trump

Democrats, election officials and voting rights groups have long wondered whether President Trump, upon his return to the Oval Office, would again attempt to overturn an election when his party is trailing.

It’s no longer hypothetical.

Late last week, the president directed his Department of Justice to preemptively contest a potential Republican loss in the U.S. Senate race in Alaska. The department is demanding a court hold up certification of a possible Democratic win until it’s determined whether voters were confused by having two candidates with the same name on the ballot.

Trump followed that by calling for the prosecution of Democratic candidate Mary Peltola, a former congresswoman, based on a New York Times report that her campaign helped recruit someone named Dan Sullivan to siphon away votes from the Republican incumbent, also named Dan Sullivan. The governor has ordered an investigation.

Academics believe the lawsuit is the first time since the Civil Rights era that the federal government has sued to halt certification of an election, a duty the Constitution places in the hands of states.

Trump, for years, has claimed elections are rigged when he or his party loses, and this time is no exception. He has used his midterm rallies to say Democrats cheat, criticize election officials by name and call the ranked choice voting system in Alaska, which might hold the key to Senate control, a scam.

But the certification lawsuit elevates Trump’s crusade beyond mere rhetoric, indicating that he is preparing to use the power of the presidency to try to reverse a possible loss as his party struggles to hold its control of Congress in Tuesday’s elections.

Earlier this week, the president also announced a $1 million bounty for anyone who provides proof of prior or current voter fraud in the country. It wasn’t clear whether or how he planned to follow through.

“For at least the last year and a half, they’ve been laying that groundwork,” said Theresa Lee, a senior attorney with the ACLU. “We’ve been preparing for just as long, if not longer.”

Trump says he’ll accept results if the election is ‘honest’

Trump told reporters this week that he would accept the election results, but with his typical caveat: “If they’re honest elections,” he said.

That follows a pattern. Trump has preemptively claimed that upcoming elections will be rigged and labeled elections he’s lost as stolen. It started with the 2016 Republican Iowa caucuses, when he came in second to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.

“Ted Cruz didn’t win Iowa,” Trump said at the time. “He stole it.”

Democrats and other groups that oppose Trump have been concerned that his words would turn into directives to have his administration interfere in the midterms. They have been running exercises for months and have lawsuits pre-written. They also plan to have tens of thousands of people monitoring the polls on Election Day.

So far, early voting has been quiet, with about 35 million people already casting ballots without any notable disruption.

In that respect, this year’s election so far resembles 2025’s off-year elections in New Jersey, Virginia and a handful of other states. Democrats braced for possible Trump action then, but the election proceeded with no major issues. But the Justice Department’s more aggressive actions this month already make 2026 different from any election in recent memory.

It has sued California to block it from counting ballots after it alleged the state had 20,000 noncitizens on its rolls and made a similar demand of Washington related to about 400 voters in that state. Both states said the demands came too close to the election to fulfill, and a federal judge Wednesday rejected the federal government’s California demands.

Earlier, the Justice Department seized ballots and election records related to the 2020 presidential election in Georgia’s Fulton County, and the administration launched a sweeping investigation of that vote, though it has yet to turn up evidence supporting Trump’s false claims of fraud.

Attorney General Todd Blanche said the Justice Department does not want to intervene in elections, but had no choice in Alaska.

“We are not doing anything improper,” Blanche said Sunday on CNN. “But I do think it’s important for the American people to understand that we are not — (and) President Trump is not — trying to take over a state election in any way, shape or form.”

After the lawsuit was filed, Trump told reporters he was the one who pushed for it: “I’m the one that said do it,” the president said.

Lawsuits seem more ‘impulsive’ than strategic

Though the Trump administration claimed to be acting on behalf of Alaska’s voters in its lawsuit to hold up certification, the president’s Republican allies in the state didn’t appear happy.

Sen. Sullivan would not say whether he supported the lawsuit. Alaska’s Republican-controlled state government filed court papers to try to have it dismissed. The state’s other Republican senator, Lisa Murkowski, said the administration “should never have filed” it.

While controversial, the situation in Alaska is not that unusual. Political parties often support extra candidates on the ballot to try to pull votes from their rivals. If state courts allow it, legal experts say, the federal government has no role challenging the results.

Derek Muller, a Notre Dame law professor, wrote that the Alaska lawsuit’s legal argument was “one of the worst ones I’ve ever seen.” He said that should reassure the public that Trump won’t be able to change election outcomes.

“The notion that there’s going to be something systemic that’s going to thwart the will of the voters seems much more speculative,” he said. “A lot of the conduct seems impulsive rather than strategic and planned.”

The courts have repeatedly rebuffed the administration, in many cases because the Constitution gives the president no direct power over how elections are run. Courts put on hold two Trump executive orders seeking to change voting procedures. The administration also has lost more than two dozen cases trying to get detailed voter information from the states.

That resembles 2020, when Trump and his allies tried to overturn his loss to Democrat Joe Biden and in the process lost dozens of lawsuits.

Can the institutions hold?

Pat McCrory, a former Republican governor of North Carolina, is part of Right Count, a group of conservatives pushing back against election conspiracy theories and intervention in local elections. He said he’s confident the system will hold.

“The only thing that protects us from anarchy is this thin piece of paper called the Constitution,” McCrory said. “That thin piece of paper is, to me, a cement wall.”

It’s one that many analysts expect will continue to stymie Trump in the courts.

“The courts are likely to throw most, if not all, of these charges out,” said Matt Dallek, a political historian at George Washington University. “But this is a way of intensifying the signal to Trump’s supporters that the elections are rigged.”

The Justice Department in 2020 refused to join Trump’s allies in litigation. In his second term, Trump has pushed out career staff and stocked his administration with people who helped him challenge the 2020 election. That’s led to mounting concern he could deploy immigration agents, the FBI or even the military to the polls or seize ballots or voting machines, although multiple administration officialshave denied they have such plans.

All of that could happen before courts even have a chance to weigh in, said Brendan Nyhan, a Dartmouth political scientist.

“The threat is that he’ll take actions that can’t be undone,” Nyhan said.

Riccardi and Swenson write for the Associated Press.

With less than a week until Election Day, Democrats remain divided over their nominee in Michigan’s pivotal Senate race. The question now is whether those divisions will outweigh voter frustration with President Trump and the Republican Party.

Criticism of Democrat Abdul El-Sayed has persisted for months, both privately and publicly, since a contentious primary divided voters and party leaders. Rather than focusing solely on uniting the party’s traditional coalition in the aftermath of the primary, El-Sayed has sought to bring new voters — particularly college students and rural residents — into the fold.

But the lingering Democratic tensions spilled into public view again Wednesday, when Jason Turkish, the fiance of El-Sayed’s former primary opponent, Rep. Haley Stevens, told The Detroit News that he would vote for Republican Mike Rogers.

Hours later, Stevens appeared on CNN to reaffirm that she would be voting for El-Sayed, but urged his campaign to “shut out the hate and call it out.”

“Make people who are in my coalition, right, make them feel comfortable about coming to the polls,” said Stevens, who drew significant support from Jewish and Black voters during the primary.

El-Sayed’s criticism of Israel, past remarks and associations with controversial streamer Hasan Piker have long drawn concern from some in Michigan’s large Jewish community. Turkish and others in the Jewish community have said El-Sayed hasn’t done enough to address concerns ahead of the general election.

The latest controversy centered on an ad by Rebellion PAC, an independent left-wing group, that linked U.S. support for Israel to high grocery prices.

“That has nothing to do with our campaign,” El-Sayed said of the ad. “It’s certainly not what I want to be talking about right now.”

Stevens and other Democrats urged him to go further to denounce the content of the advertisement rather than merely distancing himself from it.

Republicans face political challenges of their own, particularly voter dissatisfaction with Trump, the Iran war and high costs. Rogers has remained closely aligned with the president on most issues, appearing alongside him at a Michigan rally Sunday where he credited Trump with bringing manufacturing jobs back to the state.

El-Sayed has sought to capitalize on that dissatisfaction, holding campaign events in heavily Republican areas, including Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. His campaign even released an ad featuring clips of prominent conservative figures praising him, including Tucker Carlson. The former Fox News host has also been accused of antisemitism, which he has denied.

But that outreach has created another source of friction with some Jewish voters.

Rabbi Aaron Starr of Congregation Shaarey Zedek in Southfield criticized both the Rebellion PAC ad and El-Sayed’s campaign ad during a call with reporters.

“We are one week away from the election, and it feels like the temperature has turned way up,” Starr said. “Instead of things getting better over the last seven weeks, they’ve actually gotten worse.”

Cappelletti writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — In the final days before an election that will decide control of Congress, President Trump’s closing argument — buoyant, digressive and characteristically off-script — is at times running headlong into the economic anxieties of the voters Republicans most need.

