The survey of more than 925 local election officials in February and March also found 62% are concerned about political leaders’ attempting to interfere with how election officials do their jobs.

Thirteen percent of the local officials who responded said they are “concerned about facing pressure to certify results in favor of a specific candidate or party.”

“Election officials are adjusting to ensure workers and voters are safe. The numbers around threats, harassment and interference remain unacceptably high, but election officials aren’t being passive in the face of this hostile environment. They are investing in security trainings, increasing physical and cybersecurity measures, and building stronger networks with emergency management services,” said Lawrence Norden, senior director of elections and government at the Brennan Center, part of the New York University School of Law.

NBC News has reported on growing security threats facing election workers as the November presidential election approaches. Many local jurisdictions have said they need more money for more security and more training about what to do should a threat to the safety of election workers arise.

Hanging over the election workers are false claims spread after the 2020 election by former President Donald Trump and his supporters, who insist the election was “stolen” from Trump because of election workers who manipulated the results. 

Trump has recently told supporters at his rallies that votes go missing or end up thrown on the floor in areas like Philadelphia.

Omar Sabir, chair of the city commission that runs Philadelphia’s elections, received a threatening voicemail and email. “We have insiders that will be snitching this time around and violators will be sent to federal prison,” the email said.

Sabir and others have said federal government should do more to keep local officials safe.

Four out of 5 respondents in the Brennan Center survey said their budgets need to grow to keep up with their administration and security needs.

Turnover is another top concern for officials, as many are fighting to find new hires amid high dropout rates due to retirement and security concerns.

One in 5 are unlikely to continue to serve in the 2026 midterms, and 27% know of colleagues who have left their jobs because of concerns about safety.

This story first appeared on NBCNews.com. More from NBC News:

• Harvey Weinstein to return to court after N.Y. rape conviction is overturned
• New research shows how a surge of anger could raise heart attack risk
• Inside the tiny N.J. suburb with the fastest-growing Asian population in the country

At least 36% of local election offices have changed hands since 2020, following a similar exodus in the run-up to the midterms in 2022, when 39% of jurisdictions had new lead election officials from four years previously. Both points in time represented the highest four-year turnover rates in two decades, a development that worries election experts and officials who say such jobs are complex and come with a steep learning curve and no margin for error. And 2024’s turnover rate could continue to rise as the year goes on.

Election workers have been exposed to unprecedented scrutiny, threats and harassment following the presidential election in 2020, when Donald Trump falsely claimed the election was stolen and made baseless claims of voter fraud. And as Trump seeks the presidency for the third time, he has continued to predict voter fraud — seeming to lay the groundwork to again claim the election was stolen if he loses in November.

While the turnover rate has jumped in recent years, researchers found that it has been gradually rising for years, suggesting that both new and long-standing challenges are driving administrators from their jobs. From 2000 to 2004, about 28% of local election officials left their jobs. Four years later, 31% of election offices had changed hands.

Experts say that dynamic only reinforces the need to provide better funding and support for election workers to ensure the smooth administration of future elections.

“This gradual increase that we’ve seen over the last two decades really does highlight the need for comprehensive, coordinated strategies that seek to better fund election administration, that seek to reduce the burdens being placed on these election administrators,” said one of the study’s co-authors, Rachel Orey, senior associate director at the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Elections Project. “Because clearly, this isn’t something that only happened back in 2020.”

The research was conducted by UCLA researchers Daniel M. Thompson and Joshua Ferrer, who spent years collecting lists and directories of election officials in counties and municipalities around the country to produce the most accurate and expansive picture of election worker turnover available yet. Their data was analyzed and published in partnership with the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington, D.C., think tank, in an effort to better understand turnover as election administrators face harassment, violent threats and increasingly complex and heavy workloads.

The data for 2024 is current through January and is preliminary.

Turnover surged in populous jurisdictions after 2020

The 2020 election appears to have escalated and shifted the trend in turnover, which researchers found was consistent across geographic and partisan lines. 

Until recently, the bulk of the turnover was driven by the resignations of election officials in small towns and counties, where election officials must wear many hats and oversee all parts of the election process with limited help and staffing. After 2020, officials from larger jurisdictions began leaving their jobs at a higher rate: Districts with at least 100,000 voting-age residents had a turnover rate of 46% from 2018 to 2022.

Trump and his allies have particularly focused their baseless fraud allegations on large cities like Phoenix, Philadelphia, Atlanta and Detroit. His supporters have seized on the claims, protesting near and harassing officials and poll workers, suggesting that election denialism may be fueling departures in large jurisdictions. Still, there was no clear tie between areas where more threats have been reported — like the states Joe Biden narrowly won in 2020 — and higher turnover, according to the data.

In Georgia, a key battleground state, many election offices have been flooded with voter challenges, public information requests and frequent harassment and threats. All four election offices in Georgia’s most populous counties, all in and around Atlanta, have changed hands since 2020, with many lower-level staffers following, too. 

“I got here in August ’21. By the time we ran our first election in May of ’22, I think it was something like 75% of the staff had never run an election before,” said Zach Manifold, Gwinnett County’s elections supervisor.

Since then, he said, turnover has slowed in his office, making everyone’s lives a bit easier. He said camaraderie has developed among the new election chiefs in the Atlanta area as they talk about their shared experiences.  

“I’m part of the new generation of election administrators,” said Tate Fall, Cobb County’s new elections director. Fall, 30, started in December — “baptism by fire,” she called it — after having worked in elections in Virginia and studied election administration in graduate school.

“We’ve heard so much about the great resignation and people retiring and stepping down, and I definitely see why — this job is exhausting. It’s draining,” she said. “We have seen our predecessors, our mentors, the people that we’ve seen speak at conferences for years, stepping down, and understandably so, but we’re not afraid to step into those positions. We’re not going in blind.”

And the next generation is entering the top jobs with a significant level of experience, the researchers determined after having drawn on data from a survey of local election officials last year conducted by the Elections & Voting Information Center at Reed College in Oregon. On average, new election officials had eight years of experience; in large jurisdictions, new officials had an average of 11 years of experience.

Public attacks and heavy workloads 

In interviews, election officials who have left their jobs in recent years said that their decisions were based on many factors but that public attacks and scrutiny particularly weighed heavily on their experiences.

“I still love elections to this day,” said Teresa DeGraaf, the former clerk of Port Sheldon Township, Michigan. “But it changed. I’ve never had a job where I had so many sleepless nights. I would wake up at 3 in the morning, and you feel like you’re under the microscope, and you feel like everything you’re doing is being watched. We had folks that sat in our parking lot at 2 in the morning to watch our ballot box before the election.”

In Charleston County, South Carolina, Joe Debney, 44, resigned from running the county’s elections in December 2020.

“After 2020, you could go home and people would question you in your own household. Your family members around Thanksgiving dinner or Christmas time are like, well, we trust you, Joe, but we’re not so sure we trust the rest of the United States,” he said.

Another factor that may be driving resignations is that the work has become more complicated and time-consuming. 

Many states’ election codes have been overhauled repeatedly over the last few years, including changes to mail voting and new restrictions driven by unfounded fear of fraud. 

Isaac Cramer, who succeeded Debney in Charleston County, said South Carolina’s election code doesn’t consolidate special elections onto the existing elections calendar, leaving officials in his state running multiple elections per week at times. He said it’s burning out election workers, and after a spate of resignations this year, he said, he knows few other election directors in the state because so many have resigned. 

Cramer said that after three years in the top job, he believes he’s one of the most senior officials in the state. When nuances in the law arise, he said, there isn’t anyone more experienced to ask.

Debney said: “There’s a learning curve. Thank God we have people like Isaac who are reaching out to those counties and trying to work with them and give them the tools in order to succeed.”

Debney, who had previously worked with the South Carolina Election Commission, said there was a similar exodus of election directors when the state upgraded its voting system. He went across the state, training and supporting officials, talking through nuances and best practices.

“If those things don’t occur, I think, there could be some pitfalls,” he said.

Debney now runs a local YMCA and serves on the Board of Elections in his home county, Dorchester, South Carolina. On Election Day in November, he’ll be in the field supporting his county’s election director.

“I really do miss it,” he said. “What I did was good. It helped not only our community but our state and nation as a whole.”

This story first appeared on NBCNews.com. More from NBC News:

• Right-wing operatives agree to pay up to $1.2 million for misleading 2020 robocalls
• Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass pitches Rep. Barbara Lee to be the next U.S. Housing secretary
• Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin rejects accusations Israel has committed genocide in Gaza

The following content has been provided by Global Group Media under its flagship “Rising Women Series.” This content does not represent the opinions of the NBC Washington news team. Click here to learn more about Global Group Media.

Sigríður Hrund Pétursdóttir was six years old when the first democratically elected female president in the world, Vigdís Finnbogadóttir, was elected as Iceland’s president in 1980.

Finnbogadóttir’s historic win was a watershed moment that inspired Sigríður Hrund and countless other young girls in Iceland and around the world to pursue roles in leadership and public service. Forty-four years later, according to Pétursdóttir, “The time has come for the words ‘Madame President of Iceland’ to be used again in Iceland.”

Sigríður Hrund Pétursdóttir, 50, is a businesswoman, educator, advocate and philanthropist with an MBA, M.Sc. in Strategy and Business Administration and B.A. in French. She is an angel investor financing female founders and an active member of numerous influential professional committees in Iceland.

As a presidential hopeful, she seeks to run an administration that upholds social-economic equality, collaboration, and transparency; implement strategies to enhance the standard of living in Iceland; and foster public-private partnerships to increase local and foreign trade to improve the healthcare system, tourism, education, and agriculture.

Sigríður Hrund shared with Oni Aningo, Creator, Rising Woman Series & Global Women in Leadership Series,  issues at the forefront of her campaign, from socio-economic inequality to investment strategies for attracting investors and increasing trade in Iceland.

Considering Iceland’s ever-changing social and economic dynamics, what issues are at the forefront of your campaign? How can you as a president make changes that support the Icelandic nation and humanity as a whole?

I stand irrevocably for democracy, freedom of speech and equity. These are the founding pillars of a healthy, strong, dynamic society that is changing at a supersonic speed. Iceland is arguably the world’s oldest parliamentary democracy, with the Parliament Althingi, established in 930. Sitting parliament is almost 50/50 in gender. The president is elected by direct popular vote for a term of four years, with no term limit. It is my belief that the best way to protect our precious rights is by exercising them in a non-violent way. Standing up, stepping forward and running for president means that I am using my unique right to do so. I do not come for power or prestige, but for my nation and for Humanity.

Freedom of speech is under attack everywhere in the world and it is vital to protect our freedom in any way we can by getting engaged. People have already died for our basic human rights. Let’s remember who we are and where we come from. I relate strongly to Maya Angelou’s phrase “I come as one, but I stand as ten thousand”. Our ancestors went through suffering so we could prosper and serve.

Equity is a necessary action as nations are merging fast due to worldwide migration forces. We need all hands on deck all over and there is no time to waste. Equity means to give people space to get involved and to participate in society according to their talent and capabilities regardless of demographics. A hammer is a hammer anywhere in the world. Jobs are genderless and we badly need to mix jobs in human demographics as age, gender, and origin for innovational and growth purposes. We have nothing to fear and everything to gain by practicing equity.

The President of Iceland is elected directly by the nation and serves the nation. Iceland elected the world’s first female president, Vigdís Finnbogadóttir, in 1980 where she served for 16 years as president. It is time for another woman to hold the baton. The president has the unique authority to ask the nation directly by voting on issues that are dividing the Parliament or the nation, issues that are fundamental to our human rights, independence, security and survival. It is Iceland’s role to be at the forefront of democracy.

How can individuals contribute to change within a political climate that is often marked by powerful interests, strong rhetoric, and socio-economic inequality?

Apathy is the greatest threat to humanity and our societies today. Human rights are easy to lose and very hard to gain. This is the right time to rise and rise again. Open your heart – it knows the way. Let it shine and release your fears. Get involved, take action, be a voice, be authentic, show up and stand up every day in some way. You can always find a platform, big or small, within your surroundings and closest communities. This is about cooperation, compassion, and solidarity – all of which must be chosen and practiced. Humans are unfortunately not born with the traits of equality, solidarity and cooperation – we have to choose them every time. Our choice is our power. The power of the people. Make that choice. Choose Love. Choose Solidarity.

We are all unique, precious and rare both as individuals and as communities. We all possess within us a light. It is our purpose to make it shine and turn on other people’s lights. Do not diminish your light for any reason. I use powerful multiplicators of abundance on my journey called life; hope, grace, gratitude, joy and love. There is no lack of anything in my life, only abundance. Choose love in thoughts, words and actions. Be yourself and get engaged in society. Life is a gift, and we should live it beneficially for all of us.

You come from a strong private sector background, having invested for years and run successful companies. How important are effective public-private partnership models for investment in Iceland’s economy?

The government sector relies on the private sector. A strong, healthy, innovative private sector will foster a strong, healthy, innovative governmental sector. The sectors are intertwined and as we step into a dynamic, bright, and innovative future it is imperative that the sectors stay in balance. Otherwise, we are creating new challenges that will slow us down and cloud our clear focus. Constant revision on where we are at, where we are heading and how we are performing is fundamental. Iceland is a popular destination, both for tourists and immigrants. 2.2 million tourists visited this nation of 400,000 inhabitants in 2023, and the nation includes almost 18 percent immigrants. This means that the infrastructure is under constant strain in all sectors; schools, health care, roads, housing etc. Iceland constantly needs more hands on deck as industries are quickly growing – tourism, construction, tech, lateral multi-sector innovation. There is a strong demand for people with vocational education and training as well as STEAM-educated people. The government has developed multiple initiatives to accelerate and facilitate education focusing on these sectors throughout the educational system. That is a superb example of public-private partnership for an investment in Iceland’s future, which is surely promising and bright. 

Click here to learn more about the work of #RisingWomanGlobalGroupMedia. 

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

In questioning Diane Butler at a state Senate hearing, the panel of lawmakers controlled by Democrats was following up on a pledge to be more careful in its confirmation process as it weighs the replacement for the former Republican elections board official, who resigned in January.

“I’d just gotten back from Florida visiting with my daughter, and I was actually cleaning my fish tank because it got a bunch of stuff in it while I was gone,” Butler said, when asked where she was on Jan. 6, 2021. “I was at home.”

Members of Maryland Senate’s Executive Nominations Committee have said they will be more diligent after failing to ask a single question of Carlos Ayala, who resigned his position on the elections board in January after being charged in federal court. He faces charges of civil disorder, a felony, and multiple misdemeanor counts for allegedly participating in the riot while Congress was certifying the 2020 presidential election results.

Sen. Clarence Lam, a Democrat, also asked Butler about a screenshot of a Facebook page he said his office received that appeared to be from her relating to pandemic masking guidance from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“The post that was purported to be from you said that you have responded with a comment of: ’What’s next? Nazi armbands?’ Is that something you recall posting in the past?” Lam asked.

When Butler responded “No, I don’t recall that,” Lam asked again.

“It could have been mine. I think that there were a lot of different thoughts about the masks, and I think people had a lot of thoughts in the beginning,” Butler said.

Butler, who served as a county elections official in the state, faced a variety of questions about her beliefs in the integrity of the state elections process.

Butler appeared before a state Senate panel that votes on nominees by the governor to positions in state government, including the Maryland State Board of Elections, which is comprised of five members.

The minority party, which in Maryland is the Republican Party, nominates two members to the state’s governor, who forwards the nomination to the state Senate for consideration.

Lam also asked Butler if she thought fraud “is a significant problem in Maryland’s elections,” and she said no. Butler also said she did not believe there has been illegal interference in past elections in the state.

Asked for her thoughts about mail-in ballots, Butler said she believed “it can be done extremely well,” and she thought Maryland did “a good job with it under the circumstances we had” during the pandemic.

Having the polls opened on the weekend sure seems as if it would be more convenient for most voters.

The simple answer is that it started that way a long time ago and just kind of stuck, continuing in 2024 with Election Day on Tuesday, Nov. 5.

Here’s a look back at how the Tuesday election tradition began.

Why is Election Day always on Tuesday?

Election Day is always on Tuesday because that was the weekday that was most ideal for the arduous horse-and-buggy commute to the local polling place in the mid-1800’s.

In 1845, Congress passed a law that created a series of election uniformities, including sending Americans to the polls on the first Tuesday, after the first Monday, in the month of November, according to History.com.

Back then, the ride to the polls was significantly longer than it is today in gas-powered or electric-charged vehicles. Those arriving by buggy in the 19th century often traveled a full day or more to cast their vote at their polling place.

So, a two-day window was needed for Election Day to account for travel time to and from.

Since many spent Sundays in church, weekends were not in consideration. Wednesday was market day for farmers, per History.com, making Tuesday the most practical day of the week to hold an election. 

decision 2024 Mar 5

Super Tuesday: Biden and Trump dominate the night, edging closer to a general election rematch

Taylor Swift Mar 5

Taylor Swift urges her 282 million Instagram followers to vote on Super Tuesday

decision 2024 Mar 4

Which states vote on Super Tuesday and how many delegates are at stake? Everything to know

Why is Election Day in November?

Election Day is held in November because, when the law was passed in 1845, it was best for farmers and harvest schedules.

Planting season was in spring and summer and the harvest lasted through the early fall. That, per History.com, made early November ideal because the harvest was complete and winter weather had not yet set in.

Impact on voter turnout

Tuesday elections were much more convenient in the 1800s than they currently are nearly two centuries later.

Even with a much shorter commute to polling places, political scientists note that America’s voter participation numbers are among the world’s worst for developed countries. One of the top reasons for that poor showing is the inconvenience of a Tuesday election.

“One of the consequences of it, is it keeps the voter turnout down [and] makes it harder for those least likely to vote to vote,” said Thomas De Luca, professor of political science at Fordham University. 

Efforts to change Election Day

Many have suggested moving Election Day to a weekend or making it a federal holiday so voters nationwide would not have to miss work to get to the polls. Employers in many states are not required by law to give employees time off to vote.

Some states do observe Election Day as a holiday. That includes Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Virginia and West Virginia.

Just 29 states and the District of Columbia have laws giving registered voters time off to vote in general elections, according to CNBC. Only 23 states require employers to pay employees for that time, and those rules also vary by state. 

Trump went into the primary with a huge polling lead and the backing of the state’s top Republicans, including Sen. Tim Scott, a former rival in the race. Haley, who served as U.N. ambassador under Trump, has spent weeks crisscrossing the state that twice elected her governor warning that the dominant front-runner, who is 77 and faces four indictments, is too old and distracted to be president again.

In all but one primary since 1980, the Republican winner in South Carolina has gone on to be the party’s nominee. But Haley has repeatedly vowed to carry on if she loses her home state, even as Trump positions himself for a likely general election rematch against President Joe Biden.

Trump’s backers, including those who previously supported Haley during her time as governor, seemed confident that the former president would have a solid victory on Saturday.

“I did support her when she was governor. She’s done some good things,” Davis Paul, 36, said as he waited for Trump at a recent rally in Conway. “But I just don’t think she’s ready to tackle a candidate like Trump. I don’t think many people can.”

Trump has swept into the state for a handful of large rallies in between fundraisers and events in other states, including Michigan, which holds its GOP primary Tuesday.

He has drawn much larger crowds and campaigned with Gov. Henry McMaster, who succeeded Haley, and Scott, who was elevated to the Senate by Haley.

Speaking Friday in Rock Hill, Trump accused Haley of staying in the race to hurt him at the behest of Democratic donors.

“All she’s trying to do is inflict pain on us so they can win in November,” he said. “We’re not going to let that happen.”

In some of those rallies, Trump has made comments that handed Haley more fodder for her stump speeches, such as his Feb. 10 questioning of why her husband — currently on a South Carolina Army National Guard deployment to Africa — hadn’t been campaigning alongside her. Haley turned that point into an argument that the front-runner doesn’t respect servicemembers and their families, long a criticism that has followed Trump going back to his suggesting the late Sen. John McCain, a prisoner of war in Vietnam, wasn’t a hero because he was captured.

That same night, Trump asserted that he would encourage countries like Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” against NATO member countries who failed to meet the transatlantic alliance’s defense spending targets. Haley has been holding out that moment as evidence that Trump is too volatile and “getting weak in the knees when it comes to Russia.”

After one of Haley’s events, Terry Sullivan, a U.S. Navy veteran who lives in Hopkins, said he had planned to support Trump but changed his mind after hearing Haley’s critique of his NATO comments.

“One country can say whatever it wants, but when you have an agreement, among other nations, we should join the agreements of other nations, not just off on our own,” Sullivan said. “After listening to Nikki, I think I’m a Nikki supporter now.”

Haley has made an indirect appeal to Democrats who in large numbers sat out their own presidential primary earlier this month, adding into her stump speech a line that “anybody can vote in this primary as long as they didn’t vote in the Feb. 3 Democrat primary.”

