The Justice Department is investigating allegations that Democratic operatives recruited Alaska Senate candidate Daniel J. Sullivan, dubbed «Decoy Dan,» to siphon votes from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan, prompting liberal-leaning election law experts to accuse the Trump administration of federal overreach.

But former Federal Election Commission member Hans von Spakovsky argued that the Biden-era Justice Department’s prosecution of Donald Trump over alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election laid the groundwork for the Alaska probe.

«The Justice Department has talked about a potential conspiracy to defraud the voters of Alaska and people are saying, ‘Oh, he’s got no case. That’s a weak case,’» von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow at Advancing American Freedom, told Digital. 

«Well, I suggest you do a Google search and pull up the indictment that Jack Smith got against Donald Trump in the District of Columbia. He set a precedent for this.»

MARY PELTOLA’S CAMPAIGN, DEMS BACKED COVERT SCHEME TO FIELD SPOILER CANDIDATES IN ALASKA SENATE RACE: REPORT

Joined by FBI officials and Alaska State Troopers, Alaska U.S. Attorney Michael Heyman announced at a news conference Friday that the Justice Department has been investigating whether Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired school teacher who will appear on the ballot without a party affiliation, was colluding with Democratic operatives tied to Democratic candidate Mary Peltola’s campaign.

The Justice Department previously sued Alaska election officials, seeking to block certification if Sen. Dan Sullivan loses re-election by fewer votes than those cast for Daniel J. Sullivan. 

The lawsuit was amended Friday to include reporting by The New York Times that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and senior aides of Peltola’s campaign allegedly worked to recruit candidates who could pull votes away from Sen. Sulllivan. Heyman mentioned the Times reporting repeatedly at the news conference.

«We are taking that extremely seriously,» Heyman said.

Sources at the Justice Department told Thursday the Trump administration had issued more than 30 subpoeanas in a span of 24 hours as part of its criminal investigation into the alleged collusion, but Heyman did not say at the news conference what criminal charges are being pursued.

«I’m not making any assumptions on whether a crime has been committed or not,» Heyman said. «That’s why we are conducting that thorough investigation.»

Von Spakovsky, a former Federal Election Commission commissioner, said potential indictments of Democratic operatives in the Alaska Senate race could rely on federal statutes similar to those Smith, the former special counsel, used in his 2023 indictment of Trump over alleged efforts to overturn the election.

Von Spakovsky pointed to charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy against rights. In Trump’s case, prosecutors alleged that he used fraud and deceit to obstruct the federal government’s process for certifying the 2020 election and conspired to deprive voters of having their lawful votes counted and honored.

Von Spakovsky said prosecutors could potentially apply similar theories in Alaska if they determine that Democratic operatives knowingly recruited Daniel J. Sullivan to confuse voters and divert votes from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan.

ALASKA’S GOVERNOR ORDERS INVESTIGATION AFTER NYT REPORT ON ALLEGED DEM-LINKED SENATE ELECTION SCHEME

Smith’s «indictment is basically along exactly those same lines, claiming that Donald Trump was trying to defraud U.S. voters from fair and honest elections. So, Jack Smith and Democrats, they set the precedent for the kind of investigation Justice Department is doing now.»

Aubrey Wieber, executive director of 907 Initiative, a progressive advocacy group running critical ads against Sen. Sullivan, told Alaska Public Media that the news conference announcing the investigation «on the eve of the election» may be stemming from ulterior motives.

«One could say it appears that they are trying to interfere in an election and put their thumb on the scale,» Wieber said.

The Justice Department’s lawsuit was filed Oct. 22, prompting a parade of condemnations from those who argued the federal government had «no authority» to intervene, with many pointing to the Alaska Supreme Court rejecting the state’s push to disqualify Daniel J. Sullivan from appearing on the ballot.

GOVERNOR PROBING ‘DECOY DAN’ SULLIVAN ELECTION SCANDAL WARNS SYSTEM FLAW HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT

«DOJ’s theory: Two candidates named Sullivan might confuse voters. The Alaska Supreme Court settled that in June, and the ballot labels the incumbent. DOJ has no role in state election law,» Omar Noureldin, senior vice president of policy and litigation at Common Cause, a self-described non-partisan watchdog organization.

Von Spakovsky called recruiting a candidate with the same name as a political opponent a «dirty trick» but said the recruitment itself was not necessarily a criminal violation. He said the legal analysis could change if operatives paid the candidate or provided services to help organize his campaign.

«The place you run into potential issues is not only if you just recruit a candidate, but you’re being paid to recruit that candidate, and you then provide services to help him run his campaign and organize it,» Von Spakovsky said.

Providing campaign assistance outside of being a volunteer is an in-kind contribution subject to federal reporting and contribution rules. Von Spakovsky said any failure to properly report such contributions could create a separate campaign-finance violation.

justice department, elections disputes, fbi, attorney general, politics

Sen. Elissa Slotkin’s warning to young Americans not to join the Trump administration could backfire by handing Trump officials legal ammunition to derail the investigations Democrats hope to launch if they retake Congress, a former federal prosecutor warned.