With a war in Iran driving up gas prices for Americans, Trump is boasting to supporters that the conflict is making the country rich. At a rally in Georgia, he said his aides had urged him not to brag about the billions of dollars the United States was earning on oil from the war, since Americans are “paying a little higher” in costs because of it. But he did it anyway.

“I said, I don’t give a damn,” Trump said. “We are making a freaking fortune. Our country is getting stronger and stronger all the time. And those pump prices are going to come down.”

The moment underscores the gamble at the core of Trump’s final pitch to voters. With polls showing an overwhelming majority of Americans unhappy with the economy, the president is offering a portrait of national prosperity that many voters do not recognize, and pairing it with jokes and digressions that can seem to make light of their struggles.

Tuesday’s results will be the clearest test yet of whether that message still moves his base, or whether the president has become a liability for a party at risk of losing Congress in part because of his sinking popularity.

Signs of GOP anxiety are reflected in where Trump is spending his final days campaigning. Rather than courting swing voters in battleground states, he is leading rallies in Mississippi, Texas, Ohio, South Carolina and Kansas — states that have long been Republican strongholds but where the party now worries its voters may stay home.

Still, the president is insisting to voters that the country is succeeding, and he is making the election a referendum on his agenda.

“The world is falling apart, and we are doing better than we’ve ever done,” he told a crowd in Mississippi on Monday. The next day, during a stop in Texas, he joked that the $5,000 he has promised Americans if Republicans win would not be enough for his supporters to eat a meal at Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Palm Beach, Fla.

“You will be my guest at Mar-a-Lago. The problem is that for $5,000 the most you’ll be able to buy is a hamburger and maybe a small dessert,” Trump said, laughing. “I’m not even sure you could buy that.”

Democrats have criticized the president’s remarks, calling them dismissive of voters’ concerns. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said Trump boasting that the country was making money out of the Iran war was a “fitting” slogan for Trump’s White House.

Trump’s personal oil and gas holdings are now estimated to be worth between $22.5 million and $81.6 million, up from $12.6 million to $46 million at the end of last year, according to a report released this week by congressional Democrats.

Joe Gruters, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, rejected the idea that the president has dismissed voters’ financial pain.

“The president, I think, shows empathy about what we’re going through, and he is fighting like hell,” Gruters said in an interview.

Asked to sum up Trump’s closing message, Gruters framed it as a choice between “common sense vs. crazy.” When pressed on the economy, Gruters pointed to Trump’s push to limit federal taxes on tips and overtime pay, to create investment accounts for children and to bring back manufacturing jobs.

“He has transformed the Republican Party into the workingman’s party,” Gruters said. “He is all about trying to bring back jobs that will bring up real wages across the board.”

But that message can be overshadowed with the off-script riffs that have long defined Trump’s rallies. During a rally in Ohio, while praising Sen. Jon Husted, Trump detoured into remarks about the Republican senator’s backside as well as rapper Nicki Minaj’s.

“I looked at his ass and I’ve never done that with a man before. It’s true. Off the record: Women, yes, men, no, OK?” Trump said. “By the way, I looked at one hell of a beautiful ass before, Nicki Minaj.”

At a separate rally, Trump turned his attention to Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic Senate nominee in Michigan, saying that if elected, El-Sayed should be forced to pass through a metal detector before entering the U.S. Senate chamber.

“Anyone with that record of support for jihadists would be screened and unable to get a seat on an airplane,” Trump said of El-Sayed. “They certainly should not give him a seat in the United States Senate.”

In those moments, the message is aimed squarely at his base, which over the last decade has celebrated his unfiltered style. And it is that base, more than swing voters, that Trump has spent his precious time courting in the final stretch of the campaign.

On Monday, Trump rallied supporters in Mississippi, a state he carried by 23 points two years ago. On Tuesday, he went to Texas for the fourth time this month to make the case for Ken Paxton, the Republican Senate nominee trying to stave off what could be the first statewide Democratic victory there in three decades. Then on Wednesday, Trump was in Ohio for the third time this month, playing defense in a state he has won every time he’s been on the ballot. And on Saturday, Trump is heading to Kansas, a state that has not elected a Democrat to the U.S. Senate since 1932.

Gruters said the red state swing reflects the need to get Republicans to the polls.

“You can’t take anything for granted. You have to fight hard in every single state, and remind people why they need to go vote,” he said. “This is a turnout, turnout, turnout race. And we’re doing everything we can as a party.”

Don Haider-Markel, a political science professor at the University of Kansas, said it is still surprising to see the party deploy the president in Republican strongholds so close to the election.

“It really reflects, not just the tilt toward Democrats, but also the lack of enthusiasm among Republican voters for this election,” Haider-Markel said.

Republicans outnumber Democrats in Kansas, but there is a possibility that Democrats can win if Republicans stay home, he said. One of the biggest assets the party has to mobilize the MAGA base is having Trump talk to them in person, he argued. But so far, it is unclear whether his closing message will resonate.

“I don’t think that he’s really speaking to the issues that voters care about, but I don’t think he’s coming to change people’s minds,” Haider-Markel said. “He’s looking for lines that get him applause and praise.”

In rally after rally, Trump has turned the event into a show about himself. In Iowa, congressional candidate Joe Mitchell presented Trump with a “man of the century” certificate. In Texas, Trump bemoaned that he was not awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last year. And in several events, he has shown the crowd a video of a CNN analyst saying that among GOP voters, Trump is more popular than Ronald Reagan or Abraham Lincoln.

But in the end, he also tried to appeal to his base with nostalgia.

“We’ve been doing this together for 11 years, and there’s never been anything like it and there probably never will be anything like it again politically or otherwise,” he said. “So let’s go out and do what we do best and that is win on Nov. 3. We gotta win!”

A New York Times investigation links Democratic operatives to a namesake candidate in Alaska’s Senate race.

US President Donald Trump has called for the removal and prosecution of two candidates in Alaska’s Senate race, accusing Democrats of orchestrating a scheme to mislead voters.

Trump’s demand on Wednesday followed a New York Times investigation into efforts by people linked to Democrat Mary Peltola’s campaign to recruit candidates who could draw support from Republican Senator Dan Sullivan, including a retired teacher with the same name.

The November 3 vote could help determine control of the US Senate, Congress’s upper chamber.

In Truth Social posts on Wednesday, Trump accused Peltola and Daniel J Sullivan Jr of election fraud and called for both to be removed from the ballot and prosecuted.

He described the alleged operation as “Voter Fraud at the Highest Level” and accused Democrats of lying under oath.

The Times noted that recruiting candidates to split an opponent’s vote – a practice known as ballot stacking – is generally legal and has been used by both parties in Alaska.

The two Sullivans are among four candidates in Alaska’s ranked-choice election.

Voters rank candidates by preference, with votes transferred if a first choice is eliminated. The ballot identifies the sitting senator as an incumbent Republican.

His namesake says he entered the race independently.

The Times reported that the effort began in 2025, when a Peltola aide was asked to identify Alaskans named Dan Sullivan.

Citing interviews and messages, it said Peltola advisers and officials from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which supports Democratic Senate candidates, discussed ways to reshape the ballot.

The newspaper identified Democratic operative Jerid Kurtz as a recruiter who approached potential candidates, sometimes under an assumed name.

It also reported that another Democrat withdrew after an approach from Kurtz, opening a place for Republican Gerald Heikes, who said he too had been encouraged to run.

Peltola’s former campaign manager, Elisa Rios, told the Times that Peltola knew about the operation but did not participate directly.

Rios later sought to withdraw her statements and the newspaper said other evidence supported its reporting.

Peltola’s campaign and the Democratic campaign committee denied recruiting candidates. Her campaign said political threats from Washington would not stop her candidacy.

Senator Sullivan accused Peltola of deceiving voters on Fox News on Wednesday.

Recruiting candidates to divide an opponent’s support is generally legal, the Times noted, and both major parties have used such tactics in Alaska.

The state’s Supreme Court upheld the retired teacher’s right to stand in June.

Trump’s Justice Department, the federal government’s legal arm, sued Alaska last week, seeking to delay certification if Senator Sullivan loses and votes for his namesake could have affected the outcome.

Alaska has asked the court to dismiss the case, arguing that it lacks legal grounds.

Trump administration issues more than 100 subpoenas across 13 states as search for alleged noncitizen voters ramps up.

A United States judge has rejected a Department of Justice request to temporarily halt California from counting mail ballots from a list of 20,000 alleged noncitizens just six days before the country’s midterm elections.

US District Judge David Carter’s ruling on Wednesday came as US President Donald Trump expands efforts to search for alleged noncitizen voters, with subpoenas issued in at least 13 states.