Some of those voters have been showing up at her events, saying that although they planned to vote for Biden in the general election, they planned to cross over to the GOP primary on Saturday as a way to oppose Trump now.

In any other campaign cycle, a home state loss might be detrimental to a campaign. In 2016, Sen. Marco Rubio dropped out shortly after losing Florida in a blowout to Trump, after his campaign argued the political winds would shift in his favor once the campaign moved to his home state.

And Haley’s campaign can’t name a state in which they feel she will be victorious over Trump. “The primary ends tonight and it is time to turn to the general election,” Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung said Saturday.

But in a speech this past week in Greenville, Haley said she would stay in the campaign “until the last person votes,” arguing that those whose contests come after the early primaries and caucuses deserved the right to have a choice between candidates.

Haley also used that speech — which many had assumed was an announcement she was shuttering her campaign — to argue that she feels “no need to kiss the ring,” as others had, possibly with prospects of serving as Trump’s running mate in mind.

“I have no fear of Trump’s retribution,” Haley reiterated. “I’m not looking for anything from him. My own political future is of zero concern.”

___

Weissert reported from Washington. Associated Press writer Jill Colvin in Columbia, South Carolina, contributed to this report.

One of the biggest quirks you should be aware of: Virginia, like D.C., has two primary dates in 2024. Read on for more.

decision 2024 Mar 4

Which states vote on Super Tuesday and how many delegates are at stake? Everything to know

decision 2024 Mar 3

Nikki Haley gets first 2024 win in the Washington, DC, GOP primary

Primary dates:

• Tuesday, March 5 (Super Tuesday): Virginia’s presidential primary

• Tuesday, June 18: Virginia’s congressional primary

Voter registration in Virginia:

• You can register to vote or apply for an absentee ballot online using the Virginia Department of Elections Citizen Portal.

• The deadline to register to vote or to update an existing registration for the presidential primary was Monday, Feb. 12. (However, voters still may register after this date and vote using a provisional ballot through Primary Day.)

• The deadline to register to vote or to update an existing registration for the congressional primary is Tuesday, May 28. (However, voters may register after this date and vote using a provisional ballot through Primary Day.)

Ways to vote in Virginia’s presidential primary:

• Voting in person on Primary Day: Polls will be open from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Tuesday, March 5. Anyone in line by 7 p.m. will be able to vote. Find your polling place here.
• Mail-in voting: The deadline has passed for those who wanted their ballots to be mailed to them. Those requests needed to be received by local voter registration offices by Friday, Feb. 23 at 5 p.m.
• Early voting in person: Back on Jan. 19, voters began voting early at their local registrar’s office. Voter registration offices were open for early voting through Saturday, March 2 at 5 p.m.

Ways to vote in Virginia’s congressional primary:

• Early voting in person: Starting Friday, May 3, voters may vote early at their local registrar’s office. (Find yours here.) Starting on Saturday, June 8, voter registration offices will be open for early voting, through Saturday, June 15 at 5 p.m. (Find yours here.)

• Mail-in voting: If you want a ballot to be mailed to you, your request must be received by your local voter registration office by Friday, June 7 at 5 p.m.

• Voting in person on Primary Day: Polls will be open from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Tuesday, June 18. Anyone in line by 7 p.m. will be able to vote. Find your polling place here.

news Jan 31

Trump campaign chief urges Republican megadonors to ignore Trump's words, focus on primary lead, sources say

news Feb 7

‘None of these candidates' defeats Nikki Haley in Nevada Republican primary, NBC News projects

news Feb 5

Trump wants to debate Biden ‘immediately' — but president shrugs him off

“I think it’s important to saturate Congress with truth tellers now,” he told a voter recently.

Dunn was a U.S. Capitol Police officer on Jan. 6. He resigned in December 2023 to launch his campaign.

“I don’t think we have the luxury to stand back and hope that everything works out,” Dunn told the News4 I-Team. “Democracy, I think, is under attack.”

There are signs he could be. too. Dunn showed the I-Team a social media threat he received shortly after announcing his campaign, warning him he “should have died” on Jan. 6.

“Do you try to reason with a person like that, or do you just continue to stay motivated and fight?” Dunn asked out loud. “This is what’s at stake, people that believe that political violence is acceptable.”

He’s far from the only one suggesting that’s so.

“2024 is the big year. It’s a federal election,” said Dr. Garen Wintemute of University of California Davis as he explained his latest research into political violence to the I-Team.

Wintemute is an emergency room physician who’s studied political violence for years. His most recent work — surveying more than 8,600 Americans — shows just how widespread the support is for political violence. A third of them said violence can usually or always be justified.

Wintemute is concerned what that could mean this election year.

“I think there are lots of people who are determined that if they can have their way, that election will have a particular outcome regardless of what the vote is. And they’re willing to use armed force to make that outcome come to pass,” he said. “I don’t think we’re going to have a next two years without violent rhetoric. To be honest, I think that’s a given, because it’s worked before. So, the people who have used it before are going to use it again. They’re using it now, and it works.”

Wintemute’s research shows it’s not just support for actual violence but support for people who condone it — even for anti-democratic leaders. Nineteen percent of respondents agreed that “having a strong leader for America is more important than a democracy.”

Wintemute said that number jumped to 31% for self-identified MAGA supporters.

The Southern Poverty Law Center’s Rachel Carroll Rivas echoed Wintemute’s work, telling the I-Team, “We know that these groups are organizing.”

“There is a hard right, anti-democratic, often white nationalist movement that is laying the groundwork to capture power and control in this country once again, or even for some of them for the first time in a way that I don’t even think we fully can understand. They are preparing and ready and on every front,” said Carroll Rivas, who’s studied the anti-government movement for almost 20 years.

“In 2022, it felt like a pause,” she said. “At the second half of 2023, we see sort of a reformation and eyes on building towards 2024 and 2025 and the opportunity for a hard right to recapture the power of government, to push for authoritarian rule or to use violence again.”

News4 I-Team

DC Public Schools (DCPS) Feb 2

Understanding absenteeism in schools: ‘It's such a deeper issue'

gun violence Jan 30

An officer's hope: ‘That better day is coming,' DC police veteran says

A just released report from U.S. Capitol Police shows 8,008 threats in 2023 against members of Congress and those the USCP protect. It is up 7% from 2022. U.S. Capitol Police Assistant Chief Ashan Benedict warned, “This is going to be a very busy year for our special agents.”

The Brennan Center for Justice surveyed local and state elected officials and reported in late January, “More than 40% of state legislators experienced threats or attacks within the past three years, and more than 18% of local officeholders experienced threats or attacks within the past year-and-a-half. The numbers balloon to 89% of state legislators and 52% of local officeholders when less severe forms of abuse — insults or harassment such as stalking — are included.””

A separate Brennan study asked election workers about threats. Sixty percent of those surveyed were very or somewhat worried about the “safety of your colleagues and/or staff including other election officials and election workers.”

Reported by Ted Oberg, produced by Rick Yarborough, and shot and edited by Steve Jones.

The statements from Project Veritas and founder James O’Keefe came as a lawsuit filed against them by a Pennsylvania postmaster was settled Monday.

The group produced videos in the wake of the 2020 presidential election based on claims from a postal worker in Erie, Pennsylvania, who said he had overheard a conversation between the postmaster and a supervisor about illegally backdating mail-in presidential ballots.

Pennsylvania is a battleground state in presidential elections and had been a key target for unfounded claims of election fraud by former President Donald Trump and his supporters after he lost the election to Democrat Joe Biden. The claims about the Erie postmaster sparked calls for an investigation from Republicans and were cited in court by the Trump campaign to support voter fraud allegations.

The admission on Monday was the latest evidence that Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election were baseless. The former president’s allegations of massive voting fraud have been dismissed by a succession of judges and refuted by state election officials and his former attorney general, William Barr.

The Erie postal worker, Richard Hopkins, said in a statement Monday that he was wrong and apologized to the postmaster and his family, as well as the Erie post office.

“I only heard a fragment of the conversation and reached the conclusion that the conversation was related to nefarious behavior,” he wrote. “As I have now learned, I was wrong.”

US & World

news Jan 29

Trump attempts to take credit for stock market record highs under Biden

Entertainment Jan 24

Jon Stewart is returning to ‘The Daily Show' through the 2024 election

Donald Trump Jan 18

Trump lawyers tell Supreme Court keeping him off ballot will unleash ‘chaos and bedlam'

Both Project Veritas and O’Keefe said in their statements posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, that they are not aware of any evidence or other allegation of election fraud in Erie during the 2020 election. The conservative nonprofit, which is known for its hidden camera stings aimed at embarrassing news outlets, labor organizations and Democratic politicians, removed O’Keefe last year amid reports of mistreated workers and misspent organization funds.

Erie postmaster Robert Weisenbach sued the group, as well as O’Keefe and Hopkins, for defamation in 2021.

Weisenbach’s attorneys included the group Protect Democracy, which confirmed the settlement, as did Stephen Klein, an attorney who represented Project Veritas and O’Keefe. Both sides said the “case was resolved in a manner acceptable to all the parties.”

An attorney for Hopkins did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

Weisenbach, who voted Trump, has previously said the false ballot backdating accusations destroyed his reputation and forced him to flee his home after his address was circulated online and he was confronted by a man yelling at him as he pulled into his driveway, according to court documents.

The U.S. Postal Service also investigated Hopkins’s claims, but found no evidence of backdated ballots, according to a report released in February 2021.

Elections officials previously told The Associated Press the county had received about 140 ballots after the election and just five had an Erie postmark.

That question is as timely as ever as former President Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for the 2024 presidential election, faces dozens of felony charges across four cases.

The answer is, simply, yes.

A convicted or imprisoned felon can not only campaign for president and other federal offices, but also be elected.

Can a felon run for president?

The U.S. Constitution does not explicitly prohibit a presidential candidate from running for office while under indictment, or even while serving time behind bars.

Eligibility requirements for presidents state only that they must be at least 35 years old, be a natural-born citizen of the United States, and have been a resident of the country for at least 14 years.

voting Jul 16, 2020

Supreme Court Deals Setback to Florida Felon Voting Rights

Oct 14, 2022

Here's How Mail-In and Absentee Ballots Are Verified

So, a criminal record, an orange jumpsuit and being on the wrong side of prison bars will not necessarily prevent someone from becoming president. It’s the voters who have the power to do that. 

Has anyone run for president from prison?

Just over a century ago, Eugene V. Debs served as the Socialist party’s nominee in 1920 while he was imprisoned for speaking out against World War I and convicted under the Sedition Act.

Debs ran as a free speech martyr and collected about three percent of the vote, which was about 915,000 votes. 

Can you run for Congress if accused or convicted of a crime?

United States political candidates have campaigned from jail in the past to varying degrees of success.

Vermont congressman Matthew Lyon in 1798 won re-election while imprisoned under the Sedition Act for speaking out against President John Adams, becoming the only federal candidate to do so while in jail.

Beleaguered New Jersey Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez, currently under indictment, campaigned throughout his first bribery-related indictment from 2015 to 2018. After those earlier charges were dropped, he won another six-year term.

Can Trump be president if convicted? 

Trump is facing felony charges in four cases, with verdicts that could come before the 2024 election.

While the Constitution does not specifically disqualify candidates for public office due to criminal records, some people have argued that Trump’s actions are different because they violated a key part of a constitutional amendment.

Some courts and election officials have argued that Trump’s actions before and on the day of the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021 should deem him ineligible for office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which disqualifies people who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” after taking an oath to support the Constitution.

Can felons vote?

In another interesting twist, though, while Trump would not lose the ability to run for president if convicted of a felony, he could lose the right to vote.

Trump is registered to vote in Florida, where most disenfranchised felons do not regain their right to vote until after completing their full sentence, including parole or probation.

The departure of Election Assistance Commission executive director Steven Frid, confirmed by the agency on Tuesday, comes just as voting begins in the U.S. presidential election.

Frid held the position for less than a year and was the agency’s third executive director in three years. The EAC’s chief information officer will serve as acting executive director while a search for a permanent replacement is underway, the EAC commissioners said in a statement.

“The EAC Commissioners and staff remain committed to carrying out the mission and vision of the agency and continuing to serve election officials and voters, especially as we move into a critical election year in 2024,” the agency said.

The executive director, along with the general counsel, are the agency’s top two staff positions and have experienced heavy turnover since 2019. The officials who held those roles at the time were not rehired when their contracts expired, and the agency hired replacements in 2020. By February, both replacements had left for other agencies.

The positions were staffed on a temporary basis until Frid was appointed to replace the interim executive director a year ago. He had previously worked as security director of the U.S. Department of Education’s federal student aid office, according to the EAC. He also had worked for the U.S. Secret Service, the U.S. Coast Guard and the Office of Personnel Management.

The EAC now heads into a major election year without an executive director or general counsel. Frid could not immediately be reached for comment. His departure was first reported by the news outlet Votebeat.

The bipartisan commission was established by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to modernize voting technology following the “hanging chad” debacle in Florida during the 2000 presidential election.

The agency’s mission includes assisting election officials nationwide and helping them meet requirements of the 2002 law. It also adopts voluntary voting system guidelines, helps certify voting systems and maintains national mail voter registration forms.

Since the 2016 election, the agency also oversees federal money set aside by Congress to bolster election security.

___

The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

When state legislatures kick off their fresh sessions in the coming weeks — 37 will go into session in January and another nine will follow in February — lawmakers will immediately dive into a host of big policy issues.

Some of those areas — like how to tackle artificial intelligence and deepfakes — will be relatively new. For others, like how state governments can best deal with major workforce shortages, legislators will be picking up where they left off last year.

Meanwhile, in areas like abortion rights, it will be organizers attempting to place measures on the November ballot, not lawmakers, who are taking the lead.

“2024 will be an incredibly important year as we think about the progress that can be made at the state level,” said Jessie Ulibarri, the co-executive director of the State Innovation Exchange, a policy shop that helps draw up model state legislation that advances traditionally progressive issues.

Read the full story on NBCNews.com.

About one-third of Republicans say they have a “great deal” or “quite a bit” of confidence that votes in the Republican primary elections and caucuses will be counted correctly. About three in 10 Republicans report a “moderate” amount of confidence, and 32% say they have “only a little” or “none at all.” In contrast, 72% of Democrats have high confidence their party will count votes accurately in its primary contests. Democrats are also slightly more likely than Republicans to have a high level of confidence in the Republican Party’s vote count being accurate.

Republicans continue to be broadly doubtful about votes being counted accurately — in the early contests or beyond them. About one-quarter of Republicans say they have at least “quite a bit” of confidence that the votes in the 2024 presidential election will be counted accurately, significantly lower than Democrats. Slightly fewer than half of U.S. adults overall (46%) believe the same, which is in line with an AP-NORC poll conducted in June.

The skepticism among Republicans comes after years of former President Donald Trump falsely blaming his 2020 loss on election fraud. Federal and state election officials and Trump’s own attorney general have said there is no credible evidence the election was tainted. The former president's allegations of fraud were also roundly rejected by courts, including by judges Trump appointed.

“Nothing will be fair because the last election was rigged,” said Julie Duggan, 32, of Chicago, a Trump voter, referring to 2020. “I don't trust any of them at this point.”

The AP-NORC poll found a widespread lack of trust in both major political parties among U.S. adults overall.

About one-quarter of U.S. adults say they have “only a little” confidence or “none at all” that both the Democratic Party and Republican Party have a fair process for selecting a presidential nominee. About half of independents have that low level of confidence in both party’s processes, compared with one-quarter of Republicans and 19% of Democrats.

Slightly fewer than half of U.S. adults — 46% — say they are pessimistic about the way the country's leaders are chosen.

About half of U.S. adults are pessimistic about the future of the Republican Party, including one-third of Republicans and 45% of independents. The poll found 45% of U.S. adults are pessimistic about the future of the Democratic Party, including about one-quarter of Democrats and 41% of independents.

“The way they're spending our money, sending it all over the world and not protecting our people here in the United States of America,” said Gary Jackson, a 65-year-old retired trucker and Republican in Boise, Idaho. “Right now, I'm not impressed with either party.”

Christine Allen, a political independent in Gambrills, Maryland, sees her state's last governor, Larry Hogan, a moderate Republican, as a model for the country. But Hogan refused to run in the GOP presidential primary, which she sees as emblematic of how the two-party system prevents talented leaders from holding office,

“Everybody right now is a bunch of children, stomping their feet until they get their way,” Allen, 44, said. “Everybody's at fault here. There's no winners.”

Nonetheless, Allen thinks the primaries will be fair. “They're fairer than the Electoral College,” she said.

Even those who identify with the two political parties are uneasy about whom their organizations will nominate. A recent AP-NORC poll found that Democrats and Republicans are also not especially confident that their party’s primary contests will result in a candidate who can win the general election in November. Additionally, there are some doubts on both sides that the emerging candidates will represent their party’s views or Americans overall.

US & World

Colorado Dec 26, 2023

Police investigating incidents involving Colorado justices after Trump removed from state's ballot

New York Dec 7, 2023

New York Democrats pick Tom Suozzi as their candidate for George Santos' seat

decision 2024 Nov 30, 2023

All about delegates: Here's how the presidential nomination process really works

Only three in 10 Democrats say they are confident the Democratic party's process will result in a candidate whose views represent most Americans. About one-quarter of Democrats believe the process will produce a candidate whose views represent their own. Similarly, about three in 10 Republicans say the GOP process will produce a candidate who represents a majority of Americans. About one-third of Republicans expect they'll get a nominee whose views represent their own.

Mark Richards, a 33-year-old middle school teacher in Toledo, Ohio, and a Democrat, said he expects President Joe Biden will be nominated again by the party, despite his low job approval numbers. The incumbent faces only token opposition in the Democratic presidential primary.

“I feel like there's got to be someone better out there, but I don't think another Democrat is going to unseat Joe Biden,” Richards said.

Though Richards thinks the primaries will be fair and the votes accurately counted, he sees the nominating system as inherently flawed. “It's all about money, who can get the most money from PACs and Super PACs,” he said, referring to political committees that donate to candidates or spend millions of dollars on their behalf.

The poll of 1,074 adults was conducted Nov. 30–Dec. 4, 2023, using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, designed to represent the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.0 percentage points.

Riccardi reported from Denver.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

Vanessa Rubio, an Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner in Ward 4, voted in both D.C. and Maryland in the 2020 general election, according to the elections board. Documents from the board state Rubio voted in person in Maryland on Nov. 1, 2020 and then in D.C. on Nov. 3, 2020.

Rubio admitted she voted twice to the board, but said she didn’t think it was illegal because D.C. is not a state, according to the documents.

The elections board fined her $500. Rubio declined to comment to News4.

The head of ANC 4E said Wednesday that commissioners asked Rubio to resign but she refused. They will bring a motion to censure her and remove her as secretary.

Five other voters who the board said double-voted were ordered to pay a lesser fine of $100 each. They also voted in D.C. and Maryland, officials said.

The board said it ordered Rubio to pay a heftier fine due to her position as an elected official.

None of the six cases are related to one another, officials said.

They’re the first cases of voter fraud the elections board has taken action on since sharing data with the nationwide Election Registration Information Center, or ERIC.

News4 has reached out to the Maryland Board of Elections to find out if it’s taking any actions.

Double voting is not grounds to be removed from elected office in D.C. and it does not impact the person’s right to vote in future elections.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

They just disagree over who poses the threat.

A poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that 62% of adults say democracy in the U.S. could be at risk depending on who wins next fall. Majorities of Democrats (72%) and Republicans (55%) feel the same way, but for different reasons.

President Joe Biden has attempted to paint a dystopian future if GOP front-runner and former President Donald Trump returns to the White House after promising to seek retribution against opponents and declining to rule out that he would abuse the powers of the office. The former president has tried to flip the narrative lately, saying the election subversion and documents cases against him show Biden has weaponized the federal government to prosecute a political opponent. He has called Biden the “destroyer of American democracy.”

“I think from the side of the left, it’s pretty obvious that they’re concerned about electing a president who is avowedly authoritarian, someone who clearly wants to reduce checks and balances within the government to strengthen the presidency and to do so in ways that give the executive branch kind of an unprecedented reach across the population and sectors of the government,” said Michael Albertus, political science professor at the University of Chicago.

“From the right, the Republicans think about government overreach, big government, threats to freedom and mandates to act in a certain way or adopt certain policies,” he said.

Against that backdrop, the poll found that about half of U.S. adults, 51%, say democracy is working “not too well” or “not well at all.”

The poll asked about the importance of the coming presidential election for 12 issues and found that the percentage who said the outcome will be very or extremely important to the future of democracy in the U.S. (67%) ranked behind only the economy (75%). It was about equal to the percentage who said that about government spending (67%) and immigration (66%).

Tony Motes, a retired firefighter who lives in Monroe, Georgia, cited a number of reasons he believes “we’re not living in a complete democracy.” That includes what he sees as a deterioration of rights, including parental rights, thieves and other criminals not being held accountable, and a lack of secure borders.

The 59-year-old Republican also said the various criminal cases being brought against Trump undermine the country’s democratic traditions.

