduct alleged is legal, The Other Sullivan could not get on the ballot without lots of documents that with near certainty contain sworn false statements.
As long as all the rules were followed the Sullivan running against the incumbent Sullivan is perfectly legal. Alaskans are not stupid. The incumbent will have the word. “Incumbent” right next to it. If Republicans want to deny the “false” Sullivan they will vote for the real one and deny Pelton the seat.
But we know Republicans have been relying on idiots and poorly educated folks to mindlessly vote. Democrats are taking advantage of that same tactic. And…it’s perfectly legal.
Thoughts on this take Mr. Turley? https://x.com/AlaskaLP/status/2115562003234472170?a=GNF6k9KjCKtdFTxlN64&s=20
Turley: “The risk of such allegations should lead the Peltola lawyers to withdraw from further work, as they could become potential witnesses and targets in state or federal investigations.”
No kidding! I would jump back as if my clients suddenly contracted Ebola.
What crime would that be, Professor?
It would appear that the Professor is 100% sure that no crime has been committed, but likes to dangle the bait for the ignorant Republicans who are, apparently, too stupid to know what the word “incumbent” means.
An inability to know what “incumbent” means and a disinterest in current events such that they don’t know why they should consult a dictionary to find out.
Ignorant ANON!! If GOP did this you would be crying all day long. Hypocrite!
First of all, not everyone has sworn allegiance to a team. I have voted about equally for Democratic and GOP presidential candidates.
Second, I did not express a normative opinion about whether the actions taken by the AK Democrats were good or bad. Can you point out exactly where above you believe I did? My comment was directed towards Turley.
Third, if you do want my opinion, it is (a) there is nothing illegal with the tactics but (b) they have shown a problem with the AK election procedures that should be rectified. I view this in the same light as Trump’s $5K dividend check promise – it deliberately deceives voters without crossing the line into criminal activity. Both should be called out for dirty politics, but neither should be confused as illegal behavior (based on available public facts in both cases).
Apples and oranges.
What people do in secret is always viewed with more suspicion than what they do openly.
Hunter Biden secretly agreed to have his father use the power of the US government for the benefit of a client in return for money.
Trump and his family negotiate foreign policy in public and make business deals in public.
Your beleif there is some quid pro quo does not create one.
Turley is not calling whatever was, or wasn’t, done to create a confusing ballot a crime. He is saying that lying to investigators in their process of looking into whether there has been a crime is a crime.
According to Democrats, voters are too stupid to get a voter ID. I doubt such a person knows the meaning of the word “incumbent.”
This just makes Democrats seem all the more pathetic, especially when you think of all the times they and their propaganda media have called Trump/Republicans a “threat to democracy”, and still do.
Democrat hypocrisy is well established. Democrats OWN hypocrisy.
What’s most shocking here is that it’s the NYT breaking the story! What’s next? Dogs and cats living together? :-O
just think how dumb people must be for them to vote for the wrong candidate. if it works it just shows how dim gopers are
You are dumb to post as Anonymous!!
I guess about as dumb as you need to be to not be able show an ID when you vote.
I agree, sounds like the NY Times still does investigative reporting on occasion. That is the most shocking part of the whole story.
GEB
How do you not understand the hypocrisy of your statement.
You believe that the NYT does reliable investigative reporting only when you approve of the story. When they report something that you do not like, and that offends your MAGA beliefs, then the reporting is unreliable.
MAGA dogma holds that the NYT, WaPo and the rest of the MSM are unreliable purveyors of leftist doctrine. It takes a certain type of very warped thinking to believe that the NYT reporting is unreliable except when they report something you like to hear.
you mean like the truth?
Of course there are no sheep on the Dem side. Ever hear of TDS.
Foolishness.
I strongly suspect that NYT was fed the story and they had two choices – get scooped or run it.
I have little doubt if they thought they could bury it they would have.
You can not always count on people doing the right thing because they are good people.
But sometimes you can make not doing the right thing sufficient self harm that people will actually do the right thing even when they do not want to.
I gather Media Matters sent up the bat signal to flood the zone.
While I am usually a solid supporter of Mr. Turley’s opinions if the “intent” was to defraud then it is illegal! Douglass Mackey was sentenced to prison in 2023 for 7 months for tweeting that one could vote by simply Tweeting a vote in the 2016 election! There is “intent” in this instance by Mary Peltola to be sure, so the idea that it is categorically not illegal is on thin ice!
While I am usually a solid supporter of Mr. Turley’s opinions. So you come here to judge Turley’s opinions, whether they are DSA correct or MAGA correct?
The NYT deserves credit for ratting out the rats. Why didn’t conservative media investigate the facts? It is funny to remember the 2000 Presidential election when Democrats challenged the Florida election results because people were supposedly confused by a butterfly ballot. Turns out that Democrats are in favor of confusion.
Because Democratic operatives don’t knowingly talk to conservative media. They retailed their ingenuity to a Sulzberger minion to amuse themselves, figuring it would go no further. The question is, what angle are the Sulzbergers working?
Yes – where was the conservative media? Like the Minnesota fraud scandal – asleep, while an amateur podcaster actually did some real work!
This democrat boiler room plot is about Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Which one will win the most votes?
Bribery? I’d like to know if Barrett, Kavanaugh, Roberts, were bribed or was it just the death threats in the Barbara opinion. 😏
Episode of Star Trek, Genesis Planet.
Money laundering? “Kurtz was allegedly paid …pro-peltola fund”.
Is that a crime?
A functioning political order benefits, nay requires, consensus about rules of competition and certain mutual courtesies between competitors. Fifty years ago, we used to have an approximation of it. (Gerald Ford used to say “Politics stops at 5 O’Clock”). You read the correct-the-record recruits on these boards and you realize we’re unlikely to return to it until nearly all of us are safely and cozily dead.
In respect to the 65% Alaskan Independent Voters – The most important point is, these Alaskan Voters are looking for a ‘clean election’ of choice. The problematic corundum is that the whole thing is corrupt. And that’s generally the feeling of Independents across the Nation.
‘Election Integrity’ is more than just a vote count, it is the qualities of the Candidate’s integrity that matters most.
Alaskan Election ‘gimmick’ is but just one ‘fly in the ointment’ of the system.
IMO: Sad but True, it is the last ditch effort of some Candidates to save their lives from a life of being ignorant and poor.
Here in South Texas is a perfect example of such: Candidate Bobby Pulido (Democrat Nominee for Texas’s 15th Congressional District)
A High School Grad, that didn’t finish college, essentially learned the ropes to be an ‘Influencer’ (Performer) through musical media, then runs for Political Office. No serious political experience at all – but sure enough He will get the Hispanic/Latino vote.
The reality is: It’s the bailout of a mid-life crisis. And Bobby Pulido is but one example of a slew of Candidates across America.
Bobby Pulido: https://www.fec.gov/data/candidate/H6TX15246/
Honestly: How did we get someone like Ilhan Omar and Others, is there no background *vetting before Candidates are allowed to run?
*(SF-85P | SF-86 background check – https://www.opm.gov/forms/federal-investigation-forms/ )
James Dell Talarico vs. Warren Kenneth Paxton Jr. (both running for the U.S. Senate in Texas)
Can’t stand either one of them. Paxton’s as crooked as a dogs hind-leg and Talarico a want-a-be crooked dogs hind-leg.
It’s about the ‘real’ bonafide quality of the Candidate’s integrity that matters most.
Well, that sounds nice, but I think policy matters most.
Come on, man. This is just another example of Democrat ongoing efforts “to preserve our democracy”.