“Never before in American history has the federal government, on the eve of an election, sought to coerce a state and local government to abandon their own Constitutional elections procedures and bend to the will of the Executive Branch,” Carter wrote on Wednesday.

The judge, a 1998 appointee of Democratic President Bill Clinton, said the Justice Department’s last-minute request to exclude more than 20,000 ballots ran afoul of “longstanding constitutional principles mandating that states have control over their elections”.

The Justice Department swiftly appealed the decision to the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals and did not immediately respond to requests for comment by the Reuters news agency.

The Justice Department filed the lawsuit on October 15, a rare intervention in the voting process weeks before Tuesday’s election, when voters will choose which party controls Congress as well as their state and local representatives.

Escalating efforts from Trump

The decision marks the latest setback in Trump’s effort to expand the federal government’s role in elections ahead of the legislative midterms, as his Republican Party fights to retain control of both houses of Congress.

The Trump administration issued more than 100 subpoenas demanding records on tens of thousands of voters in at least 13 states, both Republican- and Democratic-leaning.

Most of the subpoenas Reuters documented were issued to state and local election officials in the past three months, though some date to the start of the year. Many were previously unreported, revealing a federal effort to identify potential noncitizen voters that is broader than publicly known.

It is illegal for noncitizens to vote in US federal elections. Legal experts say the records could be used to contest close midterm results, despite scant evidence that noncitizen voting is widespread.

‘Deeply flawed process’

Also on Wednesday, Democracy Docket, a US media platform that tracks election litigation, reported that the Department of Justice list of alleged noncitizen voters “appears to have been created using a deeply flawed process” that could disenfranchise US citizen voters beyond California.

In a court filing, a government whistleblower revealed that voters were being scrutinised nationwide, not just in California, as part of the federal government’s “Unlawful Voter Initiative” investigation, the group reported. The whistleblower warned that “the current process is knowingly sweeping known US citizens in as potentially ‘unlawful voters’”.

California has said the state’s safeguards against noncitizen voting are robust. It said the Justice Department’s assertions relied on “suspect data” and that complying with its demands would risk disenfranchising eligible voters. Democracy Docket reported that in Los Angeles County, one in four voters on the “noncitizen” list were born in the US.

Government says Salim Said ‘hit the jackpot’ in a scheme claiming to feed needy children during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A 37-year-old man who played a key role in defrauding a United States food programme in the state of Minnesota during the COVID-19 pandemic has been sentenced to 30 years in prison, in a case that has drawn intense national scrutiny and political pressure from President Donald Trump.

The widespread scheme in Minnesota, which resulted in dozens of convictions, has repeatedly drawn attacks from Trump, who ridiculed the Democratic governor for failing to stop the scheme and cited it as grounds for an immigration crackdown in the state’s largest cities.

Salim Said, who operated Safari Restaurant in Minneapolis, was accused of vastly overstating the number of meals when seeking payment for providing food to needy children. The government said he was responsible for $44 million in fraud, some of which was committed by others he recruited.

“You took more than taxpayers’ dollars to enrich yourself. You took the reputation of our state down with you,” US District Judge Nancy Brasel said.

Said was claiming a “ridiculous daily distribution of 6,000 meals” while FBI cameras showed 40 people a day collecting food, prosecutors said in a court filing.

“The defendant and his sites did not serve thousands of children; he served a calculated, lucrative lie,” prosecutors said.

Said, who was born in Somalia, denied the allegations while testifying at his 2025 trial, saying many meals were delivered off site. But he changed course and expressed remorse at his sentencing on Wednesday.

Defence lawyer Barry Zone, who had asked for a 12-year prison sentence, disputed the government’s claim that Said was the “architect”.

COVID-19 brought changes to a federal programme that typically fed children through schools. Restaurants could participate, and food distribution was extended to places outside schools.

“For 21 consecutive months, Said made thousands of fraudulent reimbursement claims,” prosecutors said. “Each submission represented meals purportedly provided to underprivileged children, yet the listed children themselves were entirely fictitious.”

The government said Said hit the jackpot, using the stolen funds to buy a $1.2 million home, commercial real estate and an $87,000 pickup truck.

Said was convicted in 2025 alongside Aimee Bock, leader of the Minnesota nonprofit Feeding Our Future, who is serving a 42-year prison sentence for devising the scheme and was ordered to repay $242 million.

State auditors found that Minnesota’s education department received numerous complaints about Feeding Our Future but often told the group to police itself. Following relentless criticism from Trump over theft in federally funded programmes, Governor Tim Walz announced in January that he would not run for re-election.

Soaring gas prices and a war with Iran. Historically low approval ratings. A potential blue tsunami. A new rape allegation.

President Trump has a lot on his plate, and so too does the nation. Sunday, he took to Truth Social to address the people.

“Let’s talk about this COMPLETE AND TOTAL LOSER, Bill Maher,” the president wrote at the top of his longest post ever.

A fireside chat it was not.

The 1,300-word-plus screed was triggered by Friday’s episode of “Real Time With Bill Maher,” a mainstay on HBO since 2003. The comedian referred to Trump as a “lame duck” president with low approval ratings during a segment with his guest, former White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt.

Trump, 80, likely expected praise from his fellow curmudgeon Maher, 70, since the men had recently dined together at the White House. It was their second such date following a controversial get-together in March 2025, which Maher juiced for all it was worth in an effort to stand out from his fellow late-night hosts.

Maher’s chummy relationship with Trump has made him an outlier among his peers, many of whom have been in the president’s crosshairs.

CBS canceled Stephen Colbert’s show after decades on the air following pressure from Trump’s Federal Communications Commission chair. Trump has bitterly complained about being treated unfairly by Jimmy Kimmel and Seth Meyers. They, too, now have targets on their backs.

Maher has avoided the same fate by railing on Trump only half as much as his late-night peers, leaning into various MAGA grievances about the “woke” left and forging a fair-weather friendship with the second-term president.

If the Maher of 2003 could see himself now, he’d likely dedicate a searing monologue to the hypocrisy. The host was once positioned as an irreverent comedian whose political satire was guided by his no-BS take on Capitol Hill and American culture. Common sense over party fealty. Political correctness be damned.

But as the political landscape has shifted, so too has Maher’s approach.

Now he plays the role of a staunchly nonpartisan crank on TV while dining with the president in person.

“Yeah, I did it again, b—!” Maher said to his audience Friday. “I know. I’m the bad guy because I go and say face-to-face to the man the things you write in articles that he’ll never read, but OK. You know what? F— you. I like these dinners.”

So brave. So calculated.

Maher was dipping back into the attention he received in 2025, when he first dined with Trump and described the president as “gracious and measured.”

Their rendezvous was just the sort of thing the comedian would have mercilessly lampooned if he wasn’t in fact part of the joke. Fellow comedians such as Patton Oswalt have criticized the HBO host for placating Trump, while Larry David satirized Maher’s first date with the president in a New York Times essay titled “My Dinner With Adolf.”

The controversy was a boon for “Real Time,” boosting its waning relevance by putting Maher back in the news and reinforcing the tired charade that his fearlessness knows no bounds.

This week’s public skirmish was a repeat performance, if not a somewhat pathetic display of both men’s need to agitate for attention.

Maher told his audience on Friday’s episode that he spoke with the president about deadly ICE incidents, Ukraine and how Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was “dragging” Trump down. In closing, he assured the audience he was no pushover by poking at the president’s recent favorable dealings with Russia (a diesel deal, lifting sanctions), then saying, “I could not have been treated better if I was Russian.”

Given the president’s delicate psyche, Maher knew anything short of absolute praise would be perceived as an insult. As for the knock about Trump’s slumping approval numbers? A sure trigger.

In Sunday’s Truth Social manifesto, Trump referred to Maher as a “biased, dumb SLEAZEBAG” whose program is plagued by low ratings. The president also alleged that the comedian was drunk and had a drink in hand as he toured the White House on Oct. 15, and that Maher is a “major POTHEAD” who “looked like hell this time.”

So much for Trump’s initial comments about their meeting. He had told reporters that it was “a great dinner.”

“Bill Maher, I tell you what, he likes me a lot more than people understand,” Trump said. “And I actually like him.”

Not unlike Trump, Maher also enjoys praise, and blames the “woke left” when he doesn’t get it.

The typically smug host appeared upset earlier this year at the Golden Globes when presenter Wanda Sykes roasted him and another nominee up for best performance in stand-up comedy on television, Ricky Gervais.

“There’s some people pissed off that a queer Black woman is up here doing the job of two mediocre white guys,” Sykes said. “… But first, I want to give them some love.” Addressing Maher directly, she said, “You give us so much. But I would love a little less. Just try less.” The camera panned to a stone-faced Maher, who appeared “butthurt” (a term he likes using to dismiss the gripes of folks he gripes about).