“They’re trying to keep him from running because they know he’s going to win,” he said.

The poll’s findings continue a trend of Americans’ lackluster views about how democracy is functioning. They also believe the country’s governing system is not working well to reflect their interests on issues ranging from immigration to abortion to the economy.

Robert Lieberman, a professor of political science at Johns Hopkins University, has studied the fall of democracies elsewhere and the common elements that feed their demise.

The factors include polarization, growing ethnic or racial antagonism, rising economic inequality and a concentration of power under a country’s executive officeholder.

“For a number of years now, the United States has had all four of these conditions, really for the first time in history,” he said. “So we’re in a period that’s ripe for challenges to democracy.”

Trump is not the cause of the pattern, Lieberman said, but “seems to have an unerring instinct to make things worse, and he certainly has authoritarian impulses and a lot of followers who seem to validate or applaud him.”

The AP-NORC poll found that 87% of Democrats and 54% of independents believe a second Trump term would negatively affect U.S. democracy. For Republicans, 82% believe democracy would be weakened by another Biden win, with 56% of independents agreeing.

About 2 in 10 U.S. adults (19%) say democracy in the U.S. is “already so seriously broken that it doesn’t matter who wins the 2024 presidential election.” Republicans (23%) are more likely than Democrats (10%) to say this, but relatively few in either party think U.S. democracy is resilient enough to withstand the outcome.

Social media platforms and news sites that reinforce biases accelerate the polarization that leads people from different political perspectives to believe the other side is the one representing the gravest threat to the nation’s democracy, said Lilliana Mason, an associate professor of political science at Johns Hopkins.

“I don’t think that people are exaggerating. I think it’s that they actually are living in information environments in which it is true for them that democracy is under threat,” she said.

Mason said one side fears what Trump has said he will do if he wins, while the other is responding to the fear created in a media ecosystem that says the Democrats want to destroy America and turn it into a socialist or communist society.

For some, the danger is more than Trump’s statements and concern over how he might turn toward authoritarianism. It also is what’s happening in the states and courts, where political gerrymandering and threats to voting rights are continuing, as are measures that limit people’s ability to vote easily, such as reducing drop box locations for mail-in ballots and tightening voter identification requirements.

“Look at all the roadblocks that have been put up to keep people, especially people of color, from being able to vote,” said Pamela Williams, 75, of New York City, who identifies as a Democrat. “That isn’t democracy.”

Douglas Kucmerowski, 67, an independent who lives in the Finger Lakes region of New York, is concerned over those state-level actions and the continued use of the Electoral College, which can allow someone to be president even if they lose the popular vote.

He also questions the state of the nation’s democracy when a large proportion of the country supports a candidate facing multiple criminal charges who has spoken about pursuing retribution and using the military domestically, among other things.

Trump also has lied about the outcome of the 2020 election, which has been affirmed by multiple reviews in the battleground states where he disputed his loss, and called his supporters to a Washington rally before they stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in a violent attempt to stop Congress from certifying Joe Biden’s win.

“That candidate, in any other age, probably would have been ruled out. But for some reason, in this society, he’s one of the best choices,” Kucmerowski said. “If this country is that confused that they can’t tell the difference between right and wrong and ex-presidents making statements that on day one he will be a dictator, doesn’t anybody care about day two or three or four when he’s still a dictator?”

___

The poll of 1,074 adults was conducted Nov. 30 through Dec. 4, 2023, using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.0 percentage points.

___

The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

“We cannot allow attacks on democracy to go unchallenged,” Nevada’s Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford said in a statement Wednesday. “Today’s indictments are the product of a long and thorough investigation, and as we pursue this prosecution, I am confident that our judicial system will see justice done.”

The fake electors — involved in the state GOP or Clark County GOP — have been charged with offering a false instrument for filing and uttering a forged instrument. Those two categories of felonies have penalties that range from one year up to either four or five years in prison.

Joe Biden Dec 6, 2023

Biden to donors: ‘If Trump wasn't running I'm not sure I'd be running. We cannot let him win'

Donald Trump Dec 1, 2023

Judge rejects Trump's claim of immunity in his federal 2020 election prosecution

The indictments in Nevada are just the latest to come out of investigations in several states into the activities of Republican electors.

Michigan’s Attorney General filed felony charges in July against 16 Republican fake electors, who would face eight criminal charges including forgery and conspiracy to commit election forgery, though one had charges dropped after reaching a cooperation deal. The top charge carried a maximum penalty of 14 years in prison.

In Wisconsin, 10 Republicans who posed as electors settled a civil lawsuit Wednesday, admitting their actions were part of an effort to overturn President Joe Biden’s victory. Sixteen fake electors have been charged in Georgia, three of which were also charged in August alongside Trump in a sweeping indictment accusing them of participating in a wide-ranging scheme to illegally overturn the results of the presidential election. They have pleaded not guilty.

Democratic attorneys general in New Mexico and Arizona also are investigating the role of fake electors in their states.

Ford began investigating fake electors in Nevada last month. That announcement marked a shift for the state’s first-term attorney general, who previously was quiet on whether he would investigate the fake electors before saying that state law did not directly address whether he could pursue charges.

In December 2020, six Republicans signed certificates falsely stating that Trump won Nevada and sent them to Congress and the National Archives, where they were ultimately ignored. The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol looked into the role these fake electors in key battleground states took in Trump’s attempt to cling to power after his 2020 defeat.

Among the fake electors is Nevada GOP chairman Michael McDonald, who has pushed to bypass the state-run presidential primary to nominate a Republican presidential nominee, instead opting for a party-run caucus, which would require voter ID and paper ballots.

He has remained a staunch ally of Trump, opening for the former president at a rally in Las Vegas by saying, “You give us a fair election, I’ll give you the next president of the United States — Donald J. Trump.” Trump and his attorneys also had a direct hand in the planning and execution of the fake elector scheme, including a conference call with McDonald, transcripts released last year show.

McDonald did not respond to phone calls and a text message requesting comment on Wednesday.

Clark County GOP Chair Jesse Law was also indicted hours after he announced his candidacy for the Nevada state Assembly, along with Nevada GOP Vice Chair and Storey County clerk Jim Hindle, who runs elections in the rural county. Neither returned voice messages left Wednesday requesting comment.

Ford had testified in support of a bill that would have criminalized future fake electors. That passed Nevada’s Democratic-controlled Legislature but was vetoed by Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo, who said there should be “strict punishments” for those trying to undermine elections but that the proposed punishment between four and 10 years in prison was too harsh.

Fred Lokken, a longtime political science professor at Truckee Meadows Community College in Reno, said Wednesday the indictment isn’t necessarily a surprise. He said he doubts it will dissuade any backers of Trump but expects it will have an impact on undecided and independent voters.

“This is a grand jury. There’s an indictment. Prosecutors don’t get that unless there is evidence,” Lokken said. “It’s a validation that what was going on was illegal and now there can be consequences.”

AP writers Kate Brumback contributed reporting from Atlanta, Joey Cappelletti contributed reporting from Lansing, Michigan and Scott Sonner contributed reporting from Reno. Stern is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a program that places journalists in local newsrooms.

At the prosecutors’ request, the judge on Friday dismissed a felony charge of corrupt conduct and one for making a false statement, both of which had been levied against former Prince William County Registrar Michele White. She still faces trial next month on a misdemeanor charge of willful neglect of duty.

Very little has been publicly revealed about exactly what prosecutors believe White did wrong. Court records merely indicate that the case revolves around 2020 election returns, including the presidential race.

Prince William election officials have previously said White’s successor reported “discrepancies” in results to state officials, but that those discrepancies would not have affected the outcome of any race.

The case was brought by Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares last year. Shortly after his office obtained the indictment against White, it launched an election integrity unit. The move prompted critics to accuse Miyares of pandering to supporters of former President Donald Trump, who falsely blamed his defeat on election fraud.

In White’s case, Assistant Attorney General James Herring filed a motion ahead of Friday’s hearing in which he alleged that an elections worker “conveniently and quite surprisingly provided a different version of events” than the witness had previously recounted.

“As a consequence, the Commonwealth is confronted with significant inconsistent statements,” Herring wrote.

White’s lawyer, Zachary Stafford, said he interviewed the same witness and found nothing inconsistent in his statements. The election worker “rather filled in a hole that the initial investigation did not address” about who asked him to make changes in the state voter registration system, Stafford said in a statement. The system is being replaced after an audit questioned its reliability and functionality.

Stafford said the witness reported White didn’t ask him to make the changes now under scrutiny and that it was “a poor choice of words” for prosecutors to refer to the witness’ updated testimony as “convenient.”

Attorney General Miyares’ office declined to comment beyond the court filing, citing the ongoing misdemeanor case.

The letters were sent to elections offices in the presidential battlegrounds of Georgia and Nevada as well as California, Oregon and Washington, with some being intercepted before they arrived. Four of the letters contained fentanyl, the FBI and U.S. Postal Inspection Service reported in a statement to elections officials Thursday.

“Law enforcement is working diligently to intercept any additional letters before they are delivered,” the statement said.

The Pierce County auditor’s office in Tacoma, Washington, released images of the letter it received, showing it had been postmarked in Portland, Oregon, and read in part, “End elections now.”

In Seattle, King County Elections Director Julie Wise said that letter appeared to be the same one her office got — and that it was “very similar” to one King County received during the August primary, which also contained fentanyl.

Among the offices that may have been targeted was Fulton County in Georgia, which includes Atlanta and is the largest voting jurisdiction in one of the nation’s most important presidential swing states. Authorities were working to intercept the letter.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger confirmed to NBC affiliate WXIA-TV in Atlanta that the letter sent to the Fulton County office tested positive for fentanyl.

“Some people like to call fentanyl a drug, but it’s actually poison. It will kill you. It will kill you very quickly,” Raffensperger said, adding later that he lost his son to a fentanyl overdose. 

Raffensperger said officials were sending the overdose-reversal drug naloxone to the office as a precaution.

In California, the United States Postal Service intercepted two suspicious envelopes that were headed to election facilities in Los Angeles and Sacramento.

Authorities in Lane County, Oregon, which includes the University of Oregon, were investigating a piece of mail that arrived at the local election office Wednesday. No one who came in contact with it had experienced any negative health effects, said Devon Ashbridge, spokeswoman for the Lane County Elections Office in Eugene.

The incident prompted officials to close the office and delayed an afternoon pickup of ballots. Ashbridge declined to provide further details.

“Someone attempted to terrorize our elections staff, and that’s not OK,” Ashbridge said.

On Wednesday, authorities in Washington state said four county election offices had to be evacuated as election workers were processing ballots cast in Tuesday’s election, delaying vote-counting.

Election offices in Seattle’s King County and ones in Skagit, Spokane and Pierce counties received envelopes containing suspicious powders. Local law enforcement officials said the substances in Kings and Spokane counties field-tested positive for fentanyl, NBC affiliate KING-TV in Seattle reported. In at least one other case, the substance was baking soda.

Pierce County Auditor Linda Farmer released images of the envelope and letter her office received. The letter contained a warning about the vulnerability of “ballot drops” and read: “End elections now. Stop giving power to the right that they don’t have. We are in charge now and there is no more need for them.”

The letter featured an antifascist symbol, a progress pride flag and a pentagram. While the symbols have sometimes been associated with leftist politics, they also have been used by conservative figures to label and stereotype the left, and the sender’s political leanings were unclear.

Elections offices in two Washington counties — King and Okanogan — also received suspicious envelopes while processing ballots during the August primary, and the letter sent to King County tested positive for traces of fentanyl. Those letters remain under investigation by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and FBI.

Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs called the incidents in his state “acts of terrorism to threaten our elections.”

White House spokeswoman Olivia Dalton said the Biden administration was aware of the investigation: “We are grateful for the election and poll workers who served this week to ensure the security of our democratic processes.”

Fentanyl, an opioid that can be 50 times as powerful as the same amount of heroin, is driving an overdose crisis deadlier than any the U.S. has ever seen as it is pressed into pills or mixed into other drugs. Briefly touching fentanyl cannot cause an overdose, and researchers have found that the risk of fatal overdose from accidental exposure is low.

Jeanmarie Perrone, director of the Center for Addiction Medicine and Policy at the University of Pennsylvania said studies simulating exposure from opening envelopes containing powders showed that very little, if any, of the powder becomes aerosolized to cause toxicity through inhalation.

She noted that factory workers in manufacturing facilities often wear some level of protective equipment, but even incidental nasal exposure has not been found to cause toxicity in those workers.

“We have really good evidence that it wouldn’t be exposed through the skin, or through inhalation,” Perrone said.

It was not immediately clear how authorities came to suspect that a letter might have been sent to Georgia’s biggest election office. Raffensperger said the state alerted all 159 of its counties of the possible threat Wednesday, but believes only Fulton County is being targeted.

It’s the latest disruption since the 2020 election to the office that oversees voting in and around Atlanta.

Fulton County Commission Chairman Robb Pitts, speaking at a news conference Thursday with Raffensperger, said the county’s election workers had been under threat since at least when two of them were singled out following the 2020 presidential election, with then-Republican President Donald Trump, attorney Rudolph Giuliani and others falsely alleging that election workers were stuffing ballots to aid Democrats. Democrat Joe Biden narrowly won the state.

Part of the Fulton County prosecution that indicted Trump, Giuliani and 17 others includes criminal charges focusing on statements and acts made against election workers.

“There’s people out there who want to do harm to our workers and want to disrupt, interrupt, the flow of democracy and free, open and transparent elections, and we’re prepared for it,” said Pitts, an elected Democrat.

Pitts said he believes that in 2024 Georgia’s most populous county will be the “focal point” of election scrutiny.

“So this was a good trial run for us, I hate to say it,” he said.

Many election offices across the United States have taken steps to increase the security of their buildings and boost protections for workers amid an onslaught of harassment and threats following the 2020 election and the false claims that it was rigged.

Many of us skip voting in local elections because we’re unfamiliar with the candidates. But election experts say your vote especially matters in down-ballot races, which can come down to just a few votes. This summer in Virginia, a Republican running in a primary for the 29th District state Senate seat won the nomination by just two votes.

“If you don’t vote in those races, someone else will,” said Jon Valant, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “Someone’s going to be elected in those races. These are really important seats these officeholders fill, and they really do make big, important decisions.”

Ahead of Election Day in Virginia on Tuesday, Nov. 7, here’s how school board decisions became cultural flashpoints in recent years, why your local election vote can make a big difference and how to get up to speed on candidates fast.

How school board meetings got so heated

It’s been a tumultuous few years for many school boards, with packed rooms of parents waiting hours for their chance to say what should and shouldn’t happen in schools.

Interest in school board meetings ramped up in 2020 and 2021 because parents were concerned about COVID-19, said Valant, who has devoted his career to studying education policy and the politics of education. Parents wanted to weigh in on how schools would reopen, whether masks needed to be worn and whether vaccines should be required.

Strong feelings plus highly accessible government institutions were a recipe for political activity, Valant explained. Parents who got engaged with school boards about COVID then moved on to other issues.

“Over the last few years, as some of the COVID topics have gotten a little less prominent, they’ve been replaced with some of these other hot cultural topics related to race, gender and sexuality, and those types of issues,” he said. “It has remained the case that the venue for a lot of those arguments has been school board meetings.”

Montgomery County Public Schools Jun 27, 2023

Montgomery County parents protest literacy lessons on gender and LGBTQ+ issues

LGBTQ+ Aug 15, 2023

Spotsylvania schools change transgender student policies

High-profile policy groups such as the right-wing organization Moms for Liberty, launched in Florida in 2021, began working to get school board candidates elected. Researchers are still working to understand the impact of these groups, Valant said.

School board election turnout is low but may be on the rise

Elected school board members make major decisions affecting public school students, but turnout in school board races is generally low, at an estimated 5 to 10% of the electorate, the National School Boards Association wrote in early 2020.

Since the start of the pandemic, there appears to be an uptick in voting in school board races, Valant said, though he warned that data is hard to track on a national level because it’s decentralized.

To have a say in what happens, it’s crucial to get educated about candidates and vote, said Amir Badat, who manages voter education efforts for the Legal Defense Fund.

“What I would say to folks who leave races blank is, you do so at your own peril. These are incredibly important offices. They hold an immense amount of power and influence over the day-to-day lives of every person who lives in this country,” he said.

Local officeholders determine who goes to jail, whether roads get repaired and how laws are enforced, Badat said.

Why one voter started tracking local elections

Emergency room doctor Kevin Chin, of Ellicott City, Maryland, made it a point to vote in every election but didn’t always pay much attention to local races. He got more engaged once he understood that local officeholders make decisions on issues he cares about, including housing affordability and transportation access.

“A lot of people, myself included, kind of think about politics as sort of like entertainment or kind of like a sports match of, ‘Oh, who’s gonna win?’ when really what it’s about is the issues — how this affects everyday people’s lives,” he said.

Chin, 35, said he now researches candidates up and down the ballot before he goes to vote.

Here’s how to research candidates for school board and other local offices

With a little effort, you can be ready to pick leaders aligned with your values. Badat, of the Legal Defense Fund, shared these election prep tips:

• Use online resources to learn about races. Using the site VOTE411, you can see what’s on your ballot, check your voter registration and plan how you’ll vote.
• Seek information on candidates from trusted news sources.
• Keep your eyes open for misinformation and disinformation. Ask yourself: How do you know that what you’re hearing or seeing online is true?
• The nonpartisan group OpenSecrets helps voters track money in U.S. politics. See what you can learn about how a candidate is funded.
• Attending candidate forums or watching videos of them online can be a great way to get to know who’s who, Valant, of the Brookings Institution, said.

However you prepare for your local elections, make sure you cast your ballot, Badat said

“Make a plan, make sure that you’re registered, and get out there and vote,” he said.

The governor’s administration first disclosed the problem earlier this month following reporting from VPM News about concerns raised by civil rights advocates over improper voter removals. The error, which the administration has blamed on a data-sharing issue that misclassified probation violations as new felonies, has sparked criticism from Democrats, including a call from the state’s Democratic congressional delegation for a Department of Justice investigation.

The full scope of the problem had been unclear until the Department of Elections’ announcement Friday — less than two weeks before Election Day.

A department spokeswoman, Andrea Gaines, acknowledged in mid-October that at least 275 misclassified voters had been identified, but she had since declined to answer questions about the latest available figures. At the same time, inquiries made to local registrars’ offices by The Associated Press and other news outlets made clear the total surpassed 275.

For instance, in the capital city of Richmond — which has a population of about 230,000 — about 200 affected voters have been reinstated, according to a Friday interview with Keith Balmer, the city’s general registrar.

Eric Olsen, the director of elections and general registrar for Prince William County, said last week by email that 87 voters had been reinstated. The number had risen to 107, he said in an update Friday.

The Department of Elections said Friday that all affected voters have been notified by mail.

“As of today, all but approximately 100 of these records have been processed by general registrars. ELECT staff continues to check in with localities to ensure each record is reinstated,” the department said in a news release.

Virginia also offers same-day voter registration, meaning impacted individuals would have the opportunity to remedy the situation and cast a provisional ballot in early voting or on Election Day. Every General Assembly seat is on the ballot this year, along with various local offices.

Democrats continued to be sharply critical of the error.

“First, we were told there was no problem. Then we were told it was small, contained problem. Now we’re told it is a massive problem, with numbers large enough to swing control of the General Assembly,” said Aaron Mukerjee, an attorney working as the Democratic Party of Virginia’s voter protection director. “All of this confirms Republicans cannot be trusted with Virginians basic constitutional rights.”

It’s not clear whether the U.S. Department of Justice will investigate the matter. A DOJ spokeswoman who has previously acknowledged receipt of the congressional delegation’s request declined further comment Friday.

Youngkin has asked the state’s government watchdog agency to investigate.

In a letter dated Wednesday obtained by AP, Youngkin’s chief of staff wrote to Inspector General Michael Westfall to memorialize a previous request from Youngkin for an administrative investigation into the “circumstances, data systems, and practices” surrounding the voter removals and a separate finding that in previous decades, thousands of Virginians may have been permitted to remain on the rolls despite being convicted of a new felony.

In Virginia, a felony conviction automatically results in the loss of a person’s civil rights, such as the right to vote, serve on a jury, run for office and carry a firearm. The governor has sole discretion to restore those civil rights, apart from firearm rights, which can be restored by a court.

The department said in an annual report this year that it had discovered 10,558 people who were convicted of a felony, had their rights restored and then were convicted of another felony, but were not subsequently removed from the list.

Jeff Goettman, the chief of staff, wrote that the administration suspects the errors “are the result of antiquated data systems and insufficient processes maintained over the last 20 plus years.”

The categorization of some probation violations as felonies “may date back decades, across multiple gubernatorial administrations,” Goettman wrote.

“It is important that we resolve these issues as soon as reasonably practical as Governor Youngkin believes that every eligible Virginian should exercise his or her right to vote,” the letter continued.

