Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Trump's allies push tiny suspicions of vote fraud in two swing states

Absentee ballot return envelope
Steven White/Getty Images

The number of votes being investigated for fraud has surged this week — by 47 ballots.

Inquiries were revealed Thursday by the Justice Department, which said it was probing the fate of nine discarded mailed-in ballots in Pennsylvania, and the Republican attorney general in Texas, who unveiled indictments in a case of 38 people pretending to be disabled so they could vote absentee.

The probes show just how assiduously allies of President Trump are working to find and publicize cheating with mailed votes, a scheme the president maintains is so massive that it's about to rob him of an otherwise assured second term.


Trump on Thursday declined for a second straight day to commit to a peaceful transition of power if he's defeated, repeating his claims that easy mail voting is such a "whole big scam" that it will invalidate the election if he does not win. It is the most sustained assault on the bedrock of American democracy ever mounted by a president.

But the scattershot instances of suspected vote-stealing in recent years do not come remotely close to justifying such claims, which were further undercut Thursday when FBI Director Chrstoipher Wray told Congress flatly that the bureau has not detected any "coordinated national voter fraud effort."

The Pennsylvania and Texas examples don't amount to so much as a rounding error, even in close contests in either of those significant presidential battlegrounds.

It's also highly unusual to announce a partial set of facts at the early stages of a criminal inquiry, only to have to correct them later, as the top federal prosecutor in central Pennsylvania did Thursday — giving the impression a Trump political appointee was leveraging his law enforcement powers to help promote the president's case.

U.S. Attorney David Freed originally said officials in Wilkes-Barre appeared to have "discarded" nine mailed ballots, all for Trump and cast by military members, that had been "improperly opened" by Luzerne County clerks. (He later said seven votes were for the president and the other ballots were put back in their sleeves, contents unknown.)

State law says such envelopes can't be opened, or the signatures on them verified, before Election Day. But applications for absentee ballots get returned in envelopes very similar to those used to send in the votes themselves.

In his news releases, Freed said he was justified in releasing the information because of "the limited amount of time before the general election and the vital public importance of these issues."

The Justice Department's own guidelines call for something different. Criminal investigations of elections "must be conducted in a way that minimizes the likelihood that the investigation itself may become a factor in the election."

Although he got the details of both cases wrong, Trump mentioned the Pennsylvania instance in his remarks Thursday and also reports that three trays of first class mail, including some ballot envelopes, had been found this week in a ditch in rural northern Wisconsin.

He did not mention the felony indictment GOP Attorney General Ken Paxton had filed against Shannon Brown, a Democratic county commissioner in rural East Texas. Brown was charged with orchestrating a scheme two years ago to get 38 allies to falsely claim on their absentee ballot applications that they were disabled — one of the few available excuses to vote by mail in the state. (Brown ended up winning by five votes.)

Paxton has been leading the GOP effort, which has so far been sustained in a series of high-profile court cases, to keep the rules for mail voting as restrictive as ever — and Texas now stands as one of just five states that will require an excuse for a November absentee more explicit than fear of the coronavirus.

The charges, he said, are further evidence that "mail ballots are vulnerable to diversion, coercion and influence by organized vote harvesting schemes."


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less