The bruised feelings didn’t stop there. Later, on Maher’s “Club Random” podcast, he vented about being passed over by Hollywood.

“I’ve been nominated for 33 Emmys, and they would never give it to me,” he told his guest Joel Edgerton. “I speak freely, and this woke town f— hates that. That’s OK. I’ve made my peace with that, so I know how this goes.”

If Maher has been “soft-canceled” by the industry, as he claims, then Hollywood has a funny way of showing its disdain: HBO renewed “Real Time” through 2028.

Perhaps he learned from his frenemy Trump that grievance politics sells, and it’s time to cash in.

With six days to go before the November 3 midterm elections in the United States, Democrats are leading Republicans in national polls, but several key Senate races seem too close to call.

President Donald Trump has stepped up his campaigning, holding two Republican rallies in Texas on Tuesday before heading to Ohio on Wednesday. Ex-President Barack Obama and former Vice President Kamala Harris are also hitting the campaign trail in Georgia for the Democratic Party.

Here is what the latest polls say, what happened on the campaign trail and what to expect on Wednesday.

What do the latest polls suggest?

With less than a week to go before the midterms, a Reuters/Ipsos poll suggests the Democrats are ahead of the Republicans by nine points.

According to the October 22-26 survey, 47 percent of voters support the Democrats, compared with 36 percent who support the Republicans. When undecided voters’ leanings were taken into account, Democrats lead with 50 percent compared with Republicans’ 41 percent.

Trump’s approval rating improved by a percentage point to 32 percent, with 73 percent of US adults saying the cost of living was going in the wrong direction.

In Texas, where Democrats have not won a Senate election since 1988, James Talarico and Republican Ken Paxton are virtually tied in the polls.

Trump has made several trips to the state ahead of the midterms, but the polls indicate a much tighter race than the president has suggested.

“The good people of Texas have probably never seen so much of President Trump. Four visits in seven weeks, which, to put that into context, is twice as many as we saw at the comparable period leading up to the 2024 election, which perhaps shows just how concerned Republicans are,” Al Jazeera’s Phil Lavelle said, reporting from the Texas coastal city of Corpus Christi.

Lavelle said local analysis suggested more Republicans have voted early than Democrats, but Talarico has also been courting Republicans dissatisfied with Trump.

“That doesn’t mean Republicans are voting for Republican candidates,” Lavelle said.

In Michigan, Democrat Abdul El-Sayed and Republican Mike Rogers are also competing in a closely contested Senate race.

“I was a Republican forever, but I became an independent in the last two elections,” Michael Alexander, a Native American backing El-Sayed, told Al Jazeera.

“I don’t really vote for a party any more. I vote for who I think will do the best job.”

Kansas has not elected a Democrat to the Senate since 1932, but Republican incumbent Roger Marshall now faces a close contest against Democrat Adam Hamilton.

The race has brought Trump and his deputy, JD Vance, to the state.

“There’s a reason why we’re seeing not only US President Donald Trump but also Vice President JD Vance heading to Kansas because it’s actually in play,” Al Jazeera’s Patty Culhane said.

According to The Associated Press news agency, both parties and their allied groups have committed about $71m to campaign advertising in the Kansas race, making it the most expensive Senate contest in the state’s history.

What happened in the US midterm campaigns over the past 24 hours?

Trump addressed two campaign rallies in Texas on Tuesday in support of Paxton.

In Corpus Christi, Trump pointed to a tanker that he said was carrying one million barrels of Venezuelan oil and called it a win for his administration. He also suggested the idea of making Venezuela the 51st US state. The Trump administration has signed an oil deal with Venezuela’s interim leader, Delcy Rodriguez, after abducting socialist President Nicolas Maduro in a military operation in January.

Trump also announced plans to roll back the Biden-era restrictions on methane emissions from oil and gas production, stating that it would help bring down energy prices.

Fuel prices have become a huge election issue as the US-Israel war on Iran continues. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also joined Trump for a rare campaign-trail appearance in Texas.

In Alaska, Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski has backed Democrat Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins for governor rather than Bernadette Wilson, the Trump-endorsed candidate.

What’s next for Democrats and Republicans on Wednesday?

Trump heads to Ohio on Wednesday for his third rally in the state this month, as Republicans try to defend a Senate seat being challenged by former Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown.

The US president is scheduled to speak in Chillicothe at 23:00 GMT. Republican Senator Jon Husted, who took over Vance’s seat when he became vice president, is facing Brown, who is seeking a return to the Senate after losing his seat in 2024.

The two are in a closely contested race, with more than $400m spent or reserved for campaign advertising as of October 8, according to an Axios report.

Republicans are particularly concerned in Texas, Ohio, Kansas and Iowa, where even a few percentage points for a third party could swing the outcome.

Trump is scheduled to hold rallies in Ohio on Wednesday and Iowa on Sunday.

Vance will be in Kinston, North Carolina, campaigning for Republican Senate candidate Michael Whatley, who is running against former Democratic Governor Roy Cooper. The vice president is expected to speak at 16:30 GMT.

In Georgia, former President Obama will campaign in Atlanta alongside Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff and gubernatorial candidate Keisha Lance Bottoms at 20:00 GMT.

Ossoff is running against Republican Mike Collins, while Bottoms faces Republican Rick Jackson in the governor’s race. Trump won Georgia in the 2024 presidential election.

Former Vice President Harris also begins a three-day visit to Georgia on Wednesday, with early in-person voting due to end on Friday, October 30.

In Wisconsin, Marquette Law School will publish its latest statewide poll at 18:15 GMT.

Wednesday’s poll will also examine voters’ views on inflation, tariffs, the US-Israel war on Iran and Trump’s presidency.

Oct. 28, 2026 3:13 AM PT

Donald Trump could be in the White House for as long as another 26 interminable months, which is beyond depressing. But Democrats are mobilizing to use that time wisely if they win at least one congressional majority in midterm elections next week.

The odds are good that as of January 2027, they will be in charge of the House, and they’re slight favorites to run the Senate. If voters punish Republicans with a thumping (George W. Bush’s description in 2006) or a shellacking (Barack Obama in 2010), a few GOP lawmakers might even decide to help Democrats undo some of the damage inflicted by their president and party.

Steep cuts in federal healthcare money, price-hiking tariffs across the globe and Trump’s inflationary war on Iran are among the targets ripe for rapid action in the first 100 hours of a Democratic House, and potentially in a Democratic Senate as well.

Who knows what Trump would do or say if an actual bill were to land on his desk. When Congress passed a major bipartisan bill to lower housing costs this year, he called it a yawn and let it become law without his signature. But in 2019, he refused to work with Democrats on an infrastructure bill — purportedly one of his own priorities — unless they stopped their “phony investigations” of him. They did not stop, and we did not get an infrastructure package until the Biden administration.

If those first-term investigations annoyed Trump, he’ll be livid at what’s on tap for the next two years. Constant reports of corruption and profiteering are a hallmark of his second term, and Democrats are readying literally countless investigations of him and his family, and their businesses and associates. Democratic Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland and Robert Garcia of California know each other well (Garcia says he sees Raskin as a mentor) and are discussing their plans in the likely event they become chairs, respectively, of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees.

The to-do list is daunting, starting with Trump’s scandalous and seemingly pay-to-play pardons, his foreign gifts, and the Trump family’s government contracts and cryptocurrency cash haul. Other areas of interest include vindictive government prosecutions, penalties and threats; foreign influence-buying; rising authoritarianism; civil liberties; abusive immigration enforcement; corporate corruption; unfinished inquiries involving Jeffrey Epstein associates; and suspect tariff deals, conflicts and profits.

Former Republican Kurt Bardella was a senior House Oversight Committee advisor and communications specialist from 2009 to 2013, during California Republican Darrell Issa’s tenure as chair. A Democrat since 2017, these days Bardella is closely following Trump-era corruption and how Democrats are handling it in his newsletters, “The Watchdog Report” and “The Agenda.”

“The success of these investigations really comes down to how you message and communicate to the American people,” Bardella said in a weekend interview. “You have to spend the first part of this building the case. Telling the story.” The story, he said, is “the level of corruption we’re seeing” and its cost to every American. As one of his newsletter headlines reads, “Every Trump investigation needs a price tag.”

Bardella has suggested that House committee chairs report to an “oversight czar” to avoid chaos and competition. He has also prescribed a “Special Select Committee to Investigate Trump Family Finances” to coordinate the many committees that would need to be involved in addition to Oversight or Judiciary — for instance, Armed Services (sweetheart defense contracts), Ways and Means (Trump’s IRS slush fund and other tax shenanigans), and let’s not forget Don Jr.’s Bahamas wedding, bankrolled by a Russian oligarch (Foreign Affairs, or maybe Intelligence?).