On his way to cast his ballot last week, longtime Democrat Pablo Cuadrado accepted a blue sample ballot — the type typically used by the Democratic party. As he left the polling place, he realized the sample ballot he’d used to guide his vote – titled “Spotsylvania Democrats” – was not from Democrats but instead from a group called the Fredericksburg Virginia Patriots (FVP), which was created by Nick Ignacio, who is running for clerk of courts and has not been endorsed by Democrats or Republicans.

The sample ballot suggests Ignacio and several GOP candidates would be the best choice for Democrats. 

“I just feel like I was taken advantage of,” Cuadrado said. “I feel like there was deceit going on here.”

On Monday, a volunteer handed out pink sample ballots made by Ignacio titled “Spotsylvania Republican Voters.”

Republican-endorsed school board candidate Jordan Lynch says what Ignacio is doing is wrong. 

“You shouldn’t mislead people,” he said. “You should be able to stand on your own merit, and I don’t agree with deceiving and lying to voters, essentially.”

“FVP is a tea party, an independent organization,” Ignacio said.

“We have the ability like any other candidate to make our sample ballots based on what we believe is the best for the people,” he said.

Some volunteers are trying to counter the misleading information with flyers warning voters.

Spotsylvania County Sheriff Roger Harris issued a statement reading, in part, “The misleading ballots being handed out by certain campaigns are confusing to voters and a political stunt. Just be diligent and get to know who you are going to vote for. Know before you go.” 

The county registrar contacted the state elections department and was told to have voters make complaints.

News4 contacted the attorney general’s office to see if the flyer violates any laws or rules and is awaiting a response. 

Lindell confirmed in an interview with The Associated Press on Friday that he’s out of money and said he understands his lawyers are people who need to make a living.

Attorney Andrew Parker wrote in documents filed in federal court on Thursday that his firm and a second firm representing MyPillow in lawsuits by Smartmatic and Dominion Voting Systems can’t afford what it would cost to represent Lindell and MyPillow through the rest of the litigation. Continuing to defend him would put the firms “in serious financial risk,” he wrote.

It’s the latest in a string of legal and financial setbacks for Lindell, who propagates former President Donald Trump’s lies that the 2020 election was stolen from him, in part by rigged voting machine systems. Several big-box retailers, including Walmart, have discontinued his products.

Donald Trump Sep 29, 2023

Bail bondsman charged alongside Trump in Georgia becomes the first defendant to take a plea deal

Oct 6, 2023

Trump endorses Jim Jordan to succeed Kevin McCarthy as House speaker

“MyPillow’s been decimated. … We’ve lost hundreds of millions of dollars,” Lindell said, adding that the other main assets he has left are his home and pickup truck. He blamed Dominion, Smartmatic and the news media, including the conservative outlets Fox News and Newsmax.

“You’re all doing it because you want me to shut up about security of our elections,” a defiant Lindell said. “You’re all the same.”

But he vowed to keep fighting and to keep MyPillow going. He said he doesn’t have any other debts and has no plans to file for bankruptcy for himself or MyPillow.

In a rambling video posted on his FrankSpeech website Thursday night, he depicted himself as a victim of “cancel culture” and said he wasn’t done fighting.

“I’m never going to stop trying to secure elections for this country ever,” Lindell said.

Parker filed the requests to quit in federal court in Minnesota, where Smartmatic filed a defamation lawsuit seeking over $1 billion, and in Washington, D.C., where Lindell is a defendant in a similar $1.3 billion lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems that also targets Trump allies Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell. Dominion won a nearly $800 million settlement from Fox News in April. Giuliani is being sued by a former lawyer over allegedly unpaid legal bills.

Parker’s firm also moved for permission to stop defending Lindell, MyPillow and FrankSpeech from a defamation lawsuit filed in federal court in Colorado by Eric Coomer, former director of product strategy and security for Denver-based Dominion.

In July, Lindell acknowledged to the Star Tribune of Minneapolis that his company was auctioning off equipment and subleasing some of its manufacturing space in Minnesota after several major retailers and some TV shopping networks stopped carrying MyPillow products amid the negative publicity. He said the equipment was no longer needed as MyPillow consolidated its operations and turned its focus to direct sales.

In April, an arbitration panel ordered Lindell to pay $5 million to a software engineer for breach of contract in a dispute over data that Lindell claimed proves China interfered in the U.S. 2020 elections and tipped the outcome to President Joe Biden. Lindell had launched his “Prove Mike Wrong Challenge,” as part of the “Cyber Symposium” he staged in South Dakota in 2021 to further his theories.

Parker wrote in his filings that Lindell and MyPillow had regularly paid his firm in full and on time through the end of 2022. But he said the payments slowed this year while the litigation fees and costs “dramatically increased.” By May, the payments slowed to more than 60 days and didn’t cover the full bills. Lindell and MyPillow made no payments for the firm’s July and August bills, he wrote, though they did make some relatively small payments that were only a fraction of the total owed.

The attorney said his firm, Parker Daniels Kibort, or PDK, warned Lindell and MyPillow in August and September that it would have to withdraw if the bills weren’t paid.

He said Lindell and MyPillow understand his firm’s position, don’t object, and are in the process of finding new lawyers. No trial date is scheduled in either the Smartmatic or Dominion cases.

Ever the pitchman, Lindell, known as the MyPillow Guy, asked viewers of his webcast who wanted to help to call in and buy his pillows, towels and other products.

Nick Ignacio created a sample ballot claiming that he’s a preferred Republican candidate on one side but the preferred Democrat on the other side. Ignacio did not get an endorsement from either party.

One voter confronted him outside, saying that he was misleading people before they got the chance to vote.

“At the very least, it’s unethical, and you’re asking for my vote,” voter Margaret Gallagher said. “You’re trying to mislead people as they walk in. And then he threw an insult at me and walked away.”

Ignacio declined to explain why he was giving voters inaccurate information.

He waved to News4’s camera and said, “I’m out here working the polls, ma’am. I want to talk to the voters.”

voting Sep 22, 2023

Election season is underway in Virginia. Here's what to know about voting

Decision 2023 Jun 20, 2023

Primary results: Reform-minded Northern Virginia prosecutors win nominations

Kellie Acors, the county’s registrar, said that as long as the ballot conforms with rules about the font size and color, there’s nothing election officials can do.

“We don’t have the authority, nor the Department of Elections does, on what is advertised or what they’re sharing on their sample ballot,” said Acors.

Some voters also raised concerns about an armed security guard on site. A friend of sheriff candidate Steve Maxwell hired the guard after one of his volunteers said she had been harassed by a Democratic campaign worker.

“That worker felt that they were being accosted verbally and almost physically because this person, according to their description, was leaning across the table and yelling at them,” Maxwell said.

The security guard being there is legal as long as he stays at least 40 feet from the polling place. Because voters are concerned that the guard will scare people away, the guard said he’ll put on a more casual uniform to make people feel more comfortable.

The security guard said he’ll also be accompanying Maxwell to campaign events. Maxwell is challenging longtime incumbent Sheriff Roger Harris. 

In a two-page order Monday, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee imposed strict limitations regarding the identities of jurors’ involved in any upcoming trial in the case against former President Donald Trump and his 18 co-defendants.

The court’s standing rules restrict the use of photographic or electronic equipment without a judge’s prior consent. McAfee’s order offers additional protections by prohibiting drawing in an identifiable manner, or otherwise recording images, statements or conversations of jurors or prospective jurors.

The judge further ordered that jurors and prospective jurors be identified only by their number in court filings while the trial is pending and prohibited disclosure of juror information that would reveal their identity, including names, addresses, telephone numbers or identifying employment information.

For more on this story go to NBCNews.com.

More: Georgia election trial

news Sep 6, 2023

Trump Georgia election trial juror names should be secret, DA tells judge

Donald Trump Aug 31, 2023

Trump Georgia trial will be streamed live, judge rules

Government employees are being bombarded with threats even in normally quiet periods between elections, secretaries of state and experts warn. Some point to former President Donald Trump and his allies repeatedly and falsely claiming the 2020 election was stolen and spreading conspiracy theories about election workers. Experts fear the 2024 election could be worse and want the federal government to do more to protect election workers.

The Justice Department created the Election Threats Task Force in 2021 led by its public integrity section, which investigates election crimes. John Keller, the unit’s second in command, said in an interview with The Associated Press that the department hoped its prosecutions would deter others from threatening election workers.

Rudy Giuliani Aug 30, 2023

Rudy Giuliani liable for defaming Georgia election workers, hit with sanctions by judge

Donald Trump Aug 31, 2023

Trump campaign aide told police officers to ‘go hang yourself' at Jan. 6 riot

“This isn’t going to be taken lightly. It’s not going to be trivialized,” he said. “Federal judges, the courts are taking misconduct seriously and the punishments are going to be commensurate with the seriousness of the conduct.”

Two more men pleaded guilty Thursday to threatening election workers in Arizona and Georgia in separate cases. Attorney General Merrick Garland said the Justice Department would keep up the investigations, adding, “A functioning democracy requires that the public servants who administer our elections are able to do their jobs without fearing for their lives.”

The unit has filed 14 cases and two have resulted in yearslong prison sentences, including a 2 1/2-year sentence Monday for Mark Rissi, an Iowa man charged with leaving a message threatening to “lynch” and “hang” an Arizona election official. He had been “inundated with misinformation” and now “feels horrible” about the messages he left, his lawyer Anthony Knowles said.

A Texas man was given 3 1/2 years earlier this month after suggesting a “mass shooting of poll workers and election officials” last year, charges stated. In one message, the Justice Department said, the man wrote: “Someone needs to get these people AND their children. The children are the most important message to send.” His lawyer did not return a message seeking comment.

One indictment unveiled in August was against a man accused of leaving an expletive-filled voicemail after the 2020 election for Tina Barton, a Republican who formerly was the clerk in Rochester Hills, Michigan, outside Detroit. According to the indictment, the person vowed that “a million plus patriots will surround you when you least expect it” and “we’ll … kill you.”

Barton said it was just one of many threats that left her feeling deeply anxious.

“I’m really hopeful the charges will send a strong message, and we won’t find ourselves in the same position after the next election,” she said.

Normally, the periods between elections are quiet for the workers who run voting systems around the U.S. But for many, that’s no longer true, said Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, a Democrat who has pushed back against conspiracy theories surrounding elections.

“I anticipate it will get worse as we end this year and go into the presidential election next year,” Griswold said.

Griswold said the threats come in “waves,” usually following social media posts by prominent figures about false claims the 2020 election was stolen or blog posts on far-right websites. While the nation is more informed about the threats to election workers, she worries that there haven’t been enough prosecutions and states haven’t taken enough action to protect workers.

“Do we have the best tools to get through the next period of time? Absolutely not,” Griswold said.

Election officials note that there have been thousands of threats nationwide yet relatively few prosecutions. They say they understand the high bar to actually prosecute a case but that more could be done.

Liz Howard, a former Virginia election official now at the Brennan Center for Justice’s elections and government program, called on the Justice Department to hire a senior adviser with existing relationships with election officials to improve outreach.

About 1 in 5 election workers know someone who left their election job for safety reasons and 73% of local election officials said harassment has increased, according to a Brennan Center survey published in April.

The task force has reviewed more than 2,000 reports of threats and harassment across the country since its inception, though most of those cases haven’t brought charges from prosecutors who point to the high legal bar set by the Supreme Court for criminal prosecution. Communication must be considered a “true threat,” one that crosses a line to a serious intent to hurt someone, in order to be a potential crime rather than free speech, Keller said.

“We are not criminalizing or frankly discouraging free speech by actions that we’re taking from a law enforcement perspective,” he said.

The task force’s work is unfolding at a time when Trump and other Republicans have accused the Biden administration of using the Justice Department to target political opponents, although the task force itself hasn’t been targeted publicly by Republicans.

Many GOP leaders have sharply criticized the federal prosecutions of Trump and of rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and Trump himself faces a federal indictment in Washington, D.C., and a state indictment in Georgia over his efforts to overturn 2020 election results. He has denied wrongdoing and said he was acting within the law. A series of federal and state investigations and dozens of lawsuits have not uncovered any evidence the election was rigged.

Trump is the front-runner for the GOP nomination for president in 2024 and continues in his speeches and online posts to argue the 2020 election was rigged.

For many election workers, the threats have been a major driving factor to leave the job, hollowing out the ranks of experience ahead of 2024, said Dokhi Fassihian, the deputy chief of strategy and program at Issue One, a nonpartisan reform group representing election officials.

About 1 in 5 election officials in 2024 will have begun service after the 2020 election, the Brennan Center survey found.

“Many are deciding it’s just not worth it to stay,” Fassihian said.

___

Cassidy reported from Atlanta. AP Director of Public Opinion Research Emily Swanson in Washington contributed to this report.

A potential victory by the progressive candidate is almost certainly distressing politicians who have been enjoying impunity for corruption, along with some members of the monied elite and their allies in organized crime.

With more than 98% of the votes counted, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal reported that the son of former president Juan José Arévalo, representing the Seed Movement, led former first lady Sandra Torres by 58% to 36%.

Supreme Electoral Tribunal Magistrate Blanca Alfaro called Arévalo the “virtual winner” and called for an immediate national dialogue to begin to reconcile the country’s deep political divides.

President Alejandro Giammattei congratulated Arévalo in a tweet on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. He invited Arévalo to begin an orderly transition the day after the results are certified.

Some of Arévalo’s supporters gathered at a plaza downtown in the capital waving flags and blowing horns.

Jhamy Lucas, 27, cried tears of joy in the Obelisk plaza. “I am so happy because I am going to be able to live in my country,” she said. “I’m not going to have to migrate to survive.”

Arévalo posted a brief message to X, saying “Long live Guatemala!”

The results are unlikely to be the last word: It took more than two weeks for the results of the first round of voting in June to be certified. Losing parties got the courts to intervene and order a review of precinct vote tallies.

When electoral authorities were finally ready to certify, the Attorney General’s Office announced an investigation into signatures that the Seed Movement had gathered to register years earlier as a party. That investigation continues, and prosecutors appear to be on a path to stripping Arévalo of his party.

Arévalo made it into the runoff with only about 654,000 votes or 11% of the total in the first round in June. On Sunday, he received more than 2.4 million.

The two candidates offered starkly different paths forward. Torres became an ally of the outgoing, deeply unpopular Giammattei in her third bid for the presidency. Arévalo, with the progressive Seed Movement, rode a wave of popular resentment toward politics to his surprise spot in the runoff.

But moves to drag the electoral process into the courts after the first round of voting in June led many Guatemalans to wonder what was to come between Sunday’s results and the transfer of power Jan. 14.

Central America’s most populous country and the region’s largest economy continues to struggle with poverty and violence that have driven hundreds of thousands of Guatemalans to migrate to the U.S.

Voting appeared to have been peaceful. The Attorney General’s Office, which sought unsuccessfully to suspend Arévalo’s party before the vote, announced several arrests for interference with the process, but they appeared to be minor.

Political analyst Renzo Rosal noted the heavier than usual presence of uniformed agents from the Attorney General’s Office at voting centers across the country “could be taken as a form of intimidation.” The Associated Press saw such agents at several voting centers.

Antonio González voted late Sunday, shortly before polls closed, at a teachers’ school in the capital.

The 42-year-old tractor-trailer driver said he hoped Guatemala’s powerful would respect the will of the voters. He wants someone to tackle corruption and improve education and the economy. Without those things, Guatemalans will continue to migrate to the U.S. like two of his co-workers recently had.

Thinking of the future of his children, he said, “We hope that they improve the economy, that there’s work.”

Poll workers at each voting table immediately began tallying ballots. One person would unfold each ballot, show it to the party observers at the table and announce which party received the vote.

Earlier Sunday, Roxana Abigail González voted for Arévalo, hoping that he would make a difference for her future. “I think he could be a good president,” she said.

The 25-year-old student lives in Villa Nueva, a gritty hillside suburb above the capital. Thieves and gangs that extort businesses and kill those who don’t pay roam its cratered streets. González said she has had the possessions she carried stolen multiple times, making her nervous to venture out alone.

Among her hopes for Guatemala’s next government are more security, jobs for the poor families whose children she sees begging in the streets and more hospitals.

González wants to continue on to college and study business administration. She loves to cook and dreams of having her own restaurant one day, but the threat of extortion is so great that she’s unsure if it’s possible. “People can’t keep a business,” she said.

At the school where she voted, the election coordinator estimated that by late morning the flow of voters was only about half of what they had for the first round of voting in June. Turnout was considerably lower at about 45% compared to 60% in June, according to electoral authorities.

The first round of voting on June 25 went relatively smoothly until Arévalo landed in the runoff. The fact that the preliminary results were dragged into Guatemala’s co-opted justice system has raised anxiety among many Guatemalans that voters will not have the final word Sunday.

Torres, in her closing campaign event Friday, suggested she would not accept a result that didn’t go her way. “We’re going to defend vote by vote because today democracy is at risk (and) because they want to steal the elections,” she said.

Torres has painted her opponent as a radical leftist who threatens Guatemalans’ conservative values on issues including sexual identity and abortion.

“We’re not going to let them influence our children with strange and foreign ideologies,” she said Friday.

Having run largely populist campaigns, capitalizing on her oversight of the government’s social programs during the presidency of her then-husband Álvaro Colom, Torres drifted sharply rightward this time, abandoning the social democratic history of her National Unity of Hope party and launching unsubstantiated attacks at Arévalo that she herself suffered during earlier failed campaigns.

Delmi Espino, a 46-year-old teacher, came to vote in Guatemala City with her mother. “It’s incredible how we managed to get to this point after everything that has happened in the electoral process,” she said. “How’s it possible that now there’s an investigation of one of the two parties?”

“It doesn’t matter that we need security, education or health, if you don’t fight corruption,” she said. “We want a president who cares about the country.”

The charges against Stefanie Lambert come days after Matthew DePerno, a Republican lawyer whom Trump endorsed in an unsuccessful run for Michigan attorney general last year, and former GOP state Rep. Daire Rendon were arraigned in connection with the case.

Trump Indictment Aug 3, 2023

Trump pleads not guilty in federal election interference case

Donald Trump Aug 2, 2023

Trump indictment reveals new details of Jan. 6, pressure campaign to subvert election

Lambert, DePerno, and Rendon were named by Attorney General Dana Nessel’s office last year as having “orchestrated a coordinated plan to gain access to voting tabulators.”

Michigan is one of at least three states where prosecutors say people breached election systems while embracing and spreading Trump’s lie that the 2020 election was stolen.

Investigators there say five vote tabulators were illegally taken from three counties and brought to a hotel room, according to documents released last year by Nessel’s office. The tabulators were then broken into and “tests” were performed on the equipment.

Prosecutors said that Thursday’s announcement “ends the charging decisions in this investigation.”

Investigators named nine individuals in connection with the scheme. Those not charged include Cyber Ninjas founder Doug Logan, Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf, Ben Cotton, Jeff Lenberg and James Penrose.

Local clerks that turned over the vote tabulators and others who analyzed the equipment “were deceived by some of the charged defendants,” according to a statement from special prosecutor D.J. Hilson.

Hilson convened a grand jury in March to determine whether criminal indictments should be issued, court documents show. The citizen grand jury “carefully listened to the sworn testimony,” and “returned a decision to indict each of the defendants,” Hilson said Thursday.

Lambert, who is listed in court records under the last name Lambert Junttila, appeared before a judge Thursday afternoon and pleaded not guilty. She is facing four criminal charges, including undue possession of a voting machine and conspiracy, according to court records.

She did not immediately respond to requests for comment left by email and a phone message with her attorney.

On a conservative podcast appearance last week, Lambert said that she had been notified of an indictment and claimed no wrongdoing. She said Hilson was “misrepresenting the law.”

A state judge ruled last month that it is a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison, to take a machine without a court order or permission directly from the Secretary of State’s office.

Trump, who is now making his third bid for the presidency, was charged by the U.S. Department of Justice on Aug. 1 with conspiracy to defraud the United States among other counts related to his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Nessel announced last month eight criminal charges each against 16 Republicans who she said submitted false certificates as electors for then-President Trump in Michigan, a state Joe Biden won.

The four-count indictment reveals new details about a dark chapter in American history that has already been the subject of exhaustive federal investigations and captivating public hearings. It cites handwritten notes from former Vice President Mike Pence about Trump’s relentless goading to reject the counting of electoral votes. And it accuses Trump and his allies of exploiting the disruption caused by his supporters’ attack on the Capitol to redouble their efforts to spread false claims of election fraud and persuade members of Congress to further delay the certification of Joe Biden’s victory.

Even in a year of rapid-succession legal reckonings for Trump, Tuesday’s criminal case, with charges including conspiring to defraud the United States government that he once led, was especially stunning in its allegations that a former president assaulted the underpinnings of democracy in a frantic but ultimately failed effort to cling to power.