The freshman Michigan Democrat said last month that she wants her party to pursue «signature cases» against officials who helped Trump, reasoning that it would discourage young Americans from considering jobs in his administration.

«I want that deterrence message sent,» Slotkin said during an Oct. 13 event at the University of Chicago, describing how young graduates might fear «buying myself a ton of problems» by joining the administration.

But Abhishek Kambli, a former deputy associate attorney general in Trump’s Justice Department, said Slotkin’s remarks could backfire if Democrats retake either chamber of Congress in the midterm elections and gain greater control over congressional investigations.

«If they just throw in boilerplate language that this is for legislative purpose, anyone challenging those subpoenas will have that entire record to demonstrate that it’s anything but that,» Kambli, a partner at Holtzman Vogel, told Digital.

HOUSE DEMS PLOT TRUMP INVESTIGATION BLITZ IF THEY SEIZE MAJORITY

While Congress has broad authority to conduct investigations, subpoena witnesses and review government operations, the Supreme Court has ruled that lawmakers cannot use those powers solely to punish individuals.

The Supreme Court confronted those limits in 2020, when House Democrats attempted to obtain Trump’s personal financial records through congressional subpoenas.

In Trump v. Mazars, the justices established a four-factor test requiring courts to examine whether Congress demonstrated a legitimate legislative need for the records, whether its requests were sufficiently narrow, whether the information could be obtained elsewhere and what burden the subpoenas would impose on the president.

The court sent the dispute back to lower courts without ruling that the subpoenas satisfied those standards, leaving unresolved questions about how the framework would be applied.

«So it’s not enough just to tack on a legislative purpose,» Kambli said, arguing that courts must look beyond Congress’ stated reasons for an investigation to determine whether its demands are constitutionally justified.

Democrats’ public remarks could become evidence against them if future subpoenas are challenged, according to Kambli.

SLOTKIN WANTS GOP PROSECUTIONS TO DETER YOUNG PEOPLE FROM TRUMP ADMINISTRATION JOBS

«They don’t have to bury their head in the sand,» Kambli said of the courts. «I think they have to look at the facts of the case and look at it in terms of how they fits into the broader comments that they made.»

House Democrats are already laying the groundwork for investigations into Trump’s family business dealings and potential conflicts of interest if they regain control of Congress. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., has also vowed to expand his investigation into donors funding Trump’s White House ballroom if Democrats retake the Senate,

But another constitutional law expert questioned whether Democrats’ remarks would carry enough legal weight to undermine future congressional investigations.

Michael Morley, a professor at Florida State University College of Law, said courts generally recognize that politicians bring partisan motivations to congressional investigations and would be reluctant to invalidate subpoenas merely because of provocative public remarks.

«I don’t think that the fact that there might be partisan motivations for a congressional investigation would ultimately be a valid basis for refusing to comply with a subpoena,» Morley told Digital.

«At the end of the day, a court is going to be very reluctant to conclude, based on one or more members’ possible subjective motivations, that Congress lacks constitutional authority to investigate,» Morley said.

SLOTKIN’S VIRAL ‘THREAT’ TO CONSERVATIVES TAKES NEW TWIST AS STUDENT MOVES TO HOLD HER ACCOUNTABLE: ‘SHOCKING’

He also emphasized that Trump v. Mazars focused specifically on subpoenas for the president’s personal records, arguing that applying the same heightened legal standards to subpoenas targeting other administration officials would be a stretch.

But Morley said Slotkin’s language could give judges pause when the legal basis for a subpoena is already uncertain.

«It’s bad atmospherics,» he said, adding that such statements could make courts «marginally less likely» to resolve doubts in Democrats’ favor.

Slotkin has rejected accusations that she wants to target Americans merely for working for Republicans. She told CNN that she was talking about officials who break the law or misuse taxpayer dollars, calling the criticism «manufactured outrage.»

But Kambli warned the consequences could extend beyond whether Democratic subpoenas survive legal challenges, saying that investigations could inflict financial and reputational damage even without criminal charges.

«There is the idea that the process is the punishment, and there is no doubt that some members of Congress intend to use the process to bankrupt people that can’t afford legal representation,» Kambli said.

He also said that while Trump’s Justice Department would be unlikely to prosecute administration officials over criminal contempt referrals from a Democratic-controlled Congress, that could change under a future Democratic administration.

Morley also criticized the prospect of intimidating young government employees who may lack the resources to defend themselves.

«That’s just not how we want our political disputes to be handled,» Morley said.

politics, congress, senate, justice department, attorney general

A top Democratic operative warned that poor campaigns and candidate choice from Republicans are opening the door for Democrats to seize control of the Senate during an interview with Digital.