Democrats should also hire former special counsel Jack Smith as top investigator for the Oversight or Judiciary panels, or for both as a joint employee, Bardella wrote in July: “Let him assemble an anti-corruption mod squad that’ll shake up the status quo, send MAGA media into a nervous breakdown, and restore checks and balances to our government.”

That may remain a Never-Trump fantasy, but Democrats are taking appropriate steps for a complex mission. They are organizing their work through a House Litigation Task Force formed to fight unlawful or unconstitutional Trump actions, demanding answers as new corruption issues arise, and preparing to build cases based on information from whistleblowers, private-sector players and other sources.

The investigations will unfold as the 2028 presidential race takes shape. It seems inevitable that, like the Jan. 6 investigation, they will generate revealing hearings and a stream of viral moments. “We are going to hold the crooks accountable,” likely Speaker Hakeem Jeffries pledged last summer in Pennsylvania.

Democrats can also pass message bills that put their legislative priorities on blast — ICE restrictions, a stock trading ban, a higher minimum wage — even if they can’t yet become law. Depending on results Tuesday, the messaging could extend to a Democratic Senate that can block Trump judicial nominees, Supreme Court justices included, and tell America exactly why they’re nonstarters.

Ideally, what happens on Capitol Hill for the next two years will give Democratic White House hopefuls bragging rights on programs and policies most people actually want, as well as a foundation — and launchpad — for the sweeping, urgently needed accountability that has been such a long time coming.

I’m itching to conclude here with “bring it on.” It’s too soon, but in a week or so it might not be.

Jill Lawrence is a journalist and the author of “The Art of the Political Deal: How Congress Beat the Odds and Broke Through Gridlock.” Bluesky: @jilldlawrence

The media reports come a day after Supreme Court ordered Bolsonaro hand over passport as part of money laundering probe.

A senior US State Department official has said that the Trump administration will issue visas to Brazilian Senator Flavio Bolsonaro and his family, allowing them to enter the US after news outlets reported that Bolsonaro had fled Brazil following his loss in the country’s presidential election.

The news came on Tuesday, one day after Brazil’s Supreme Court ordered Bolsonaro to turn over his passports as part of a probe into alleged money laundering. Bolsonaro has denied any wrongdoing and said on Monday that he would stay in the country and lead the opposition.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who has previously accused members of the Bolsonaro family of courting US interference in Brazilian affairs for their political benefit, called the right-wing senator’s actions shameful.

“This is what the Bolsonaro family is like,” Lula said. “Brazil is their second nation, the US is their first.”

Bolsonaro, the son of former right-wing president Jair Bolsonaro, initially refused to acknowledge the election results and said he would seek their annulment. His party released a statement on Monday saying it accepted the results of the election, which the conservative candidate lost by more than 4.4 million votes.

US President Donald Trump reacted by casting doubt on the election result, telling reporters it “looked like another rigged election”.

No evidence has emerged that the vote was marred by malfeasance. While critics seized on a last-minute decision to extend polling hours, Lula’s eventual victory was commanding, and the extension was unlikely to change the outcome.

US president seeks to underscore Latin American military operation, as Iran war causes midterm affordability threat.

United States President Donald Trump has featured a ship he said is carrying Venezuelan oil during a visit to Texas, where he will hold two rallies one after the other in the hopes of boosting Republican chances in a make-or-break Senate race.

Speaking at Corpus Christi on Tuesday on his fourth trip to the state this campaign season, Trump pointed to a ship in the distance.

“It’s got 1 million barrels of oil on it from Venezuela,” he said, adding the cargo was “thanks to our big victory in our recent war with Venezuela”.

The emphasis on the oil comes as US consumers have wrestled with high fossil fuel prices amid the US-Israel war with Iran, a key issue in the upcoming midterm elections.

“We’re celebrating the greatest oil victory in history,” Trump said.

It was not immediately clear under what pretext the oil had been shipped or whether the details Trump gave were correct. The US had received crude oil shipments from Venezuela before the US abduction of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro on January 3, but those transfers have increased this year.

In August, the Trump administration announced a deal giving the Pentagon a 35 percent stake in North America Blue Energy Partners, a new company overseeing 65 billion barrels of proven oil reserves. The White House said in September that the first shipment from the deal would likely hit US reserves in November, although experts have cast doubt on whether the deal will have any short-term impact.

Speaking to reporters earlier in the day, Trump referred to the shipment as a “gift” from Venezuela. The country’s interim leader, Delcy Rodriguez, has not commented on the specific shipment.

At the rally, Trump also floated making Venezuela the “51st state”.

Key race

Trump’s frequent visits to Texas underscore the state’s significance for Republicans.

Trump endorsed Attorney General Ken Paxton in the Republican primary over incumbent Senator John Cornyn. The scandal-ridden Paxton now faces a punishing contest against Democrat James Talarico, a Presbyterian seminarian.

Polls have regularly shown Talarico leading Paxton, although that lead has largely remained within the margin of error. A RealClearPolitics average of polls had Talarico leading Paxton by 1.7 points.

Talarico’s victory would mark a sea change in a state that has not elected a Democrat to statewide office since 1994.

It would also represent a major rebuke to Trump, whose Republican Party is fighting to maintain its narrow control of the Senate. Democrats are widely projected to take control of the US House of Representatives in the November 3 vote.

Talarico has used the final stretch of the race to focus on years of corruption allegations against Paxton, while drawing a contrast to voters’ affordability concerns.

“Ken Paxton represents everything that’s wrong with this broken, corrupt system,” he said during an event in Houston last week.

Paxton has sought to portray Talarico as too “radical” for Texas, saying his policies would hurt a state known for its pro-business policies.

Trump and other administration officials, notably Vice President JD Vance, have regularly focused on cultural issues, distorting Talarico’s past comments on transgender rights and border security.

Speaking in Corpus Christi, Trump repeated those attacks and urged his supporters to vote as if he were on the ballot.

“If you go out, and if you all vote, we win in a landslide,” Trump said.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is attempting to prosecute James Comey for what it calls a decade-old leak of classified information, an effort the former FBI director’s lawyers immediately dismissed as legally invalid and outside the legal time limit for when the Justice Department can file a criminal indictment.

The allegations from the Justice Department were revealed Monday in newly unsealed court documents that shed light on a closed-door fight that represents an unmistakable escalation in the administration’s targeting of Comey, a longtime critic and foe of President Trump who has faced two other criminal cases since the Republican returned to the White House last year.

The effort to prosecute Comey is also part of a series of politically charged investigative actions the department has undertaken in the run-up to next week’s midterm elections.

“Well, they’re back — again,” Comey said in a video statement Monday. “It would almost be funny if it weren’t such an appalling abuse of the Department of Justice — one that we cannot become numb to. Nothing’s changed with me; I’m still innocent, I’m still not afraid of these people — and I still believe in the independent federal judiciary.”

The Justice Department said it had filed what’s known as a “criminal information” to extend the statute of limitations for charges in the case.

“Filing a criminal information to toll the statute of limitations is a widely recognized practice in federal court and has been approved by multiple Circuit Courts of Appeals. This is an ongoing criminal investigation, and we will not comment further,” a department spokesperson said.

Asked about the Comey case, Trump told reporters upon arriving back to Joint Base Andrews in Maryland late Monday following his rally in Mississippi that “I don’t know much about it. I just heard about it.”

He added, “He’s a dirty cop, James Comey. But I know nothing about it.”

An information can be filed without the approval of a judge or a grand jury’s finding of probable cause to a court. Comey’s lawyers made clear that they intend to fight the charges as invalid because the Justice Department did not file an indictment, which must be voted on by a grand jury, inside the 10-year statute of limitations required under the law.

“For the third time in little more than one year, the Department of Justice has attempted to charge Mr. Comey with a federal crime. Mr. Comey steadfastly maintains his innocence,” his attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, said in a statement.

The allegation was previously investigated

The latest allegation concerns an October 2016 New York Times story related to a secret court order that required Yahoo to scan emails for messages potentially linked to a foreign terrorist organization. The story cited two government officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity about the order from a judge on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that Yahoo was barred from publicly disclosing.

Federal authorities, including prosecutor John Durham, began investigating the disclosure in early 2017. Durham, who later investigated the FBI’s conduct as it scrutinized potential ties between Russia and Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, wrote a classified memo in December 2018 recommending no criminal charges against anyone in connection with the disclosure, Comey’s attorneys said in a recent court filing.

In January 2019, the U.S. Attorney’s office for the District of Columbia opened a second investigation of the same matter under the code name “Tropical Vortex.” But that investigation was closed without any charges filed in February 2020.

“Both times the Government determined that no charges should be brought against anyone. Now, ten years after the article was published, the Government filed an “Information” against Mr. Comey that was not approved by a judge nor issued by a grand jury. It purports to charge Mr. Comey with crimes that he did not commit,” Fitzgerald said.