“The attack on our nation’s Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy,” said special counsel Jack Smith, whose office has spent months investigating Trump. “It was fueled by lies, lies by the defendant targeted at obstructing a bedrock function of the U.S. government: the nation’s process of collecting counting and certifying the results of the presidential election.”

Trump’s claims of having won the election, said the indictment, were “false, and the Defendant knew they were false. But the defendant repeated and widely disseminated them anyway — to make his knowingly false claims appear legitimate, to create an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger, and to erode public faith in the administration of the election.”

The indictment, the third criminal case brought against the former president as he seeks to reclaim the White House in 2024, follows a long-running federal investigation into schemes by Trump and his allies to subvert the transfer of power and keep him in office despite a decisive loss to Biden.

Trump is due in court Thursday before U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, the first step in a legal process that will play out in a courthouse in between the White House he once controlled and the Capitol his supporters once stormed.

Trump has been charged with the following four counts:

• A conspiracy to defraud the United States “by using dishonesty, fraud and deceit to obstruct the nation’s process of collecting, counting, and certifying the results of the presidential election,” according to the special counsel’s office.
• A conspiracy to impede the Jan. 6 congressional proceeding at which the collected results of the presidential election are counted and certified.
• A conspiracy against the right to vote and to have that vote counted.
• Obstruction of, and attempt to obstruct and impede, the certification of the electoral vote.

The criminal case comes while Trump leads the field of Republicans vying to capture their party’s presidential nomination. It is sure to be dismissed by the former president and his supporters — and even some of his rivals — as just another politically motivated prosecution. Yet the charges stem from one of the most serious threats to American democracy in modern history.

They focus on the turbulent two months after the November 2020 election in which Trump refused to accept his loss and spread lies that victory was stolen from him. The turmoil resulted in riot at the Capitol riot when Trump loyalists violently broke into the building, attacked police officers and disrupted the congressional counting of electoral votes.

In between the election and the riot, Trump urged local election officials to undo voting results in their states, pressured Pence to halt the certification of electoral votes and falsely claimed that the election had been stolen — a notion repeatedly rejected by judges.

The indictment had been expected since Trump said in mid-July that the Justice Department informed him he was a target of its investigation. A bipartisan House committee that spent months investigating the run-up to the Capitol riot also recommended prosecuting Trump on charges, including aiding an insurrection and obstructing an official proceeding.

The mounting criminal cases against Trump — not to mention multiple civil cases — are unfolding in the heat of the 2024 race. A conviction in this case, or any other, would not prevent Trump from pursuing the White House or serving as president.

In New York, state prosecutors have charged Trump with falsifying business records about a hush money payoff to a porn actor before the 2016 election. The trial begins in late March.

In Florida, the Justice Department has brought more than three dozen felony counts against Trump accusing him of illegally possessing classified documents after leaving the White House and concealing them from the government. The trial begins in late May.

Prosecutors in Georgia are investigating efforts by Trump and his allies to reverse his election loss to Biden there in 2020. The district attorney of Fulton County is expected to announce a decision on whether to indict the former president in early August.

The investigation of Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election was led by special counsel Smith. His team of prosecutors questioned senior Trump administration officials, including Pence and top lawyers from the Trump White House, before a grand jury in Washington.

Rudy Giuliani, a Trump lawyer who pursued post-election legal challenges, spoke voluntarily to prosecutors as part of a proffer agreement, in which a person’s statements can’t be used against them in any future criminal case that is brought.

Prosecutors also interviewed election officials in Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and elsewhere who came under pressure from Trump and his associates to change voting results in states won by Biden.

Focal points of the Justice Department’s election meddling investigation included the role played by some of Trump’s lawyers, post-election fundraising, a chaotic December 2020 meeting at the White House in which some Trump aides discussed the possibility of seizing voting machines and the enlistment of fake electors to submit certificates to the National Archives and Congress falsely asserting that Trump, not Biden, had won their states’ votes.

Trump has been trying to use the mounting legal troubles to his political advantage, claiming without evidence on social media and at public events that the cases are being driven by Democratic prosecutors out to hurt his 2024 election campaign.

The indictments have helped his campaign raise millions of dollars from supporters, though he raised less after the second than the first, raising questions about whether subsequent charges will have the same impact.

A fundraising committee backing Trump’s candidacy began soliciting contributions just hours after the ex-president revealed he was the focus of the Justice Department’s Jan. 6 investigation, casting it as “just another vicious act of Election Interference on behalf of the Deep State to try and stop the Silent Majority from having a voice in your own country.”

Trump’s attorney John Lauro called the latest indictment of the former president “an attack on free speech and political advocacy.”

Lauro said in an interview on CNN Tuesday night that it is “an effort to not only criminalize, but also to censor free speech” from Trump.

He said Trump was being told by people after the 2020 presidential election “that there were problems” with it and “he also saw in real time that the rules were changing without the state legislatures weighing in.”

He said Trump was relying on the advice of an attorney, John Eastman. Eastman was the architect of a legal strategy aimed at keeping Trump in power.

Attorney General Merrick Garland last year appointed Smith, an international war crimes prosecutor who also led the Justice Department’s public corruption section, as special counsel to investigate efforts to undo the 2020 election and Trump’s retention of hundreds of classified documents at his Palm Beach, Florida, home, Mar-a-Lago. Although Trump has derided him as “deranged” and suggested that he is politically motivated, Smith’s past experience includes overseeing significant prosecutions against high-profile Democrats.

The Justice Department’s investigation into the efforts to overturn the 2020 election began well before Smith’s appointment, proceeding alongside separate criminal probes into the rioters themselves.

More than 1,000 people have been charged in connection with the insurrection, including some with seditious conspiracy.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

Biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy rolled out a plan to let people who raise money for his campaign keep 10% of what they take in from other donors. North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum is offering $20 Mastercard or Visa gift cards in return for campaign donations of as little as $1. Miami Mayor Francis Suarez is putting up a chance to see Argentine soccer legend Lionel Messi’s Miami debut.

The unusual efforts are in response to a Republican National Committee requirement that participants in the Aug. 23 debate in Milwaukee raise money from at least 40,000 donors across the country. That’s a tall task for some of the hopefuls who aren’t as well known as former President Donald Trump or Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

It’s a recognition of the make-it-or-break-it opportunity that the debate stage provides for lower-tier candidates in a large field who need media exposure to share their message and reach voters.

Dan Weiner, an attorney who directs the Brennan Center for Justice’s Elections and Government Program, said “unorthodox fundraising” tactics are becoming more common, noting that candidates are trying new things with the knowledge that the Federal Election Commission could take action if legal or ethical concerns were raised.

“More often than not, these do at least sometimes raise questions about whether they’re skirting at the edge of the law,” Weiner said, speaking of Ramaswamy and Burgum’s proposals. “In both instances, do I necessarily think that the FEC is going to do anything about it? Maybe, but I’d be a little bit skeptical.”

Donald Trump May 25, 2023

Who's Running For President in 2024? What To Know About the Candidates

news Jul 9, 2023

Republican Presidential Candidate Doug Burgum Says He Does Not Want to Engage in ‘Every Culture War Topic'

On Monday, Ramaswamy — who launched his campaign with a $10 million infusion of his own cash and said he surpassed the unique donor threshold in June — introduced the “Vivek Kitchen Cabinet,” a plan that he said would “democratize” the fundraising process by letting fundraisers keep 10% of what they bring in for him.

“Why should it be some member of some managerial class that’s a secreted, closeted group of fundraisers, in the cloistered world of politics?” Ramaswamy asked in a video posted on Twitter. “It shouldn’t be.”

As of Tuesday, Ramaswamy’s campaign said more than 1,000 people had signed up for the program, which hires people as independent contractors subject to compliance with FEC regulations, according to the campaign’s website.

Burgum, a wealthy former software entrepreneur now in his second term as North Dakota’s governor, announced a program Monday to give away gift cards — “Biden Relief Cards,” as a critique of President Joe Biden’s handling of the economy — to as many as 50,000 people, just over the minimum donor threshold.

Campaign spokesperson Lance Trover said the effort “allows us to secure a spot on the debate stage while avoiding paying more advertising fees to social media platforms who have owners that are hostile to conservatives.” The campaign said it could reach its 50,000-card maximum by the end of the weekend.

Paul S. Ryan, a campaign finance attorney who has worked for nonprofit watchdog groups like Common Cause, said Burgum’s reimbursement framework seems to be a clear violation of campaign finance law.

“Burgum’s contributing to his own campaign using the names of the people who opt into his gift card scheme,” Ryan said. “All of these gift card recipients are straw donors.”

Burgum’s campaign said its legal advisers had reviewed and approved the fundraising mechanism. The FEC said in a statement Friday that it wouldn’t comment on the legality of Burgum’s plan.

Businessman Perry Johnson, a wealthy but largely unknown businessman from Michigan, announced last month that he would be giving copies of his book “Two Cents to Save America” — which retails for $20 — to anyone who donated to his campaign.

During a Sunday speech at Turning Point Action’s annual gathering in West Palm Beach, Florida, Suarez asked attendees to “consider making a $1 donation” to get him on the debate stage, saying all such donors would be entered in a chance to be in the front row for Messi’s first game Friday as a player for Inter Miami.

“I’m not asking you to endorse me, I’m not asking you to vote for me, even at this point,” Suarez said, reading out his campaign’s Venmo donation handle for the Messi drawing. “I’m not gonna get on the debate stage … unless I have your support in the form of that contribution.”

Gift cards and other giveaways have been used by campaigns before, both in presidential races and other contests.

In 2014, Republican Bruce Rauner’s campaign handed out thousands of prepaid Visa gift cards to volunteers helping to round up support for his successful Illinois gubernatorial campaign. According to the Chicago Tribune, the expense wasn’t revealed until months after the election, when Rauner’s political committee recouped nearly $55,000 after the “liquidation of previously purchased asset — redemption of gift cards,” according to finance filings.

Many of Rauner’s advisers are now running Burgum’s campaign.

In the 2020 presidential election cycle, when Democratic campaigns were complaining about the high threshold to make the debate stage, tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang said he would give a “freedom dividend” of $1,000 a month for a year to 10 American families, a key tenet of his universal basic income proposal. The offer prompted questions about whether he was trying to buy votes but also generated a buzz online and helped the campaign build a list of possible supporters.

Within days, nearly half a million people had reportedly signed up for the chance to get the payout. In that same fundraising quarter, Yang’s campaign brought in more than $16 million, his best quarterly posting to date. His campaign later fizzled, and he ended his run as New Hampshire was counting its first-in-the-nation primary results that February.

In addition to the donor threshold, Republican candidates must meet other requirements to quality for the party’s first 2024 debate. They must earn at least 1% in three high-quality national polls, or a mix of national and early-state polls, between July 1 and Aug. 21. They must sign a pledge backing the eventual 2024 Republican nominee.

And they must agree not to participate in any non-RNC sanctioned debate for the remainder of the election cycle, which includes the traditional general election debates hosted by the Commission on Presidential Debates for the last three decades.

Weiner predicted that campaign tactics would only become more innovative as the 2024 election grows closer and the debate thresholds become steeper.

“The campaigns are just sort of heating up right now, and you tend to see more of this with the insurgent candidacies,” he said. “Campaigns should be given some sort of leeway to be creative.”

___

Jill Colvin in West Palm Beach, Florida, contributed to this report.

Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Reform Committee who is in his fourth term, had been weighing a run for the rarely open Senate seat but said in a statement that he would instead seek reelection in the House.

“At this moment, I believe the best way for me to make the greatest difference in American politics in 2024 and beyond is this: to run for reelection to the House of Representatives in Maryland’s extraordinary 8th District,” Raskin said.

Raskin said in the statement that “if these were normal times, I am pretty sure that this is what I would be announcing now.”

“But these are not normal times and we are still in the fight of our lives for democratic institutions, freedom and basic social progress in America as well as human rights and opportunity for people all over the world,” Raskin said.

“..I have a different and more urgent calling right now and I cannot walk away from the center of this fight in the people’s House and in the country,” Raskin said. “We are still in the fight of our lives, the fight for democracy and freedom and for the survival of humanity.”

You can read his full statement here.

Raskin, 60, announced in April that he had completed chemotherapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with a 90% prognosis of no relapse and that his cancer was in remission. It was the second time Raskin had been diagnosed with cancer. He previously battled colorectal cancer in 2010.

So far, Rep. David Trone and Prince George’s County Executive Angela Alsobrooks have announced candidacies for the Democratic primary for the Senate seat. Montgomery County council member Will Jawando also is running.

The justices by a 6-3 vote rejected the broadest view of a case that could have transformed elections for Congress and president.

North Carolina Republicans had asked the court to leave state legislatures virtually unchecked by their state courts when dealing with federal elections.

But Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court that “state courts retain the authority to apply state constitutional restraints when legislatures act under the power conferred upon them by the Elections Clause. But federal courts must not abandon their own duty to exercise judicial review.”

The high court did, though, suggest there could be limits on state court efforts to police elections for Congress and president.

The practical effect of the decision is minimal in that the North Carolina Supreme Court, under a new Republican majority, already has undone its redistricting ruling.

Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch would have dismissed the case because of the intervening North Carolina court action.

Another redistricting case from Ohio is pending, if the justices want to say more about the issue before next year’s elections.

The North Carolina case attracted outsized attention because four conservative justices had suggested that the Supreme Court should rein in state courts in their oversight of elections for president and Congress.

Opponents of the idea, known as the independent legislature theory, had argued that the effects of a robust ruling for North Carolina Republicans could be much broader than just redistricting and exacerbate political polarization.

Potentially at stake were more than 170 state constitutional provisions, over 650 state laws delegating authority to make election policies to state and local officials, and thousands of regulations down to the location of polling places, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law.

The justices heard arguments in December in an appeal by the state’s Republican leaders in the legislature. Their efforts to draw congressional districts heavily in their favor were blocked by a Democratic majority on the state Supreme Court because the GOP map violated the state constitution.

A court-drawn map produced seven seats for each party in last year’s midterm elections in highly competitive North Carolina.

The question for the justices was whether the U.S. Constitution’s provision giving state legislatures the power to make the rules about the “times, places and manner” of congressional elections cuts state courts out of the process.

Former federal judge Michael Luttig, a prominent conservative who has joined the legal team defending the North Carolina court decision, said in the fall that the outcome could have transformative effects on American elections. “This is the single most important case on American democracy — and for American democracy — in the nation’s history,” Luttig said.

Leading Republican lawmakers in North Carolina told the Supreme Court that the Constitution’s “carefully drawn lines place the regulation of federal elections in the hands of state legislatures, Congress and no one else.”

During nearly three hours of arguments, the justices seemed skeptical of making a broad ruling in the case. Liberal and conservative justices seemed to take issue with the main thrust of a challenge asking them to essentially eliminate the power of state courts to strike down legislature-drawn, gerrymandered congressional district maps on grounds that they violate state constitutions.

In North Carolina, a new round of redistricting is expected to go forward and produce a map with more Republican districts.

Yegor Popov, a Russian intelligence officer, was sanctioned Friday. He served as a primary handler of Alexander Ionov, a Russian operative who was charged by the Justice Department last year with recruiting political groups in the U.S. to advance pro-Russia propaganda, including about the invasion of Ukraine.

U.S. authorities say Ionov recruited political groups in Florida, Georgia and California and directed them to spread pro-Russia talking points. Ionov, who operated an entity called the Anti-Globalization Movement of Russia, paid for group members to attend government-funded conferences in Russia, as well as a protest in the U.S. against social media efforts to suppress online support for the invasion.

Popov also communicated with Russian national Natalia Burlinova, who was charged in April with conspiring with Russian intelligence to recruit American academics and researchers to attend programs that advanced Russian interests.

Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control also sanctioned Alexei Sukhodolov, who supervised Popov. Sukhodolov also worked with Ionov to conduct foreign malign influence operations around the world, including in the U.S., Ukraine, Spain, the U.K. and Ireland, according to Treasury.

The department said Russia’s efforts to influence elections include using front organizations, seeking access to foreign officials, and recruiting people around the world “who are positioned to amplify and reinforce Russia’s disinformation efforts to further its goals of destabilizing democratic societies.”

More: Russia

Russia May 23, 2023

The Cyber Gulag: How Russia Tracks, Censors and Controls Its Citizens

news May 9, 2023

FBI Takes Down Russian Computer Malware Network That Attacked NATO Nations, Journalists

Secretary of State Antony Blinken said “to safeguard our democracy, as well as help protect our allies and partners, the United States will continue to act to deter and disrupt the Kremlin’s malign influence operations.”

Brian Nelson, Treasury’s under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, said Russia “continues to target a key pillar of democracy around the world — free and fair elections.”

“The United States will not tolerate threats to our democracy, and today’s action builds on the whole of government approach to protect our system of representative government, including our democratic institutions and elections processes,” he said.

The threat of foreign nations seeking to meddle in U.S. elections remains a top concern.

Since the 2016 election and the detection of Russian hackers scanning state voter registration systems, election officials across federal, state and local levels have been working to shore up their defenses. Congress has provided funds to assist with boosting security in state and local election offices.

Although there has been no evidence of any voting system data being manipulated or changed, Iranian hackers in 2020 obtained confidential voter data and used it to send misleading emails seeking to spread misinformation and influence the election. Another attempt by Iranian hackers in 2020 to access a system used by a local government to publish election results was thwarted.

Democratic candidates for the Virginia Senate and for the House of Delegates collectively outraised their Republican peers during the reporting period that ran from April 1 through June 8, bringing in about $14 million of the approximately $22 million total. And the Democratic candidates also ended it with more cash on hand, according to the Virginia Public Access Project, a nonpartisan tracker of money in politics that compiled and analyzed reports filed with the state this week.

The discrepancy could partly be a reflection of the fact that the Democrats have more than twice as many Senate nomination contests to be settled next week than the Republicans. The difference between the two parties was smaller among contenders for the House, where there are roughly equal numbers of nomination contests. Democratic candidates for the Senate ended the period with about a collective $2 million advantage, while Democratic candidates for the House ended the reporting period with a cash advantage of about $400,000.

The reporting period’s 10 legislative fundraisers with the biggest hauls — which include both cash and in-kind donations — were all Democratic candidates for the Senate facing a nomination contest.

Monday’s reporting deadline applied to candidates seeking an office that’s on the ballot on Election Day in November, regardless of whether they face a nomination contest. It did not apply to candidate committees whose office is not on the ballot this year, such as Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s Spirit of Virginia.

Senate candidate Lashrecse Aird, who has the backing of much of the state’s Democratic establishment as she challenges self-described “pro-life” incumbent Sen. Joe Morrissey for the party’s nomination, reported raising more than any other candidate: $985,211. More than half of that was in-kind donations ranging from field outreach to direct mail on her campaign’s behalf.

Morrissey raised just under $100,000 — most of it from Dominion Energy — in the same period and ended with $7,473 cash on hand, compared with Aird’s $100,821.

Aird and two other candidates hoping to oust Democratic Senate incumbents have been endorsed and financially backed by Clean Virginia, the advocacy group formed several years ago by a wealthy donor to counter the influence of Dominion at the Capitol.

Clean Virginia gave more than $1.4 million during the reporting period, compared with Dominion’s approximately $2.5 million, according to the reports.

Virginia’s campaign finance law allows unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations and special interest groups. It is a setup Michael Bills, who founded Clean Virginia, lamented in a piece published in The Atlantic on Tuesday.

“It’s not right,” Bills said. “I would be thrilled if there was a system that precluded someone like myself from doing that.”

Some of the other biggest fundraising totals have been logged in northern Virginia prosecutor races, where incumbents in Arlington, Fairfax and Loudoun counties who won on criminal justice reform agendas four years ago are seeking reelection.

Arlington Commonwealth’s Attorney Parisa Dehghani-Tafti has raised $437,775, most of which has come from a political action committee funded by liberal donor George Soros. Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano has raised $208,468, including a much smaller contribution from a Soros-linked PAC. Loudoun County Commonwealth’s Attorney Buta Biberaj has received $163,838, mostly in donations from family members. She has not received any money from Soros.

The challengers have raised less. In Arlington, Josh Katcher has raised $157,674. In Fairfax, Ed Nuttall has raised $83,567. In Loudoun, Elizabeth Lancaster has not yet filed her report for the most recent reporting period. According to the state board of elections, she raised $4,735 through March. In a phone interview, she said she expects to file her updated numbers shortly and that they will not show any major infusions of cash.

In mid-July, candidates must file another report covering the period from June 9 to June 30.

____

Associated Press writer Matthew Barakat in Falls Church, Virginia, contributed to this report.

___

This story has been updated to correct a day of the week reference to an article in the Atlantic magazine website.

Democrats characterized the effort as an abuse of the authority Congress has over the District and a first step in imposing voting restrictions and stripping voter protections nationwide if Republicans regain full political power in Washington during next year’s elections.

Republicans used a joint committee hearing to criticize what they see as serious flaws and missteps in how the District has run elections. Although they provided no evidence of widespread fraud, they said election officials have mailed ballots to undeliverable addresses, failed to purge the rolls after voters die and neglected security measures to make their systems less susceptible to foreign interference.