Dan Turrentine, who served as chief of staff to current Colorado Gov. Jared Polis when he was a member of Congress, said several close Senate races seem to be trending Democrat in the leadup to Tuesday’s election.

«Five days out, Democrats have a pretty good chance to retake the Senate,» Turrentine said.

He cited several races, including North Carolina, where incumbent Republican Sen. Thom Tillis is retiring. That seat, which has long been red, seems poised to flip as polls show former Gov. Roy Cooper holds a commanding lead over former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Whatley.

SENATE CONTROL IS A COIN FLIP — AND DEMOCRATS’ PATH RUNS THROUGH TRUMP COUNTRY

Republicans, who are widely projected to lose their slim House majority, currently hold a 53-47 lead in the Senate. In addition to North Carolina, a number of surprisingly close Senate races in both swing states like Ohio and Michigan, and in typically deep red states such as Texas, Kansas and Missouri, have Democrats like Turrentine hopeful they can gain full control of Congress on Tuesday.

While crediting smart campaigning from Democrats, Turrentine also pinned Republican shortcomings on what he called poor candidate quality. He cited Ken Paxton in Texas, Cindy Hyde-Smith in Mississippi, Roger Marshall in Kansas and Darlene Graham Nordone, who is running to take the seat of her late brother, former Sen. Lindsey Graham.

GOP SENATE MAJORITY FACES FRESH UNCERTAINTY AS 2 KEY RACES TIGHTEN DAYS BEFORE MIDTERMS

«If Republicans lose the Senate, it’s likely one of those four loses,» said Turrentine, who hosts «The Huddle» podcast with former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer. «While the president’s standing is part of the problem, that last mile comes down to weak candidate quality.»

POWER RANKINGS: SOUTH CAROLINA MOVES TO TOSS-UP

But while Democrats are performing well in polls, Turrentine acknowledged that previous surveys have overstated support for his party.

«Campaigns are terrified about polling,» he said, adding that «reaching voters is harder than ever; people don’t have landlines and routinely ignore unknown numbers.»

THE SILENT MAJORITY PROBLEM AND WHY CAMPAIGN POLLSTERS KEEP ‘FIGHTING THE LAST WAR’ ON ELECTIONS

«We’ve had consecutive change elections — 2016, 2022, 2024 — where polling struggled to capture late-breaking dynamics. Will frustrated Trump voters stay home, or will early Democratic surges in Texas just reflect high-propensity voters banking votes early rather than expanding the electorate? Nobody knows, and people have a knot in their stomach about Tuesday,» he said.

Turrentine was a even more confident in a Democratic takeover of the Senate before this week’s bombshell New York Times report alleging that Alaska Democratic Senate candidate Mary Peltola helped recruit a man named Daniel J. Sullivan to run against incumbent Sen. Daniel S. Sullivan, R-Alaska, to ostensibly confuse voters into accidentally choosing Daniel J. Sullivan over the incumbent senator.

MARY PELTOLA’S CAMPAIGN, DEMS BACKED COVERT SCHEME TO FIELD SPOILER CANDIDATES IN ALASKA SENATE RACE: REPORT

Peltola has denied any involvement in the former Sullivan’s campaign.

«Peltola has led almost every single poll until yesterday. Like so many of these states, Democrats win on disgruntled Republicans. It wouldn’t take much for those voters to say they can’t stomach the Democrat,» said Turrentine, adding that the Frontier State may now be a tossup.

If Alaska’s Senate seat slips from the Democrats’ grip, a majority could come down to the Democrats winning Ohio, Texas and one of Michigan, Maine, Kansas or Mississippi, Turrentine said.

«In Maine, we’ve spent entire careers thinking we’re going to defeat [GOP incumbent] Susan Collins. It feels slightly different this time, but it also doesn’t; she’s within a point or two. No Democrat wants the majority coming down to Maine or Alaska,» he added.

Collins trails Graham Platner replacement Troy Jackson 49-45, according to a recent CNN poll.

If the Democrats do take the Senate, Turrentine suggested, they will have to contend with the rising tide of socialism and an increasingly popular far-left wing within the party.

«This tension between who will be what I’ll call the majority makers and the base that feels like… both feel like, ‘You need me,’ right? A moderate can’t win if the base doesn’t turn out,» Turrentine added.

He relayed party criticisms of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who is poised to become speaker should the Democrats wrest control of the lower chamber from the GOP.

«Nobody knows where Hakeem Jeffries comes down. And no one knows who Hakeem Jeffries is,» Turrentine said.

«Pelosi had the trust of both wings; Hakeem Jeffries still faces questions from both sides about where he stands, all while [Senate Minority Leader] Chuck Schumer watches for a primary challenge from his left,» he added.

politics, midterm elections, senate, chuck schumer, alaska, democrats elections, democrats senate, maine, north carolina, kansas, missouri