Prosecutors in a newly unsealed filing said investigators found evidence that Comey “sought to correct misinformation which had appeared in the press by way of Reuters the day before” that New York Times story was published, directed his staff to speak to a journalist at the newspaper related to accuracy concerns “and thereby illegally transferred classified information.”

The criminal information was filed under seal on Oct. 5, 10 years after the 2016 story was published. “But,” Comey’s lawyers said, “the applicable statute of limitations explicitly demands an indictment within 10 years of the offense; an information does not suffice.”

They have asked a judge to dismiss the information, a request that is still pending.

Trump and Comey have a long and uneasy history

The first criminal case against Comey, filed in federal court in Virginia, accused him of having lied to Congress in 2020 but was dismissed by a judge who concluded that the prosecutor who brought the charges was illegally appointed. A separate pending indictment charges the former FBI director with threatening Trump through an Instagram photo of seashells in the numerical arrangement of “86 47,” a case Comey has sought to dismiss.

The prosecutions are part of a Trump retribution campaign that has even extended to Comey’s daughter, Maurene, who was fired from her job as a Justice Department prosecutor in New York last year in a termination that a federal judge on Monday ruled was illegal.

Comey was the FBI director when Trump took office in 2017, having been appointed by then-President Barack Obama, a Democrat, and serving before that as a senior Justice Department official in President George W. Bush’s Republican administration.

But the relationship was strained from the start, including after Comey resisted a request by Trump at a private dinner to pledge his personal loyalty to the president — an overture that so unnerved the FBI director that he documented it in a contemporaneous memorandum.

Trump fired Comey in May 2017 amid an FBI investigation into potential ties between Russia and Trump’s campaign. That inquiry, later taken over by special counsel Robert Mueller, found that while Russia interfered in the 2016 election and the Trump team welcomed the help, there was insufficient evidence to prove a criminal collaboration.

The two men have been bitterly at odds ever since Comey’s firing.

Comey in 2018 published a memoir, “A Higher Loyalty,” that painted Trump in deeply unflattering ways, likening him to a mafia don and characterizing him as “untethered to truth.” Trump, for his part, has repeatedly claimed that Comey should face charges for “treason” — an accusation Comey dismissed as “dumb lies” — and called him an “untruthful slime ball.”

The Justice Department has made a series of splashy moves in recent weeks , including a criminal complaint last Friday charging two former FBI officials with lying to Congress about their participation in investigations concerning Hunter Biden, and the search by federal agents of the Washington home of Democratic congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota.

Tucker, Richer and Kunzelman write for the Associated Press. AP writer Will Weissert contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge agreed Monday to extend an order blocking the Trump administration’s renovation plans for a century-old public golf course in the nation’s capital.

U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes issued a preliminary injunction that temporarily bars the government from removing or damaging any additional trees on the East Potomac Golf Course. The administration must give 10 days’ notice in writing before making any “irreparable modification” to any “forms or features” of the course while the lawsuit is active.

“The Court earlier stated, ‘I am not the Lorax. I do not speak for the trees.’ The Court still does not speak for the trees. It speaks only for the rule of law,” Reyes wrote.

Reyes expressed astonishment that the government has asked her to “not to believe the sitting President” and disregard Trump’s statements about his plans for the golf course renovations.

“This started as a case about golf. That good walk spoiled. But it has become much more,” Reyes wrote. “It now forces the Court to reconcile assertions by President Donald J. Trump with the sworn testimony of multiple government employees and the argument of senior Department of Justice attorneys.”

On Oct. 18, Trump announced plans on social media to close the golf course for 15 months, starting Nov. 15, and redevelop the 106-year-old park and course despite a court challenge by the D.C. Preservation League and two golfers. A day later, Trump posted that the work would start immediately.

Reyes, who was nominated to the bench by Democratic President Biden, previously ordered the administration to suspend work on the project until at least Oct. 26.

Trump was asked about the case late Monday night as he arrived back at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland following a rally in Mississippi and indicated that work on the golf course will proceed as planned.

“It has the go-ahead. The judge feels that she would like to approve it as it goes along. And I didn’t know she was an architectural critic of golf courses,” Trump said sarcastically.

He added of the judge: “She knows nothing about that, so we’ll appeal that” while also calling his planned overhaul a “beautiful project for Washington, D.C.”

Trump later in a social media post reiterated a statement he made Oct. 18 that the course would close for 15 months. “We are closing the East Potomac Golf Course Site as scheduled on November 15th in order to renovate and rebuild for Competitive (with other such projects!), Safety, Modernization, and Aesthetic reasons,” he wrote.

The plaintiffs challenging the project, DC Preservation League and two golfers, claim the work is inflicting irreversible damage. At a hearing, the judge excoriated the government after workers cut down at least 400 trees over a holiday weekend with little notice to the plaintiffs.

The course renovation project is part of the Republican president’s aggressive campaign to leave his personal imprint on Washington’s historic landscape. Those plans include construction of a huge ballroom at the White House, a massive arch and the creation of a National Garden of American Heroes in West Potomac Park. DC Preservation League is part of a coalition of organizations, including the Cultural Landscape Foundation and one D.C. resident, who have filed lawsuit challenging those plans.

Reyes rejected the administration’s request for her to recuse herself from the case. The government questioned her impartiality and accused her of engaging in “egregious” behavior from the bench during an emergency hearing in the case.

In Monday’s ruling Reyes stressed that she had hoped the parties could have resolved their dispute without judicial intervention. She noted that she had denied plaintiffs’ previous requests.

“The Court would much prefer not to have to resolve Lorax v. Once‑ler redux. Indeed, for months, the Court declined to intervene,” she wrote.

But she said the government forced her hand by bulldozing hundreds of trees without any notice, doing “what it assured all it would not do.”

Reyes quoted from a golf-related opinion written by the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a conservative icon, in stressing the temporary nature of her own decision.

“Here, golf and government have again clashed,” Reyes wrote. “By issuing this preliminary injunction, the Court does not end the round: it simply marks the ball until the parties can fully and fairly litigate this case.

Democracy Forward President & CEO Skye Perryman, whose organization is co-counsel representing the plaintiffs, called the ruling “a big win that will rightly protect East Potomac Park from further irreparable harm.” She added, in an email, that the move will stop activities “while the case continues, and we are eager to argue the case in court.”

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press. AP reporters Gary Fields and Will Weissert contributed to this report.

The political party of Senator Flavio Bolsonaro has acknowledged the result of Brazil’s presidential run-off, despite the right-wing candidate pledging to annul the outcome.

On Monday, Valdemar Costa Neto, the leader of the right-wing Liberal Party, issued a statement saying his political group had accepted the outcome of the vote.

Still, he echoed Bolsonaro’s concerns about the circumstances surrounding the election.

“We recognise the presidential election results,” Costa Neto said. “But we believe the issues raised need to be properly clarified.”

On Sunday, Bolsonaro was defeated by left-wing incumbent President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva by a margin of more than 4.4 million votes.

Bolsonaro has yet to formally concede. In a post-election speech, he called the election results “unacceptable”, citing a last-minute extension to voting hours.

“We will take legal action,” he told supporters. “I will request that these elections be annulled.”

An extension to Sunday’s vote had been sought by the campaigns of both candidates — but for different reasons.

Bolsonaro’s camp had pointed to inclement weather that impeded some voters from reaching polling stations. Parts of southern Brazil, considered a right-wing stronghold, had experienced heavy rains on Sunday.

Lula’s campaign, meanwhile, pushed for longer voting hours after it accused some cities of limiting public transportation on election day.

The left-wing leader’s allies framed those reductions in service as an attempt at election interference, aimed at preventing Lula’s working-class base from voting.

Media reports indicated that Pablo Souza, a transportation official in the city of Salvador, was arrested on Sunday over the matter.

In response to the petitions, Supreme Court Justice Cristiano Zanin agreed to extend voting by two hours.

Whereas polls across the country had been slated to close at 5pm Brasilia time (20:00 GMT), Zanin’s order allowed those that had not already closed to remain open until 7pm (22:00 GMT).

Following his loss, Bolsonaro cried foul, saying that the justice’s decision had disadvantaged his voters.

He pointed to Zanin’s relationship with Lula as support: Lula had appointed Zanin to the high court in 2023, and Zanin had formerly served as the left-wing politician’s personal lawyer.

“With a simple stroke of a pen, at the request of a former partner, [Zanin] changed the rules of the game mid-match,” Bolsonaro said in his address on Sunday night.

But experts signalled they were sceptical of Bolsonaro’s claims of malfeasance.

An analysis by Pedro Burgos, a professor at the Brazilian educational institute Insper, found that the extension resulted in 35,000 additional votes across the country, less than 0.03 percent of the total.