“For years, D.C.’s elections have been mismanaged,” said Wisconsin Republican Rep. Bryan Steil, chairman of the House Administration Committee. “Our nation’s capital should be a beacon of democracy and a national model for excellence in election administration. This isn’t about who wins or loses elections, but rather ensuring voters have confidence in our elections.”

The Republican bill seeks numerous changes that have been pushed by GOP lawmakers across the country. Among other changes, it would prohibit mail ballots from being automatically sent to all voters, require all mail ballots — except those from military and overseas voters — to be received by the time polls close, restrict the use of drop boxes and eliminate same-day voter registration.

Republicans also want to revive a failed effort from earlier this year that would prevent non-citizens from being able to vote. The District is one of roughly 15 municipalities across the U.S. where non-citizens are allowed to cast a ballot in local elections.

The election proposals follow a successful effort in Congress earlier this year to nullify an overhaul of the District’s criminal code, which President Joe Biden signed in March. It also is the latest flashpoint between the predominantly Democratic city and congressional Republicans, who have promised to investigate everything from crime in the District to the way it’s managed.

Under a 1970s-era law called the Home Rule Act, the District can pass its own laws — but they then must survive a 60-day review period during which Congress and the president can override them.

The rejection of the criminal code overhaul earlier this year embittered members of the D.C. City Council and was seen by many Democrats as part of a wider trend across the U.S. of predominantly white legislative bodies dictating how cities with large minority populations can operate.

On Wednesday, Democrats on the House Oversight and Administration committees criticized the effort to tighten the district’s voting rules as part of a similar strategy. Several said the legislation, called the American Confidence in Elections Act, was an attempt to use the nation’s capital as a model for undermining voting rights and making access to the polls more difficult.

“If we are being honest, this hearing is not actually about Washington, D.C. This hearing, and the entire ACE Act, is about giving Republicans a platform to impose extreme restrictions on voters across this country,” said Democratic Rep. Joe Morelle, a member of the Administration committee.

In a statement, District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb said there is no evidence of widespread election irregularities or voter fraud in the District, where roughly 77 percent of registered voters are Democrats. Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also questioned the need for the legislation, which she described as a way to strip voter protections in a city with a large Black population.

“If there is no valid reason, I think it stands to conclude that the only real reason that we see this push is political,” said Ocasio-Cortez, a member of the Oversight committee. “To even have the idea of proposing the federal government strip voting rights in one of the Blackest cities of this country, that has a history of enslavement, a history of freed people seeking refuge here and then being punished with disenfranchisement, this cuts to the core of not just the present moment but American history.”

The hearing also deepened the tension between District leaders’ desire to have full power over their own policies and the unusual authority Congress has over them. Democratic Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District’s non-voting delegate in Congress, said it was another reason to continue pushing for D.C. statehood.

Wendy Weiser, the vice president of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, said: “D.C residents, like all citizens, desire and deserve self-political, self-determination, a say over what happens in their community, and a voice in the national government over what happens in the country as well.”

Burgum, 66, joins a long list of contenders hoping to dent former President Donald Trump’s early lead in the race. The governor of the nation’s fourth-least populous state made the announcement in the The Wall Street Journal and was expected to kick off his campaign Wednesday in the city of Fargo, where he lives and which is near the tiny farm town of Arthur where he grew up.

“We need a change in the White House. We need a new leader for a changing economy. That’s why I’m announcing my run for president,” he said in commentary posted late Tuesday on the newspaper’s website, echoing a slogan he first used as his successful 2016 gubernatorial campaign. Burgum was reelected in 2020 and is eligible to run for a third time in 2024.

In 1983, he founded Great Plains Software, which was acquired by Microsoft in 2011, and Burgum stayed on as a Microsoft vice president until 2007.

Supporters began flowing into the event at a former church in downtown Fargo about an hour ahead of Burgum's first campaign event. They included a number of prominent North Dakota Republicans, including two former governors and top state lawmakers. Many of them posed for pictures in front of a red, white and blue “Doug Burgum for America” sign above the stage.

Known to few outside North Dakota, Burgum faces an immense challenge in a field dominated by Trump and the better-known governor in the race, Ron DeSantis of Florida.

As evidence of Burgum’s long odds, he isn’t even the most notable candidate to announce a presidential campaign on Wednesday. Four hundred miles to the south, former Vice President Mike Pence was launching his White House bid in Iowa, taking on the president he served loyally for four years.

Burgum plans to visit early voting states right away. He will campaign Thursday and Friday in Iowa, home of the first-in-the-nation Republican caucuses, and Saturday and Sunday in New Hampshire, which hosts the first GOP primary.

In a video previewing his announcement, Burgum portrayed himself as a common-sense, rural state conservative, distinctly experienced in energy policy and far removed from the bitter war of words between Trump and DeSantis as the 2024 GOP campaign heats up.

“Anger, yelling, infighting, that’s not going to cut it anymore,” Burgum said in the video, which features breathtaking vistas from across North Dakota. “Let’s get things done. In North Dakota, we listen with respect, and we talk things out. That’s how we can get America back on track.”

The new laws he signed this year include banning abortion with few exceptions up to six weeks’ gestation, before most women know they are pregnant. Other laws prohibit schools and government agencies from requiring their employees to refer to transgender people by the pronouns they use, as well as barring transgender girls and women from competing in women’s sports.

His preview video also touched subtly on his opposition to “woke” ideology, a catch-all term that conservatives use derogatorily to refer to policies or ideas that acknowledge the existence of social injustice and racial inequality.

“I grew up in a tiny town in North Dakota,” Burgum said. “Woke was what you did at 5 a.m. to start the day.”

Burgum enters the race with a more advanced background in energy policy than most of the Republican field in light of North Dakota’s decadelong petroleum industry boom, and his administration’s effort to capture carbon dioxide from around the country.

“Instead of shutting down American oil and gas, we should unleash energy production,” he said in the video, “and start selling energy to our allies, instead of buying it from our enemies.”

In addition to Trump, DeSantis and Pence, Burgum will be facing off against former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley, U.S. Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, anti-woke activist Vivek Ramaswamy, conservative talk radio host Larry Elder and businessman Perry Johnson.

The GOP nominee is expected to face Democratic President Joe Biden in November 2024.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

This year is no exception, with every seat in the Virginia state legislature up for grabs Nov. 7. And when there’s a November election, that means a spring primary.

This year, Virginia voters can cast ballots for their preferred candidates in either party on (or before) primary day, June 20. Early voting opened more than a month ago, but if you want to vote by mail, you’ll need to request your absentee ballot by June 9.

There are a few steps to take before then, whether you’re planning to vote by mail or just want to research your options.

Here’s what to know about the 2023 Virginia primary.

How to register to vote in Virginia

To vote in the 2023 primary, Virginia residents need to be registered to vote.

The deadline to register to vote, or to update an existing registration, was May 30. But according to the Virginia Department of Elections, you can register after that date and still vote in the primary or the election by using a provisional ballot.

Provisional ballots allow someone to vote if their ability to vote is in question — for example, if they are not in the database of registered voters, or if they decided to vote in-person after requesting a mail-in ballot. Provisional ballots are evaluated when all other votes are counted. If a voter is indeed eligible to vote, their provisional ballot is included in the tally. You can learn more about provisional ballots here.

To register to vote, go here to visit the Virginia Department of Elections’ citizen portal. The website will walk you through the process after you click the green “Register to Vote” button. (Make sure you know your Social Security number and have your driver’s license or state ID with you for the process.)

How to find sample ballots for your district for Virginia’s 2023 primary

Once you’re registered to vote, the easiest way to find your polling place, and see what candidates are on the ballot for your district, is to visit this Virginia Department of Elections website.

You can type in your Virginia address to see your election day voting site, as well as a list of early voting locations in your district. Those early voting locations also serve as ballot drop-off sites if you want to vote via absentee ballot but can’t mail it back by the deadline.

The same search results include a tab with a preview of candidates on the ballot in your district. Click “Ballot Info” to see names of candidates running for each position up for election.

What to know about primaries for both political parties:

• A number of districts in Virginia are only holding primaries for one party. For addresses in those districts, the page above will default to that party’s ballot.
• If you live in an area of Virginia that’s holding both Democratic and Republican primaries in 2023, the Department of Elections site will let you choose which party to preview after you look up your address.
• Note that some other counties and cities in Virginia won’t have a primary for either party this year.

Most counties also have their sites that offer links to official sample ballots for each district. Find info on your Northern Virginia city or county below:

• The City of Alexandria does not have a primary election this June.
• Arlington County is implementing ranked choice ballots for county board members in this June’s Democratic primary. Sample ballots are here.
• Fairfax County has sample ballots for the Democratic primary in several languages here.
• The City of Fairfax has sample ballots for the Democratic primary here.
• Loudoun County has sample ballots for the Democratic primary here.
• Prince William County has sample ballots for the Democratic and Republican primaries here.

How to apply for a mail-in ballot in Virginia

At the same Virginia Department of Elections website where you can register to vote, you can also apply for an absentee ballot. Voters no longer need to meet specific requirements to vote absentee. Any registered voter can get a mail-in ballot for the 2023 primary, as long as they apply before the deadline of June 9.

Click the green “Apply to Vote Absentee by Mail” button and follow the on-screen instructions to fill in your personal information. You’ll need your Social Security number and driver’s license or state ID with you.

Registered Virginia voters can also now choose to join the Virginia permanent absentee voter list. That option will send the voter ballots by mail, sent to the address on their Virginia voter registration record, for all future elections in which they’re eligible to vote.

Once you get your mail-in ballot, you can fill out your ballot and then either mail it back to the registrar’s office or drop off the sealed envelope at any of the early voting locations in your district.

Supreme Court Jun 6, 2023

Supreme Court tossed out the heart of Voting Rights Act a decade ago. The next ruling could go further

Virginia Apr 14, 2023

Virginia Agency ‘Inadvertently' Shared Registered Voter List

Virginia Jan 10, 2023

Virginia Districts Vote in Special Elections for General Assembly

How to vote early in-person

Early voting began in Virginia on May 5 and will continue until June 17. (That’s the Saturday before primary day on June 20.)

If you’re registered to vote, all you need to do to vote early in person is to show up at an early voting location in your district. You don’t need any specific reason to vote early.

You do need to bring an acceptable form of ID or sign an ID Confirmation Statement, and share your name and address.

If you request an absentee ballot and then decide to vote in-person instead, you’ll need to turn in your blank absentee ballot at the polling place. If you don’t, you’ll need to fill out a provisional ballot instead.

Christie, who also ran for president in 2016, began his bid under the slogan “Because the truth matters” with a town hall in New Hampshire, which holds the nation’s first Republican primary following Iowa’s leadoff caucuses. After losing the nomination to Trump seven years ago, the former governor and federal prosecutor went on to become a close off-and-on adviser before breaking with the former president over his refusal to accept the results of the 2020 election.

“Donald Trump made us smaller by dividing us even further and pitting us one against the other,” Christie said, suggesting that the former president was part of a broader political effort to “paint all Republicans with just one brush.”

He added that President Joe Biden “is doing the same thing, just on the other side.”

Christie enters a growing primary field that already includes Trump, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley and U.S. Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina. Former Vice President Mike Pence will be formally launching his own campaign in Iowa on Wednesday.

During his time as governor, Christie established a reputation as a fighter with a knack for creating viral moments of confrontation. But he faces an uphill battle to the nomination in a party that remains closely aligned with the former president, despite Trump's reelection loss in 2020 and Republicans' poorer-than-expected showing in the 2022 midterm elections.

Christie has become a fierce Trump critic in recent years and is now casting himself as the only Republican presidential candidate willing to openly pick fights with the former president — while also warning that the party failing to fully confront him will spark a repeat of the 2016 GOP primary, when Trump rolled over a host of alternatives with more political experience who split the support of voters opposing him.

Anti-Trump Republicans are particularly eager to see Christie spar with Trump on a debate stage — if, of course, Trump agrees to participate in primary debates and Christie meets the stringent fundraising criteria set by the Republican National Committee for participation.

JP Marzullo, a former state representative and former vice chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party, previously backed Trump but is now supporting Christie.

"I think he'll actually unite some of the voters, and he'll get to independents," Marzullo said of the former governor. "I think it's time for a change."

Christie's campaign will test the appetite among Republican voters for someone who has expressed support for many of Trump's policies but has criticized the former president's conduct. The former governor has rejected Trump's lies that the 2020 election was stolen and has urged the party to move on or risk future losses.

Other Republicans with similar views, including former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan and New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, have opted against their own campaigns, expressing concerns that having more candidates in the race will only benefit Trump.

Christie was at one point seen as one of the Republican Party;s brightest political stars as the popular Republican governor of a Democratic state. But despite persistent urging from top donors and party officials, he declined to run for president in 2012. By the time he announced in 2016, his reputation had been tarnished by the "Bridgegate" scandal in which aides were accused of wreaking traffic havoc in Fort Lee, New Jersey, in an apparent effort to punish the city's mayor for failing to endorse his reelection bid.

In the packed 2016 GOP primary, Christie portrayed himself as a brash, tough-talking East Coaster who could "tell it like it is" — only to be eclipsed by the brasher Trump.

Christie opting to start his 2024 bid at a New Hampshire town hall recalled his first run at the White House, when he focused on the state, holding dozens of New Hampshire town hall events only to finish sixth in its primary. He dropped out of that race afterward.

Two weeks later, Christie stunned even some former aides when he endorsed Trump, becoming the first sitting governor and former rival to get behind the emerging GOP front-runner. His announcement undercut rival Marco Rubio at a crucial moment — the day after a debate that had been seen as a possible turning point in the race — helping to pave the way for Trump's nomination and eventual win.

"The line of supporting Donald Trump starts behind me," Christie has said.

The former governor, who has known Trump for nearly 20 years, has had a complicated friendship with the former developer and reality TV star. At times, he was one of Trump's closest advisers: He was on the shortlist to serve as Trump's vice president, oversaw Trump's early White House transition efforts, said he was offered — and turned down — multiple Cabinet positions, and helped Trump prepare for each of his general election debates in 2016 and 2020. (It was during those debate preparations that Christie believes he caught COVID-19, landing him in intensive care.)

But Christie also clashed with Trump at times and has described the former president's refusal to accept his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden as a breaking point. In appearances and interviews, Christie says he was "incredibly disappointed and disillusioned" by Trump's refusal to concede, which culminated in his followers' violent storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6 in an effort to halt the certification of Biden's win.

Colvin reported from New York. Associated Press Writer Will Weissert contributed to this story from Washington.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

The Constitution gives states the responsibility of overseeing local and federal elections. Congress can’t legislate how individual states conduct elections.

As D.C. is not a state, Congress has authority over local laws, including D.C.’s election laws.

House Republicans proposed a new bill they say would act as a blueprint states could follow for conducting elections, but the American Confidence in Elections Act would actually change several laws in D.C.:

• Voters would be required to show a photo ID.
• Restrictions would be placed on drop boxes for ballots.
• The District would be restricted from sending mail-in ballots to voters unless requested.
• Same-day voter registration would be prohibited.
• Non-citizens would be prohibited from voting in local D.C. elections, which is set to begin in the next election cycle.

Previously, House Republicans with the help of Democrats including President Joe Biden successfully blocked D.C.’s revised criminal code from becoming law and have tried to block two other laws from taking effect.

Mayor Muriel Bowser, who recently testified before the Republican-led House Oversight Committee, sees the legislation as another step backward for D.C. home rule.

“We need to fight back against any interference from people who don’t live here, from making the rules of our District,” she said.

The Republican chairmen of the House Oversight and Administration committees invited D.C. Board of Elections Executive Director Monica Holman Evans and former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli to testify about the legislation.

The two committee chairmen issued a statement, saying, “Congress needs to get serious about election integrity and implement a comprehensive plan to restore confidence in America’s electoral process. The American Confidence in Elections Act is landmark legislation set to build voter confidence, equip states, protect Americans’ political speech and ensure overdue election integrity measures for the District of Columbia.”

While several years ago there were delays in reporting election results and more recently some issues with several hundred ballots being sent to wrong addresses, the District has not had any major election problems that would have called into question the validity of any election.

The congressional hearing is set for Wednesday. While Bowser has not been invited to testify, she said she plans to weigh in with members of Congress on the legislation.

Pence, the nation’s 48th vice president, will formally launch his bid for the Republican nomination with a video and kickoff event in Des Moines, Iowa, on Wednesday, which is his 64th birthday, according to people familiar with his plans. He made his candidacy official Monday with the Federal Election Commission.

While Trump is currently leading the early fight for the nomination, with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis polling consistently in second, Pence supporters see a lane for a reliable conservative who espouses many of the previous administration’s policies but without the constant tumult.

While he frequently lauds the accomplishments of the “Trump-Pence administration,” a Pence nomination in many ways would be a return to positions long associated with the Republican establishment but abandoned as Trump reshaped the party in his image. Pence has warned against the growing populist tide in the party, and advisers see him as the only traditional, Reagan-style conservative in the race.

A staunch opponent of abortion rights, Pence supports a national ban on the procedure and has campaigned against transgender-affirming policies in schools. He has argued that changes to Social Security and Medicare, like raising the age for qualification, should be on the table to keep the programs solvent — which both Trump and DeSantis have opposed — and criticized DeSantis for his escalating feud with Disney. He also has said the U.S. should offer more support to Ukraine against Russian aggression, while admonishing “Putin apologists” in the party unwilling to stand up to the Russian leader.

Pence, who describes himself as “a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order,” has spent months laying the groundwork for an expected run, holding events in early voting states like Iowa, South Carolina and New Hampshire, visiting churches, delivering policy speeches and courting donors.

Pence’s team sees Iowa and its evangelical Christian voters as critical to his potential path to victory. Advisers say he plans to campaign aggressively in the state, hitting every one of its 99 counties before its first-in-the-nation caucuses next year.

The campaign is expected to lean heavily on town halls and retail stops aimed at reintroducing Pence to voters who only know him from his time as Trump’s second-in-command. Pence served for more than a decade in Congress and as Indiana’s governor before he was tapped as Trump’s running mate in 2016.

As vice president, Pence had been an exceeding loyal defender of Trump until the days leading up to Jan. 6, 2021, when Trump falsely tried to convince Pence and his supporters that Pence had the power to unilaterally overturn the results of the 2020 election.

That day, a mob of Trump’s supporters violently stormed the U.S. Capitol building after being spurred on by Trump’s lies that the 2020 election had been stolen. Many in the crowd chanted “Hang Mike Pence!” as Pence, his staff and his family ran for safety, hiding in a Senate loading dock.

Pence has called Trump’s actions dangerous and said the country is looking for a new brand of leadership in the 2024 election.

“I think we’ll have better choices,” he recently told The Associated Press. “The American people want us to return to the policies of the Trump-Pence administration, but I think they want to see leadership that reflects more of the character of the American people.”

Pence has spent the 2 1/2 years since then strategically distancing himself from Trump. But he faces skepticism from both anti-Trump voters who see him as too close to the former president, as well as Trump loyalists, many of whom still blame him for failing to heed Trump’s demands to overturn the pair’s election defeat, even though Pence’s role overseeing the counting of the Electoral College vote was purely ceremonial and he never had the power to impact the results.

Pence joins a crowded Republican field that includes Trump, DeSantis, former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley, U.S. Sen Tim Scott of South Carolina, tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, and former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson. Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie plans to launch his own campaign Tuesday evening in New Hampshire, and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum will announce his bid Wednesday in Fargo.

With Trump, a thrice-married reality star, facing skepticism among some Republicans during his 2016 run, his pick of Pence as a running mate assuaged concerns from evangelical Christians and others that he wasn’t sufficiently conservative. As vice president, Pence refused to ever criticize the former president publicly and often played the role of emissary, trying to translate Trump’s unorthodox rhetoric and policy proclamations, particularly on the world stage.

After Trump’s legal efforts to stave off defeat of the 2020 election were quashed by courts and state officials, he and his team zeroed in on Jan. 6, the date that a joint session of Congress would meet to formally certify President Joe Biden’s victory. In the weeks leading up to the session, Trump engaged in an unprecedented pressure campaign to convince Pence he had the power to throw out the electoral votes from battleground states won by Biden, even though he did not.

As the riot was underway and after Pence and his family were rushed off the Senate floor and into hiding, Trump tweeted, “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done.” Video footage of the attack shows rioters reading Trump’s words aloud and crowds breaking into chants that Pence should be hanged. A makeshift gallows was photographed outside the Capitol.

Pence has said that Trump “ endangered my family and everyone at the Capitol that day” and that history will hold him accountable.

Despite his harrowing experience, Pence opposed efforts to testify in investigations into Trump’s actions on and in the lead-up to Jan. 6. He refused to appear before the House committee investigating the attack and fought a subpoena issued by the special counsel overseeing numerous Trump investigations, though he did eventually testify before a grand jury.