That amount was far short of Lula’s 4.4 million vote advantage. The incumbent won more than 64.25 million votes, compared with Bolsonaro’s 59.83 million.

Still, some right-wing allies rallied to Bolsonaro’s support. US President Donald Trump, who has clashed with Lula in the past, told reporters that the vote seemed “rigged”.

“Elections have to be indisputable and it looked very bad to me,” Trump said on Monday. “It looked like another rigged election, frankly.”

Still, Trump stopped short of suggesting that he would get involved on behalf of Bolsonaro, saying instead he “did not take sides” in the election.

Bolsonaro’s refusal to accept his loss has raised concerns about whether he will abide by the democratic process or follow in the footsteps of his father, Jair Bolsonaro, who served as Brazil’s president from 2019 to 2023.

After his defeat to Lula in the 2022 election, the ex-president refused to acknowledge the outcome.

Instead, he and his allies sought to overturn the results, including through a legal challenge, and prosecutors accused him of plotting a coup to prevent the legal transfer of power.

Jair Bolsonaro is currently serving a 27-year prison sentence on coup-related charges.

Separately, he was also barred from serving in public office for eight years, after a court found he had misused his public office to spread misinformation about the election.

Flavio Bolsonaro, along with his siblings, has sought to have his father released. The family has denounced the elder Bolsonaro’s trial as a case of political persecution.

Still, it is unclear whether Flavio Bolsonaro will continue with his legal challenge over Sunday’s election.

The Brazilian news outlet Folha de S Paulo reported on Monday that legal advisers and political allies have convinced Bolsonaro to abandon his quest to have his loss annulled, citing the large margin of Lula’s victory and its validation by the Supreme Court and election authorities.

Bolsonaro also announced on Monday that federal police asked him to hand over his passports amid speculation that he could leave the country following his loss.

He said that he would comply with the order and had no plans to leave.

“To withstand the chaos, I’m going to organise the opposition,” the right-wing politician said.

BREAKINGBREAKING,

Comey, who was fired during Trump’s first term, has been accused of unlawfully divulging national security information

James Comey, the former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), is facing a third set of criminal charges under the administration of United States President Donald Trump.

On Monday, sealed documents came to light showing that the Trump administration accused Comey of two counts related to the unlawful dissemination of “information related to national defence”.

Comey, a high-profile Trump critic, has not been indicted in the case. He has denied any wrongdoing.

But it is the third time the Trump administration has sought to level a criminal case against the former FBI director since the president returned to office in January 2025.

In a video on the online platform Substack, Comey once again denounced the Trump administration’s attempts to prosecute him as a campaign of political retribution.

“Well, now they’re back again. it would almost be funny if it weren’t such an appalling abuse of the Department of Justice, one that we cannot become numb to,” Comey said.

“Nothing’s changed with me. I’m still innocent, and I’m still not afraid of these people, and I still believe in the independent federal judiciary.”

He also noted that Trump is only midway through his second term, and he hinted that he expects more criminal charges to come.

“The next couple years are going to be hard for all of us,” Comey added. “It’s really important that we stand straight and keep the faith in America.”

More details to come.

WASHINGTON — President Trump offered $1 million Monday to anyone who reports voter fraud that leads to an arrest and conviction, escalating his efforts to cast doubt on the midterms as Republicans risk losing control of Congress.

“Anybody reporting Voter Fraud in the past Elections, or the upcoming 2026 Midterm Election, will be paid $1,000,000 upon the arrest and conviction of those that created the Fraud!” Trump posted on Truth Social.

The offer comes as the Trump administration has moved more aggressively to intervene in the midterms, including an effort in Alaska to invalidate a potential Democratic victory in a U.S. Senate race and a push in California to segregate ballots from voters the administration considers likely non-citizens.

Trump did not say how the tips should be submitted to the federal government or who would decide whether a claim qualifies for a reward. The White House declined to comment beyond Trump’s social media post.

Last week, the administration launched a separate program that is meant to pay people for providing information to the administration to combat fraud. When announcing it, Trump said he would personally decide who gets paid.

“I will be the arbitrator of all of these decisions,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “In other words, I’ll determine whether or not the person is deserving, and I’ll determine, and I will be very generous.”

It is unclear whether Trump, who has spread false claims about the nation’s voting systems and routinely questions the integrity of the elections, intends to play a similar role over the voter fraud tipping system.

In the lead up to the midterms, Trump has tried to assert more control over the elections, calling on Republicans to “nationalize” voting and pushing for restrictions on mail-in ballots. Trump has also cast doubt over the integrity of California’s primary election, claiming without evidence that Democrat cheated — an allegation that was investigated by the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles, which is run by a Trump loyalist.

Even as Trump says he wants “honesty in our elections,” the president told supporters at the Republican Party convention in Dallas in September to “cheat like hell, like they do.”

Trump’s efforts to cast doubt over voting come as polls show Republicans facing headwinds heading into the Nov. 3 election as Trump’s popularity sags amid voter concerns over the economy.

As Trump has tried to rally supporters in red states, he has also vowed to give every American adult $5,000 if Republican retain control of Congress. The promise drew bipartisan criticism, with some even calling the idea a potential bribe.

El-Sayed’s opponents have sought to link him to the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist organisation that was founded in Egypt. Trump designated certain chapters of it as Foreign Terrorist Organisations earlier this year.

Some of the scrutiny of the affiliations of El-Sayed and his family members relates to their writings from more than a decade ago.

A social media post, external in 2012 by El-Sayed’s half-sister, Eman Abdelhadi, appeared to refer to the movement, saying “my family has long been MB”. El-Sayed’s team have previously distanced him from other comments by Abdelhadi.

Critics have also pointed to an opinion piece El-Sayed wrote in Huffington Post in 2011, external about pro-democracy protesters in Egypt. In it, he acknowledged concerns that “supporting democracy in Egypt might allow the country to fall to the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood”.

A year later he also allegedly signed an open letter by Egyptian Americans. In it, the group urged Mohamed Morsi, Egypt’s first democratically elected president and a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, to “purge the media and police” following the toppling of the authoritarian regime in the Arab Spring. This letter has not been discussed by El-Sayed.

El-Sayed has previously denied any connection to the Muslim Brotherhood and has stressed his loyalty to the United States. Asked recently at a town hall event whether he would disavow the organisation, he responded: “Absolutely.”

Also in 2012, El-Sayed’s current opponent Rogers, who was then a US representative and chairing the House Intelligence Committee, appeared to call for cautious engagement with the Muslim Brotherhood, telling Reuters, external: “Do I think there are moderate Muslim Brotherhood individuals we are going to have to reach out to and talk to? Yes but we are going to have to watch it carefully.”

HA Hellyer, senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) and an expert on Egypt, says the row has more to do with Islamophobia on the political right in the US than with the Trump administration’s actual position on the Muslim Brotherhood.

“If the accusation is to be taken sincerely, then [Trump] should surely have a problem with engaging with any government that has engaged positively with the Brotherhood or with groups that are even more to the right of the Brotherhood,” Hellyer told the BBC. “He clearly has not done that.”

The plaintiffs argue they are losing access to vital information media outlets covering Trump used to provide.

A group of private citizens has sued the administration of United States President Donald Trump over its restrictions on news outlets covering the White House.

“All of the Plaintiffs rely on the White House press corps for independent reporting about the president and his administration, and all of them use that reporting in a variety of ways in their scholarship, teaching, journalism, or advocacy,” says the lawsuit, filed on Monday in a federal court in New York.

The lawsuit is the first lodged not by the news outlets being banned, but by those who consume the news and rely on it for their work.

The plaintiffs include a human rights advocate, a media watchdog, a university history professor, a high school teacher, a legal journalist and a student journalist.

Each argues they need unbiased, diverse media reporting from the White House to do their work.

“I’m gravely concerned that the Trump administration’s restrictions on White House reporters are cutting off access to crucial information,” Peter Schmidt-Nowara, a high school social studies teacher in New York City, said in a statement.

“I joined this lawsuit because my students deserve to know what’s happening in their government and to hear from a free and independent press.”

Trump already faces several legal challenges to his practice of banning journalists from outlets he dislikes from accessing the White House.

Last month, he banned journalists from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from attending news conferences at the White House. A federal judge later ruled the order was unconstitutional, a violation of the First Amendment, which protects freedom of the press, and ordered access be restored. However, the Trump administration continues to fight the ruling.

Last week, Trump dismissed reporting that he planned to evict journalists from the White House press briefing room and restore a swimming pool that was housed there starting in 1933. But he said he is still considering moving the press out of the briefing room.

“I am thinking about moving the Press, and putting them in a different location, but I will use that location for very badly needed space,” Trump said in a social media post.