Only six former U.S. vice presidents have been elected to the White House, including Biden, who is running for a second term.

Pence will hold a kickoff event in Des Moines on June 7, the date of his 64th birthday, according to two people familiar with his plans who spoke on condition of anonymity to share details ahead of the official announcement. He is also expected to release a video message as part of the launch.

His team sees early-voting Iowa as critical to his potential path to victory and advisers say he plans to campaign aggressively for the conservative, Evangelical Christian voters who make up a substantial portion of the state’s Republican electorate. Pence is an avowed social conservative and is staunchly opposed to abortion rights, favoring a national ban.

The campaign is expected to lean heavily on town halls and retail stops aimed at showcasing Pence’s personality as he tries to emerge from former President Donald Trump‘s shadow.

Pence, who served in Congress and as Indiana's governor before he was tapped as Trump's running mate in 2016, had been an exceedingly loyal vice president until he broke with Trump over the 2020 election.

Trump, desperate to overturn his loss and remain in power, had tried to convince Pence — and his supporters — that Pence could somehow reject voters' will as he presided over the ceremonial counting of the electoral college votes on Jan. 6, 2021, even though the vice president has no such power. As the count was underway, a violent mob of Trump's supporters stormed the building, smashing through windows, assailing police and sending Pence, his family and his staff, racing for cover as members of the mob chanted “Hang Mike Pence!”

Pence has said Trump's “reckless words" endangered his family and everyone else who was at the Capitol that day. He has said "history will hold Donald Trump accountable.”

“For four years, we had a close working relationship. It did not end well,” Pence wrote in his book, “So Help Me God.”

Donald Trump May 25, 2023

Who's Running For President in 2024? What To Know About the Candidates

news May 31, 2023

Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie to Launch Presidential Campaign Next Week

Pence has spent the two-and-a-half years since then strategically distancing himself from Trump as he has laid the groundwork for the campaign. While he consistently praises the record of the “Trump-Pence administration," he has also stressed differences between the two men, on both policy and style.

He has called on his party to move on from Trump’s election grievances and warned against the growing tide of populism in the Republican Party. He admonished “Putin apologists” unwilling to stand up to the Russian leader over his assault on Ukraine in response to comments from Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is running a distant second to Trump in the polls.

He has also argued in favor of reforms to programs like Social Security and Medicare — which both Trump and DeSantis have vowed not to touch — and criticized DeSantis for his escalating feud with Disney.

Pence also testified last month before a federal grand jury investigating efforts by Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

Pence has spent months visiting early-voting states, delivering policy speeches, speaking at churches and courting donors ahead of his expected run.

The week will be a busy one for GOP announcements. Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is planning to launch his campaign Tuesday evening at a town hall event in New Hampshire and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum will announce on June 7 in Fargo.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

Christie is planning to make the announcement at a town hall Tuesday evening at Saint Anselm College’s New Hampshire Institute of Politics, according to a person familiar with his thinking who spoke on condition of anonymity to confirm Christie’s plans.

The timing, which was first reported by Axios, comes after several longtime Christie advisers started a super political action committee to support his expected candidacy.

Decision 2024

Here are the latest headlines around next year's presidential race.

Donald Trump May 25, 2023

Who's Running For President in 2024? What To Know About the Candidates

decision 2024 May 31, 2023

Chris Christie Allies Launch Super PAC Ahead of Expected 2024 Campaign for the GOP Presidential Nomination

The Associated Press had previously reported that Christie was expected to enter the race “imminently.”

Christie has cast himself as the only potential candidate willing to aggressively take on former President Donald Trump, the current front-runner for the nomination. Christie, a former federal prosecutor, was a longtime friend and adviser to Trump, but broke with Trump over his refusal to accept the results of the 2020 election. Christie has since emerged as a leading and vocal critic of the former president.

Christie, who is currently polling at the bottom of the pack, also sought the GOP nomination in 2016. Christie dropped out of that race a day after finishing sixth in New Hampshire’s primary.

Now, as these prosecutors are up for reelection in Virginia’s off-off year elections, the challengers in next month’s Democratic primaries aren’t challenging the reform agenda. Instead, they too are casting themselves as reformers.

Political analysts look to Virginia’s odd-year elections for clues about voter sentiment heading into midterms and presidential years. This year, the prosecutor races may show how voters feel about crime, three years after protests over racial injustice both energized progressives and prompted a conservative backlash.

Stephen Farnsworth, a political science professor at the University of Mary Washington, cautioned against drawing sweeping conclusions from a primary that historically draws only a narrow slice of the electorate. Still, he said if voters were to reject reform incumbents, it would be noteworthy.

“If the incumbents can’t persuade that sector of the electorate that the reform agenda is the agenda to pursue, then that’s a warning sign for the Democratic Party,” he said.

Nationally, reform prosecutors have had mixed political success after their initial elections. In San Francisco, voters recalled District Attorney Chesa Boudin over rising crime concerns. St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner announced her resignation earlier this month amid pressure from Republicans, and in Chicago, Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx last month said she won’t seek another term.

But in 2022, reform prosecutors in Dallas and Indianapolis won reelection despite tough opposition. And in 2021, Philadelphia’s Larry Krasner, an icon in the criminal justice reform movement, won a second term.

The Virginia races, meanwhile, may provide more insight into the views of suburban voters. The primary challengers, thus far, are embracing the reform agenda. Even Ed Nuttall, who is running as a “common sense” Democrat and is best known for representing police officers charged with misconduct by the reformers now in office, has sought to embrace the mantle of reformer.

“Sure, why not?” Nuttall said when asked whether he considers himself a reformer.

He said he supports efforts to find alternatives to jail for nonviolent offenders dealing with addiction and mental health issues.

The problem, according to Nuttall and the other primary challengers, is mismanagement of day-to-day affairs. They cite turnover in the offices and criticism levied by crime victims and judges that cases have faltered because prosecutors have failed to follow procedure.

“There’s a lot of frustration in the courthouse with everyone about how these cases are being handled,” Nuttall said.

Nuttall’s opponent, Fairfax Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano, who won four years ago after knocking off a longtime incumbent, said the mismanagement critiques are off base. While there have been hiccups, he said critics fail to recognize the massive overhaul his office has undertaken.

“It takes more than one term to undo decades of bad policy, decades of injustice,” Descano said.

Nuttall’s race against Descano is one of three in northern Virginia, the wealthy suburban area outside the nation’s capital. In Arlington County, closest to the District of Columbia, Josh Katcher is challenging his former boss, Parisa Dehghani-Tafti. And in the outer suburbs of Loudoun County, attorney Elizabeth Lancaster is challenging incumbent Buta Biberaj.

Donald Trump May 25, 2023

Who's Running For President in 2024? What To Know About the Candidates

Proud Boys May 4, 2023

Ex-Proud Boys Leader Tarrio and Three Others Guilty of Jan. 6 Sedition Plot

Maryland May 1, 2023

Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin Won't Seek Re-Election

Incumbents say the challengers’ effort to paint themselves as reformers rings hollow. In Loudoun County, Biberaj says her opponent’s support comes from Republicans who have sought to block reforms.

“We’ve actually done the work since coming into the office,” Biberaj said. “So when you’ve got these challengers saying, ‘I am a true reformer,’ — well, what have you done?”

Lancaster said her reform credentials are solid. She worked as a public defender for more than a decade and served on a task force that overhauled the prosecution of juveniles. She said she was recruited to run by members of the county bar who are frustrated with mismanagement in the prosecutors’ office.

“As an 18-year Loudoun County attorney, it’s embarrassing, and it gives criminal justice reform a bad name and it pisses me off,” she said.

The incumbents are facing criticism not just from their opponents but in many cases from the judges in their own courthouses. In Arlington County, some judges require Dehghani-Tafti’s prosecutors to file written briefs outlining why they are dropping charges against defendants, a time-consuming process that she says infringes on her discretion.

Dehghani-Tafti said the answer is not to replace her, but the judges.

“Get a new bench,” she said, noting that two of her deputies have now been chosen to serve as judges in Arlington.

Her opponent, Katcher, has faulted Dehghani-Tafti for an inability to build relationships with judges, police, and with her own staff that has thwarted real reform.

“I have both the experience and the relationships to deliver real reform and real justice,” he said at a debate last month.

The South Carolina Republican formally announced the news on Monday before supporters at his alma mater, Charleston Southern University.

The 57-year-old Scott is the only Black Republican in the U.S. Senate and was South Carolina’s first Black senator.

“Joe Biden and the radical left are attacking every rung of the ladder that helped me climb,” Scott said. “And that is why I am announcing today that I am running for president of the United States of America.”

Scott first joined Congress as a representative in 2009, serving as a rep in South Carolina through 2013 when he was elected senator.

Scott’s campaign said he has over $22 million in campaign cash as he launches his bid. Scott will travel to Iowa and New Hampshire following his Monday announcement.

Officially, there are now six candidates who have entered the Republican race for 2024: former president Donald Trump, former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley, entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson and radio host Larry Elder.

The split-screen messaging of Ohio’s Frank LaRose, West Virginia’s Mac Warner and Missouri’s Jay Ashcroft shows just how deeply election lies have burrowed into the Republican Party, where more than half of voters believe Democrat Joe Biden was not legitimately elected president. Even election officials who tout running clean elections at home are routinely pushing for more voting restrictions and additional scrutiny on the process as they prepare to face GOP primary voters next year.

All three withdrew their states last month from the Electronic Registration Information Center, a bipartisan, multistate effort to ensure accurate voter lists. LaRose did so less than a month after calling the group “one of the best fraud-fighting tools that we have” and vowing to maintain Ohio’s membership. He defied backlash against the organization stoked by former President Donald Trump before relenting.

The three also have supported increased voter restrictions in their states — part of a national trend for Republicans that they say is intend to boost public confidence. Those bills impose new voter ID requirements, shrink windows for processing ballots or ease the ability to consolidate voting precincts.

For Republicans aspiring to higher office, “it’s kind of hard to skip some of these things if you want to succeed” in GOP primaries, said Nancy Martorano Miller, an associate professor of political science at the University of Dayton.

That includes appearing responsive to Republican voters’ belief in Trump’s false claims of a stolen 2020 presidential election at the same time they promote the job they’re doing in their own states.

“You’re secretary of state, so it’s your job to run elections and make sure they’re fraud-fee,” Martorano Miller said. “You’re kind of stuck between, ‘I need to show I’m doing these things to battle fraud,’ but at the same time, ‘if I make it seem like there’s too much fraud, it looks like I’m not doing my job.’”

Warner and Ashcroft have announced campaigns for governor while LaRose is considering a U.S. Senate run.

When he unveiled legislation in February aimed at standardizing election data, LaRose said it was all about providing transparency so voters would “have confidence in knowing that when the election is over, that the true voice of the people was heard.”

A couple weeks later, he was sitting on an elections panel titled “They Stole It From Us Legally” at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference.

LaRose’s spokesperson said the panel was renamed at the last minute, but the secretary used the opportunity to promote the integrity of Ohio elections.

“Voter fraud is exceedingly rare in Ohio because we take election security very seriously, aggressively pursue those who commit it and refer the potential crime to the attorney general and county prosecutors,” Rob Nichols said.

Similarly, Ashcroft has said Missouri has secure elections and praised Gov. Mike Parson for signing a package of election law changes last year that included a new photo ID requirement.

“Missouri voters are passionate about their right to vote,” he said. “This bill makes Missouri elections safer and more transparent, which instills confidence and trust.”

Then in January, Ashcroft hosted a meeting at his office with MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, a conspiracy theorist who travels the country fueling distrust in elections. The meeting alarmed some voting rights advocates in the state.

Warner has defended Trump’s false claims of a fraudulent 2020 election and demonstrated alongside “Stop the Steal” protesters, while also promoting the integrity of West Virginia’s elections.

He said in a recent interview that he is working to strike a balance between those on the right who believe the 2020 election was stolen and those on the left who argue “there’s nothing to see here.”

“The truth is obviously somewhere in the middle,” he said, while adding: “I will admit Biden won the election, but did he do it legitimately? Or did that happen outside the election laws that legislatures in certain states had put in place? That’s where I balk and say no.”

Warner said he would like to see an “after-action review” of the 2020 election, like those conducted in the military, to ease citizens’ minds and make elections better.

Trump and others have criticized the expansion of mail voting in 2020 in the COVID-19 pandemic, although there is no evidence of any widespread fraud and multiple reviews in the battleground states where Trump contested his loss have upheld the results. The House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol found that Trump advisers and administration officials repeatedly debunked allegations of fraud in the weeks after the 2020 election, but Trump continued to push the lies, anyway.

In a recently settled defamation case against Fox News, a Delaware Superior Court judge ruled it was “CRYSTAL clear” that none of the claims repeatedly aired on the network about Dominion Voting Systems machines rigging votes against Trump was true.

Christopher McKnight Nichols, an Ohio State University professor of history, said it’s confusing for voters when secretaries of state claim elections they run are fair but then raise questions or hint at problems, without evidence, about elections elsewhere.

An earlier era of Republicans “absolutely would have been chagrined, embarrassed, and perhaps pushed out fellow Republicans who flip-flopped so radically, or promoted lies,” he said. “Their brand was the principled and consistent politician.”

In Ohio, LaRose spent years assuring the public that voter fraud represents a tiny fraction of Ohio’s cast ballots and that election tallies were nearly perfect. Then during his reelection campaign last year, he said Trump “is right to say that voter fraud is a serious problem” and blamed the mainstream media for “trying to minimize voter fraud to suit their narrative.”

In October, he joined a national Republican trend by opening a unit to investigate election law violations in Ohio, among other duties. He said that day that Ohio has a “strong national reputation for secure, accurate and accessible elections” — but added that anything short of “absolute confidence” in election integrity “weakens the very foundation of our democracy.”

Biden, who would be 86 at the end of a second term, is betting his first-term legislative achievements and more than 50 years of experience in Washington will count for more than concerns over his age. He faces a smooth path to winning his party’s nomination, with no serious Democratic challengers. But he’s still set for a hard-fought struggle to retain the presidency in a bitterly divided nation.

In his first public appearance Tuesday since the announcement, Biden offered a preview of how he plans to navigate the dual roles of president and presidential candidate, using a speech to building trades union members to highlight his accomplishments and undercut his GOP rivals, while showing voters he remained focused on his day job. Greeted by a raucous crowd of building trades union members — a key base of Democratic support — with “Let’s Go Joe” chants, Biden touted the tens of thousands of construction jobs being created since he took office that are supported by the legislation he signed into law.

“We — you and I — together we’re turning things around and we’re doing it in a big way,” Biden said. “It’s time to finish the job. Finish the job.”

The official announcement, in a three-minute video, comes on the four-year anniversary of when Biden declared for the White House in 2019, promising to heal the “soul of the nation” amid the turbulent presidency of Donald Trump — a goal that has remained elusive.

“I said we are in a battle for the soul of America, and we still are,” Biden said. “The question we are facing is whether in the years ahead we have more freedom or less freedom. More rights or fewer.”

While the prospect of seeking reelection has been a given for most modern presidents, that’s not always been the case for Biden. A notable swath of Democratic voters has indicated they would prefer he not run, in part because of his age — concerns Biden has called “totally legitimate” but ones he did not address head-on in the launch video.

Yet few things have unified Democratic voters like the prospect of Trump returning to power. And Biden’s political standing within his party stabilized after Democrats notched a stronger-than-expected performance in last year’s midterm elections. The president is set to run again on the same themes that buoyed his party last fall, particularly on preserving access to abortion.

“Freedom. Personal freedom is fundamental to who we are as Americans. There’s nothing more important. Nothing more sacred,” Biden said in the launch video, depicting Republican extremists as trying to roll back access to abortion, cut Social Security, limit voting rights and ban books they disagree with. “Around the country, MAGA extremists are lining up to take those bedrock freedoms away.”

“This is not a time to be complacent,” Biden added. “That’s why I’m running for reelection.”

As the contours of the campaign begin to take shape, Biden plans to run on his record. He spent his first two years as president combating the coronavirus pandemic and pushing through major bills such as the bipartisan infrastructure package and legislation to promote high-tech manufacturing and climate measures. With Republicans now in control of the House, Biden has shifted his focus to implementing those massive laws and making sure voters credit him for the improvements.

The president also has multiple policy goals and unmet promises from his first campaign that he’s asking voters to give him another chance to fulfill.

“Let’s finish this job. I know we can,” Biden said in the video, repeating a mantra he said a dozen times during his State of the Union address in February, listing everything from passing a ban on assault-style weapons and lowering the cost of prescription drugs to codifying a national right to abortion after the Supreme Court’s ruling last year overturning Roe v. Wade.

Buoyed by the midterm results, Biden plans to continue to cast all Republicans as embracing what he calls “ultra-MAGA” politics — a reference to Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan — regardless of whether his predecessor ends up on the 2024 ballot.

Vice President Kamala Harris, who was featured prominently alongside Biden in the video, planned to attend a political rally on Tuesday evening in support of abortion access at Howard University in Washington, kicking off her efforts to support the reelect.

In the video, Biden speaks over brief clips and photographs of key moments in his presidency, snapshots of diverse Americans and flashes of outspoken Republican foes, including Trump, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. He exhorts supporters that “this is our moment” to “defend democracy. Stand up for our personal freedoms. Stand up for the right to vote and our civil rights.”

Biden also plans to point to his work over the past two years shoring up American alliances, leading a global coalition to support Ukraine’s defenses against Russia’s invasion and returning the U.S. to the Paris climate accord. But public support in the U.S. for Ukraine has softened in recent months, and some voters question the tens of billions of dollars in military and economic assistance flowing to Kyiv.

The president faces lingering criticism over his administration’s chaotic 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan after nearly 20 years of war, which undercut the image of competence he aimed to portray, and he’s the target of GOP attacks over his immigration and economic policies.

As a candidate in 2020, Biden pitched voters on his familiarity with the halls of power in Washington and his relationships around the world. But even back then, he was acutely aware of voters’ concerns about his age.

“Look, I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else,” Biden said in March 2020, as he campaigned in Michigan with younger Democrats, including now-Vice President Kamala Harris, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. “There’s an entire generation of leaders you saw stand behind me. They are the future of this country.”

Three years later, the president now 80, Biden allies say his time in office has demonstrated that he saw himself as more of a transformational than a transitional leader.

Still, many Democrats would prefer that Biden didn’t run again. A recent poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows just 47% of Democrats say they want him to seek a second term, up from 37% in February. And Biden’s verbal — and occasional physical — stumbles have become fodder for critics trying to cast him as unfit for office.

Biden, on multiple occasions, has brushed back concerns about his age, saying simply, “Watch me.”

During a routine physical in February, his physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, declared him “healthy, vigorous” and “fit” to handle his White House responsibilities.

Hours after Biden’s announcement, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre initially refused to say the president planned to serve all eight years if elected to a second term, later clarifying “I wanted to be sure that I didn’t go into 2024 more than is appropriate under the law. But I can confirm that if re-elected, @POTUS would serve all 8 years.”

Aides acknowledge that while some in his party might prefer an alternative to Biden, there is anything but consensus within their diverse coalition on who that might be. And they insist that when Biden is compared with whomever the GOP nominates, Democrats and independents will rally around Biden.

For now, the 76-year-old Trump is the favorite to emerge as the Republican nominee, creating the potential of a historic sequel to the bitterly fought 2020 campaign. But Trump faces significant hurdles of his own, including the designation of being the first former president to face criminal charges. The remaining GOP field is volatile, with DeSantis emerging as an early alternative to Trump. DeSantis’ stature is also in question, however, amid questions about his readiness to campaign outside of his increasingly Republican-leaning state.

To prevail again, Biden will need the alliance of young voters and Black voters — particularly women — along with blue-collar Midwesterners, moderates and disaffected Republicans who helped him win in 2020. He’ll have to again carry the so-called “blue wall” in the Upper Midwest, while protecting his position in Georgia and Arizona, longtime GOP strongholds he narrowly won last time.

Biden’s reelection bid comes as the nation weathers uncertain economic crosscurrents. Inflation is ticking down after hitting the highest rate in a generation, but unemployment is at a 50-year low, and the economy is showing signs of resilience despite Federal Reserve interest rate hikes.

“If voters let Biden ‘finish the job,’ inflation will continue to skyrocket, crime rates will rise, more fentanyl will cross our open borders, children will continue to be left behind, and American families will be worse off,” Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel said in a statement.

Presidents typically try to delay their reelection announcements to maintain the advantages of incumbency and skate above the political fray for as long as possible while their rivals trade jabs. But the leg up offered by being in the White House can be rickety — three of the last seven presidents have lost reelection, most recently Trump in 2020.

Biden’s announcement is roughly consistent with the timeline followed by then-President Barack Obama, who waited until April 2011 to declare for a second term and didn’t hold a reelection rally until May 2012. Trump launched his reelection bid on the day he was sworn in in 2017.

Biden is not expected to dramatically alter his day-to-day schedule as a candidate — at least not immediately — with aides believing his strongest political asset is showing the American people that he is governing. And if he follows the Obama playbook, he may not hold any formal campaign rallies until well into 2024.

On Tuesday, Biden named White House adviser Julie Chávez Rodríguez to serve as campaign manager and Quentin Fulks, who ran Sen. Raphael Warnock’s reelection campaign in Georgia last year, to serve as principal deputy campaign manager. The campaign co-chairs will be Reps. Lisa Blunt-Rochester, Jim Clyburn and Veronica Escobar; Sens. Chris Coons and Tammy Duckworth; entertainment mogul and Democratic mega-donor Jeffrey Katzenberg; and Whitmer.

Fresh off the campaign announcement, Biden is set to host South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol for a state visit at the White House and plans to meet with party donors in Washington later this week.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

In a decision dated Wednesday, the panel found software developer Robert Zeidman had won Lindell’s 2021 contest challenging experts to prove that data he had was not from the 2020 election, and directed the MyPillow founder to pay him the reward money he’d promised in the next 30 days.

Sep 14, 2022

MyPillow Exec Mike Lindell Says FBI Agents Seized His Cellphone in Hardee's Drive-Thru Line

Donald Trump Dec 16, 2021

MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell Says He Spent $25 Million to Push False Pro-Trump Election Claims: ‘I Will Spend Whatever It Takes'

Lindell told NBC News on Thursday that the ruling was “a horrible, wrong decision.”

The contest took place in August 2021 at a cyber symposium that Lindell — an outspoken election denier and conspiracy theorist — was hosting in Sioux Falls, South Dakota.

As part of the symposium, Lindell announced a contest called the “Prove Mike Wrong Challenge” in which participants were asked to find proof that his cyber data was not valid data from the November election, the ruling said. The announcement said: “For the people who find the evidence, 5 million is their reward.”

Read the full story on NBCNews.com here.

The stunning settlement emerged just as opening statements were supposed to begin, abruptly ending a case that had embarrassed Fox News over several months and raised the possibility that network founder Rupert Murdoch and stars such as Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity would have to testify publicly.

“The truth matters. Lies have consequences,” Dominion lawyer Justin Nelson told reporters outside a Delaware courthouse after Superior Court Judge Eric Davis announced the deal.

Outside of the $787.5 million promised to Colorado-based Dominion, it was unclear what other consequences Fox would face. Fox acknowledged in a statement “the court’s rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false,” but no apology was offered.

“We are hopeful that our decision to resolve this dispute with Dominion amicably, instead of the acrimony of a divisive trial, allows the country to move forward from these issues,” Fox said. Its lawyers and representatives offered no other comment or details about the settlement.

Asked by a reporter whether there was “anything to this other than money,” Dominion CEO John Poulos did not answer.

The deal is a significant amount of money even for a company the size of Fox. It represents about one-quarter of the $2.96 billion the company reported earning last year before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization — a figure often used to approximate a company’s cash flow.

The settlement also follows a $965 million judgment issued against Alex Jones by a Connecticut jury in 2022 for spreading false conspiracy theories about the Sandy Hook school massacre.

Coupled with other lawsuits in the pipeline, the agreement shows there is a real financial risk for conservative media that traffic in conspiracy theories. What remains unknown is how much of a deterrent this will be. Even as the Dominion case loomed this spring, Fox’s Tucker Carlson aired his alternate theories about what happened at the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

Dominion had sued Fox for $1.6 billion, arguing that the top-rated news outlet had damaged the company’s reputation by peddling phony conspiracy theories that claimed its equipment switched votes from former President Donald Trump to Democrat Joe Biden. Davis, in an earlier ruling, said it was “CRYSTAL clear” that none of the allegations about Dominion aired on Fox by Trump allies were true.

Dominion set out to prove in the lawsuit that Fox acted with malice in airing allegations that it knew to be false, or with “reckless disregard” for the truth. It presented volumes of internal emails and text messages that showed Fox executives and personalities saying they knew the accusations were untrue, even as the falsehoods were aired on programs hosted by Maria Bartiromo, Lou Dobbs and Jeannine Pirro.

Records released as part of the lawsuit showed that Fox aired the claims in part to win back viewers who were fleeing the network after it correctly called hotly contested Arizona for Democrat Joe Biden on election night. One Fox Corp. vice president called them “MIND BLOWINGLY NUTS.”

During a deposition, Murdoch testified that he believed the 2020 election was fair and had not been stolen from Trump.

“Fox knew the truth,” Dominion argued in court papers. “It knew the allegations against Dominion were ‘outlandish’ and ‘crazy’ and ‘ludicrous’ and ‘nuts.’ Yet it used the power and influence of its platform to promote that false story.”

Several First Amendment experts said Dominion’s case was among the strongest they had ever seen. But there was real doubt about whether Dominion would be able to prove to a jury that people in a decision-making capacity at Fox could be held responsible for the network’s actions.

Dominion’s Nelson called the settlement “a tremendous victory” and noted that there are six more lawsuits pending regarding election claims.

Also in the News

Donald Trump Mar 28, 2023

Dominion Wants Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Other Fox News Hosts to Testify at Trial

Donald Trump Mar 21, 2023

Fox News Producer Claims Network Coerced Her to Give Misleading Testimony in Dominion Libel Case

“We settled because it was about accountability,” Nelson said in an interview. “Our goals were to make sure that there was accountability for the lies, and to try to make our client right. And we accomplished both goals.”

It’s hard to tell what the deal will mean financially for Dominion. The company would not provide its most recent earnings, saying the figures were not public.

In the weeks leading up to the trial, Davis significantly narrowed Fox’s potential line of defense, including nixing the network’s argument that it was merely airing newsworthy allegations. Newsworthiness is not a defense against defamation, he said.

In a March 31 ruling, he pointedly called out the network for airing falsehoods while noting that bogus election claims still persist more than two years after Trump lost his bid for reelection.

“The statements at issue were dramatically different than the truth,” Davis said in that ruling. “In fact, although it cannot be attributed directly to Fox’s statements, it is noteworthy that some Americans still believe the election was rigged.”

In its defense, Fox said it was obligated to report on a president who claimed that he had been cheated out of reelection.

“We never reported those to be true,” Fox lawyer Erin Murphy said. “All we ever did was provide viewers the true fact that these were allegations that were being made.”

Dominion had sued both Fox News and its parent, Fox Corp, and said its business had been significantly damaged. Fox said the company grossly overestimated its losses, before agreeing to pay about half of what Dominion had asked for.

In a 1964 case involving The New York Times, the U.S. Supreme Court limited the ability of public figures to sue for defamation. The court ruled that plaintiffs needed to prove that news outlets published or aired false material with “actual malice” — knowing such material was false or acting with a “reckless disregard” for whether or not it was true.

That has provided news organizations with stout protection against libel judgments. Yet the nearly six-decade legal standard has come under attack by some conservatives in recent years, including Trump and Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, who have argued for making it easier to win a libel case.

“The larger importance of the settlement … is that the high level of protection for news media in a defamation case remains intact from now,” said Doreen Weisenhaus, an instructor of media law at Northwestern University.

In documents released in recent months, Fox executives and anchors discussed how not to alienate the audience, many of whom believed Trump’s claims of fraud despite no evidence to back them up. Fox’s Tucker Carlson suggested a news reporter be fired for tweeting a fact check debunking the fraud claims.

Some of the exhibits were simply embarrassing, such as scornful behind-the-scenes opinions about Trump, whose supporters form the core of the network’s viewers. Text exchanges revealed as part of the lawsuit show Carlson declaring, “I hate him passionately,” and saying that “we are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights.”

Fox News announced the settlement on Neil Cavuto’s afternoon news show. “It’s a done deal,” he said. “It’s a settlement and for at least Fox, it appears to be over.”

But Fox’s legal problems may not be over. It still faces a defamation lawsuit from another voting technology company, Smartmatic. Its lawyer, Erik Connolly, said Tuesday that “Dominion’s litigation exposed some of the misconduct and damage caused by Fox’s disinformation campaign. Smartmatic will expose the rest.” ___ Associated Press writers Jennifer Peltz in New York and Nicholas Riccardi in Denver contributed to this report.

Superior Court Judge Eric Davis suggested the sides try to mediate their dispute, according to a person close to Fox who was not authorized to speak publicly about the status of the lawsuit. Attorneys for both sides who appeared in court Monday declined to answer reporters’ questions about the delay, as did representatives for both companies.

Davis gave no explanation for delaying the trial’s start until Tuesday, although he did note that delays are common and built into the schedule. Jury selection and opening statements were planned for the first day in a trial that, if it happens, is expected to last six weeks.

“This is not a press conference,” Davis said during Monday’s brief hearing. “I don’t do that.”

US & World News

Apr 17, 2023

McCarthy Pledges a Vote on One-Year Debt Limit Hike – Without Clear GOP Support

Cancer Apr 17, 2023

Risk of Death from Melanoma Drops With Personalized mRNA Vaccine, Study Shows

A trial would force Fox to answer for its actions in the weeks after the 2020 presidential election and litigate denial about the outcome of the race in general. The case centers on whether Fox defamed Denver-based Dominion Voting Systems by spreading false claims that the company rigged the election against then-President Donald Trump.

A settlement is certainly a possibility in a trial that carries risks for both sides. Fox already has been embarrassed by revelations that some of its executives and on-air personalities did not believe fraud claims that the network spread on the air, and it doesn’t want to see 92-year-old founder Rupert Murdoch testify. Dominion could miss a big payday if a jury rules against it.

Not everyone wants the case to go away quietly, however.

“PLEASE Dominion — Do not settle with Fox! You’re about to prove something very big,” tweeted Gretchen Carlson, the former Fox anchor whose accusations of sexual misconduct by former Fox chief Roger Ailes led to his downfall in 2016.

Fox, meanwhile, paid for a full-page advertisement in The New York Times on Monday headlined “Trusted Now. More Than Ever.”

Dozens of journalists gathered at the courthouse in downtown Wilmington, some before dawn, for a hearing that lasted about five minutes. The courtyard in front of the court building was full of TV crews ready to do live shots.

Besides its implications for Fox, the case is being watched carefully by journalists for what it could mean for libel law. Defamation is generally hard to prove, since it requires a finding that journalists published information they knew to be false, or with a reckless disregard for the truth.

In the News

electric vehicles Apr 17, 2023

See the EVs Eligible for Tax Credits – and Why Most Aren't

Kansas City Apr 17, 2023

Kansas City Community Calls for Justice After 16-Year-Old Shot

Some First Amendment lawyers say Dominion’s lawsuit presents a powerful case, given the doubt expressed within Fox about the fraud allegations. Fox says Dominion can’t prove that the people with such doubts were in position to affect what was said on the air about the company.

Even before a jury hears the case, Davis has made some rulings in Dominion’s favor, including stating that the allegations of election fraud made against the company were clearly false. That means the issue will not have to be litigated in the trial.

___

Associated Press writer Eric Tucker in Washington contributed to this report.

The trial, which has drawn international interest, had been scheduled to start Monday morning with jury selection and opening statements.

The case centers on whether Fox defamed Dominion Voting Systems by spreading false claims that the company rigged the 2020 presidential election to prevent former President Donald Trump’s reelection. Records produced as part of the lawsuit show that many of the network’s hosts and executives didn’t believe the allegations but aired them, anyway.

Claire Bischoff, a Dominion spokesperson, said the company would have no comment on the trial delay. Representatives for Fox News and its parent company, Fox Corp., the entities Dominion is suing, did not immediately return requests for comment. In his statement, Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis said only that the trial, including jury selection, would be continued until Tuesday and that he would announce the delay in court on Monday.

That’s when Fox News executives and the network’s star hosts were scheduled to begin answering for their role in spreading doubt about the 2020 presidential election and creating the gaping wound that remains in America’s democracy.

Jurors hearing the $1.6 billion lawsuit filed against Fox by Dominion Voting Systems must answer a specific question: Did Fox defame the voting machine company by airing bogus stories alleging that the election was rigged against then-President Donald Trump, even as many at the network privately doubted the false claims being pushed by Trump and his allies?

Yet the broader context looms large. A trial would test press freedom and the reputation of conservatives’ favorite news source. It also would illuminate the flow of misinformation that helped spark the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and continues to fuel Trump’s hopes to regain power in 2024.

Fox News stars Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity and founder Rupert Murdoch are among the people who had been expected to testify.

Barring a settlement, opening statements are now scheduled for Tuesday.

“This is Christmas Eve for defamation scholars,” said RonNell Andersen Jones, a University of Utah law professor.

If the trial were a sporting event, Fox News would be taking the field on a losing streak, with key players injured and having just alienated the referee. Pretrial court rulings and embarrassing revelations about its biggest names have Fox on its heels.

Court papers released over the past two months show Fox executives, producers and personalities privately disbelieved Trump’s claims of a fraudulent election. But Dominion says Fox News was afraid of alienating its audience with the truth, particularly after many viewers were angered by the network’s decision to declare Democrat Joe Biden the winner in Arizona on election night in November 2020.

Read More

Apr 16, 2023

Fox News Apologizes to Judge in Defamation Case for Failing to Disclose Rupert Murdoch's Role at the Network

Donald Trump Mar 28, 2023

Dominion Wants Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Other Fox News Hosts to Testify at Trial

Some rulings by the judge have eased Dominion’s path. In a summary judgment, Davis said it was “CRYSTAL clear” that fraud allegations against the company were false. That means trial time won’t have to be spent disproving them at a time when millions of Republicans continue to doubt the 2020 results.

Davis said it also is clear that Dominion’s reputation was damaged, but that it would be up to a jury to decide whether Fox acted with “actual malice” — the legal standard — and, if so, what that’s worth financially.

Fox witnesses would likely testify that they thought the allegations against Dominion were newsworthy, but Davis made it clear that’s not a defense against defamation.

New York law protects news outlets from defamation for expressions of opinion. But Davis methodically went through 20 different times on Fox when allegations against Dominion were discussed, ruling that all of them were fully or partly considered statements of fact, and fair game for a potential libel finding.

“A lawsuit is a little bit like hitting a home run,” said Cary Coglianese, law professor at the University of Pennsylvania. “You have to go through all of the bases to get there.” The judge’s rulings “basically give Dominion a spot at third base, and all they have to do is come home to win it.”

Both Fox and Dominion are incorporated in Delaware, though Fox News is headquartered in New York and Dominion is based in Denver.

Fox angered Davis this past week when the judge said the network’s lawyers delayed producing evidence and were not forthcoming in revealing Murdoch’s role at Fox News. A Fox lawyer, Blake Rohrbacher, sent a letter of apology to Davis on Friday, saying it was a misunderstanding and not an intention to deceive.

It’s not clear whether that would affect a trial. But it’s generally not wise to have a judge wonder at the outset of a trial whether your side is telling the truth, particularly when truth is the central point of the case, Jones said.

The lawsuit essentially comes down to whether Dominion can prove Fox acted with actual malice by putting something on the air knowing that it was false or acting with a “reckless disregard” for whether it was true. In most libel cases, that is the most difficult hurdle for plaintiffs to get past.

Dominion can point to many examples where Fox figures didn’t believe the charges being made by Trump allies such as Sidney Powell and Rudolph Giuliani. But Fox says many of those disbelievers were not in a position to decide when to air those allegations.

“We think it’s essential for them to connect those dots,” Fox lawyer Erin Murphy said.

If the case goes to trial, the jury will determine whether a powerful figure like Murdoch — who testified in a deposition that he didn’t believe the election-fraud charges — had the influence to keep the accusations off the air.

“Credibility is always important in any trial in any case. But it’s going to be really important in this case,” said Jane Kirtley, director of the Silha Center for the Study of Media Ethics and the Law at the University of Minnesota.

Kirtley is concerned that the suit may eventually advance to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could use it as a pretext to weaken the actual malice standard that was set in a 1964 decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. That, she feels, would be disastrous for journalists.

Dominion’s lawsuit is being closely watched by another voting-technology company with a separate but similar case against Fox News. Florida-based Smartmatic has looked to some rulings and evidence in the Dominion case to try to enhance its own $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit in New York. The Smartmatic case isn’t yet ready for trial but has survived Fox News’ effort to get it tossed out.

Many experts are surprised Fox and Dominion have not reached an out-of-court settlement, though they can at any time. There’s presumably a wide financial gulf. In court papers, Fox contends the $1.6 billion damages claim is a wild overestimate.

Dominion’s motivation may also be to inflict maximum embarrassment on Fox with the peek into the network’s internal communications following the election. Text messages from January 2021 revealed Carlson telling a friend that he passionately hated Trump and couldn’t wait to move on.

Dominion may also seek an apology.

The trial has had no apparent effect on Fox News’ viewership; it remains the top-rated cable network. Fox’s media reporter, Howard Kurtz, said earlier this year that he had been banned from covering the lawsuit, but the network has since changed direction. Kurtz discussed the case on his show Sunday, saying he would be in Wilmington for the beginning of the trial.

“The real potential danger is if Fox viewers get the sense that they’ve been lied to. There’s a real downside there,” said Charlie Sykes, founder of the Bulwark website and an MSNBC contributor.

There’s little indication that the case has changed Fox’s editorial direction. Fox has embraced Trump once again in recent weeks following the former president’s indictment by a Manhattan grand jury, and Carlson presented an alternate history of Capitol riot, based on tapes given to him by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.

Just because there has been limited discussion of the Dominion suit on Fox doesn’t mean its fans are unaware of it, said Tim Graham, director of media analysis at the conservative watchdog Media Research Center.

“There’s a certain amount of tribal reaction to this,” Graham said. “When all of the other networks are thrilling to revealing text messages and emails, they see this as the latest attempt by the liberal media to undermine Fox News. There’s going to be a rally-around-Rupert effect.”

Associated Press writer Jennifer Peltz contributed to this report.

For months, the South Carolina Republican has been building out the infrastructure of a possible presidential campaign, staffing up his political action committee and making trips to early voting states. He’s also honed a stump speech heavy on optimism and his belief in America’s “story of redemption.”

No other major presidential hopeful has so far launched an exploratory committee for 2024, though it does have some advantages.

A quick rundown on exploratory committees, how they’re used and why:

WHAT IS AN EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE?

An exploratory committee allows someone pondering a political bid to start raising money to support efforts like traveling and polling without officially becoming a candidate. It’s not required, but some potential candidates do it.

According to the Federal Election Commission, the mechanism — also known as “testing the waters” — is not required to register or report to the commission, as a candidate’s official campaign committee would be.

But any money raised during this time frame has to comply with federal contribution limits and be reported, if a campaign is ultimately launched. And if the process doesn’t lead to an official candidacy, the prospective candidate isn’t required to disclose any fundraising and spending activity from the exploratory phase.

WHY DO THIS?

Much of it can be a PR move.

By launching an exploratory committee, a potential candidate gets dual waves of media attention — the launch of the committee and then the official candidacy. In what’s already shaping up to be a large GOP field in 2024, that can be important, with a slew of candidates competing for advertising airwaves, media attention and donor dollars.

There are also financial implications. By launching his exploratory committee this week, Scott will have almost the entire second quarter of this year to amass his fundraising, in hopes of showcasing a significant number at its end.

Scott has already proved that he can attract significant fundraising. A pro-Scott super PAC, Opportunity Matters Fund, spent more than $20 million to help Republicans in 2022 and reported $13 million-plus on hand to start 2023. Tech billionaire Larry Ellison has donated at least $30 million to the organization since 2021, according to federal filings.

WHEN IS THE EXPLORATORY PERIOD OVER?

If a person pondering a bid engages in actual campaigning, according to the FEC, the exploratory period has reached its end. As defined by the commission, campaigning includes the person referring to himself or herself as a candidate, using “general public political advertising” to publicize a specific intent to campaign, or raising “more money than what is reasonably needed to test the waters,” though that amount isn’t defined.

Campaigning can also technically include informing the media “either directly or through an advisor” that a candidacy will be announced on a certain date.

This mechanism has led to oblique maneuvers by some leading up to an official kickoff, like former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley’s tease of a “special announcement” — not specifically a campaign — in the weeks before launching her own 2024 presidential bid. She formally announced she would run the day before a planned rally in Charleston.

WHY DOESN’T EVERY POTENTIAL CANDIDATE HAVE ONE?

The use of exploratory committees used to be more customary than it is today.

In 1999, businessman Donald Trump said that he had formed an exploratory committee to help him determine whether he could win the White House as a Reform Party candidate. Trump spiked that bid, though he went on to win the White House as a Republican in 2016 and is seeking the GOP nomination again next year.

A month before his White House launch, then-Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama announced an exploratory committee. Four years later, Republicans Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum had committees of their own before official announcements, while Newt Gingrich thought about it and ultimately just jumped straight into the 2012 race.

Several Democrats who ultimately ran for their party’s 2020 nomination had exploratory efforts first, including Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julián Castro.

But some candidates skip straight into their official campaigns. Hillary Clinton did that for the 2016 election, as did Kamala Harris for 2020 and, this year, Haley.