Kenneth Roth, a senior fellow at Yale University and former executive director of Human Rights Watch, said the restrictions on press access were familiar postmarks in countries whose leaders have become authoritarian.

“Worldwide, I have seen how governmental leaders’ efforts to penalise independent journalists are a prelude to the rise of autocracy,” he said in a statement.

Oct. 26, 2026 9:23 AM PT

NEW YORK — The Trump administration last year illegally fired Maurene Comey, the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, from her job as a federal prosecutor in New York, a federal judge ruled Monday.

Maurene Comey, who was an assistant U.S. attorney for a decade, was illegally fired in July 2025 despite her work on some of the nation’s highest-profile cases and consistently receiving “the highest accolades from supervisors and peers alike,” Judge Jesse M. Furman found.

After her firing, Comey sued the Justice Department and others, saying her termination violated the constitutional separation of powers, the 1st Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the 5th Amendment.

She asserted that she was fired because she was the daughter of James Comey, whom President Trump has long viewed as an enemy, or because of her perceived political affiliation and beliefs, the judge noted.

Furman rejected the government’s claim that Comey could be fired because federal prosecutors exercise the president’s “conclusive and preclusive” powers.

He said the government’s claim that Congress is barred from regulating the removal of federal prosecutors “flies in the face of nearly two centuries of Supreme Court precedent.”

Furman added: “Indeed, to accept Defendants’ argument would be to unsettle the very equilibrium established by this Nation’s constitutional system.”

The firing violated the separation of powers, the Administrative Procedure Act and her 5th Amendment due process and statutory rights, the judge ruled.

Furman reserved judgment on Comey’s 1st Amendment claim pending further arguments to be submitted by each side, though he said he was inclined to dismiss the claim because it was largely moot since she is now in private practice and no longer seeks actual reinstatement.

The judge granted Comey retroactive reinstatement and back pay from the date of her firing through Dec. 20 to “make her whole” and ensure that she doesn’t suffer adverse employment consequences for the “unlawful termination.”

Comey’s lawyers, Ellen Blain, Nicole Gueron, Deepa Vanamali and Margaret Donovan, lauded the ruling.

“This hard-earned victory belongs to Ms. Comey, to all civil servants, and to all fighting for the rule of law,” they said in a statement. “As the Court correctly held, to accept the government’s argument about unlimited executive power ‘would be to unsettle the very equilibrium established by this Nation’s constitutional system.’ This decision reaffirms our bedrock system of checks and balances: the President is not above the law.”

The Justice Department didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment.

The Justice Department during the Trump administration has fired scores of career employees, including prosecutors and FBI agents, who participated in investigations of President Trump or who were perceived as opposed to the administration’s agenda. Some of those firings have also resulted in federal lawsuits.

The firing of Maurene Comey was seen as particularly personal, given her father’s longtime adversarial relationship with Trump.

The president fired James Comey as FBI director in May 2017 as the bureau was investigating ties between Russia and the Republican’s successful 2016 campaign for the White House. Trump in the years since has repeatedly called for Comey to be jailed, and his Justice Department has worked with mixed success to make that happen.

An earlier criminal case accusing James Comey of having lied to Congress in 2020 was dismissed by a judge who concluded that the prosecutor who filed the charges was illegally appointed. A separate pending indictment charges the former FBI director with threatening Trump through an Instagram photo of seashells in the numerical arrangement of “86 47,” a case he has sought to dismiss that some legal experts have greeted with skepticism.

Sisak, Tucker, Durkin Richer and Neumeister write for the Associated Press. Tucker and Durkin Richer reported from Washington.

My fellow Californians, let us begin with an intelligence test.

Our great state has been voting since early October. Folks have been mailing in their ballots, dropping them off at collection sites and even showing up at in-person centers.

So raise your hand if you know — or even just assume — elections officials have been doing something with those ballots as they arrive, other than just throwing them in a pile.

Congratulations, hand-raisers. You are now officially smarter than the entire U.S. Department of Justice. Or at least more honest.

On Sunday, the lawyers for the DOJ managed to get a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit to convene a rare emergency hearing because, OMG, people are actually voting and California is processing ballots!

Who could have possibly known?

Even though it’s literally law that counties count ballots in a timely manner; even though it’s happened in every other election; even though the daily tallies of how many ballots are received are posted online by the secretary of State; even though there are live camera feeds of ballots being processed in Los Angeles — somehow the U.S. government didn’t know this normal election procedure was happening, it claimed.

It wasn’t until late Friday, when DOJ lawyers read a filing by California DOJ lawyers laying out that L.A. is, like, actually opening mail-in ballots, that the U.S. DOJ realized that ballots are being opened. About 600,000 so far in L.A.

That seemed “absurd on its face,” argued California Deputy Solicitor Gen. Samuel P. Siegel.

Armed with this previously unknowable information, Trump’s lawyers were begging the appeals court to take their flimsy, constitutionally questionable case away from the judge who had already promised to rule on their requests on Tuesday and immediately give them an injunction to further their election conspiracy claims.

Most folks are aware of the background of this drama, but here’s the quick recap.

President Trump for years has falsely but incessantly claimed that Democrats are colluding with undocumented people to help them sneak into the country in exchange for illegally voting in mass numbers for Democrats. This is not happening, but the president is obsessed with this conspiracy, so much so that he is weaponizing the Department of Justice to attack states, California in particular, in a bid to prove his delusions correct, and perhaps as a bonus, undermine democracy.

A few months ago, the DOJ came to the state of California and claimed it had a list of 190,000 people it believed were illegally registered to vote. That list has since dropped to 20,000. But with all the investigative power of the government hard at work on this, only 28 people in California have been indicted by the feds during this no-holds-barred effort, and it looks as though not all of those cases will hold up.

Undeterred, Trump lawyers tried to get a California judge to order the state (and Los Angeles) to set aside ballots that it claims to have doubts about. They asked the judge in that case for a temporary restraining order forcing L.A. County to do that, and the judge agreed to rule on that request early next week, in an already-expedited fashion.

But then the Trump lawyers learned about all that ballot processing and demanded the judge instead rule by Saturday afternoon — though the reasoning here seems iffy. When the federal judge assigned to the case didn’t rule by Saturday, an absurd ask that didn’t even allow enough time for lawyers to file briefs, the feds ran to the 9th Circuit, claiming that failing to rule on Saturday was a de facto denial of their request.

Basically, it seems the Trump lawyers were arguing two things. First, that once ballots are counted, they can’t be uncounted, and if there are illegal ballots, that hurts all voters. Sure, OK.

But again, there is no evidence this is happening in any widespread fashion, and the lists of potential vote scofflaws compiled by the government have been shown to be error-ridden. They may also involve the use of a mysterious non-government “third party” to gather the information that not even the Trump lawyers could identify Sunday.

DOJ lawyers also claimed they had just learned that once a ballot is taken out of the envelope, there was no way to reconnect that ballot to the voter who cast it — because our votes are anonymous. Therefore, the 20,000 ballots had to be grabbed before they were separated from the documents inside.

The lawyers did not explain why they needed to know how a person voted to confirm they illegally voted. The envelopes are retained by county elections officials, but apparently the Trump lawyers feel it’s critical to tie them to particular votes.

But here’s the thing — there are simply not enough illegal voters to sway a Los Angeles election, or a California one for that matter. We have a system to ferrets out problematic ballots right now, and a separate criminal system that can hold illegal voters accountable. Two weeks before an election isn’t a time to demand ballots be withheld — unless you’re trying to undermine trust.

The appellate judges did not seem impressed by the federal laywers’ arguments, questioning more than once if the 9th Circuit even had jurisdiction since states are in charge of elections, not the federal government. There was even some reading of the 10th Amendment. You know, the one the don’t-tread-on-me types love that reads: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States.”

We should expect a ruling sooner rather than later, but the real question remains, why the emergency? The DOJ is involved in another voting lawsuit in Washington, D.C., where the plaintiffs, led by the UCLA Voting Rights Project, have asked for a restraining order of their own stopping the government from creating national lists of who it thinks should vote, and using janky, secretive information gathering to do it.

It’s also true that the original case was reassigned from a Trump-appointed judge to one appointed by Bill Clinton. There has been speculation the switch may have been viewed unfavorably by the feds, though the Clinton-appointed judge, David O. Carter, was given the case because of his experience in the subject matter.

The D.C. restraining order could be decided in the next few days. I’m not saying the cases are related, or that the judge should or does matter, but the Trump DOJ’s argument in California is basically that its list of 20,000 is really solid, reliable information.

If the D.C. federal judge rules first that the government information gathering is potentially both an overreach and sloppy, it makes it that much harder for another judge, or the appellate court for that matter, to rule that the list is so critical that they must step in.

So maybe there is an emergency.

Just not the one the government is claiming.