

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

An investigation by Amnesty International has revealed that three men killed in a U.S. military air strike in March after being targeted as "Al-Shabaab terrorists" were in fact civilian farmers with no evidence of links to the armed group.
Disturbingly, the organization has also learned that, despite being informed in May of its flawed assessment of at least one of the men as a fighter, the U.S. military's Africa Command (AFRICOM) failed to contact his relatives to investigate further. Between them, the men left behind 19 children.
"It's bad enough that the U.S. Africa Command appears not to know who its air strikes are actually killing and maiming in its secretive war in Somalia. But it's reprehensible that AFRICOM offers no way for those affected to contact it and has failed to reach out to the families of victims after its version of events was called into question in this case," said Abdullahi Hassan, Amnesty International's Somalia Researcher.
"This is just one of many cases of the U.S. military wantonly tarnishing large parts of the Somali population with the 'terrorist' label. No thought is given to the civilian victims or the plight of their grieving families left behind."
Air strike in Abdow Dibile
Between 3 pm and 4 pm on March 18, 2019, a U.S. air strike hit a Toyota Surf SUV near the hamlet of Abdow Dibile, around 5km from Afgoye in Somalia's Lower Shabelle region. The three men traveling in the vehicle were farmers returning from their farms to their homes in Mogadishu and Leego and Yaaq Bariwayne in Lower Shabelle.
The impact destroyed the vehicle, instantly killing the driver, Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim (46), and one passenger, Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey (30).
A man who was a close friend of Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim visited the scene the next morning and described the aftermath: "Abdiqadir's body was completely destroyed but I recognized... his face that was burnt...I also recognized his watch which was hanging from the front side of the car." A woman who visited the scene told Amnesty International that Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim and Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey "were both burnt beyond recognition and cut into pieces."
A third man traveling in the vehicle, Abdiqadir's half-brother, Mahad Nur Ibrahim (46), was very badly burnt and died in a hospital in Mogadishu almost three weeks later. Medical records seen by Amnesty International listed his cause of death as cardiac arrest after suffering sepsis and burns over more than 50% of his body. There is no evidence that AFRICOM attempted to engage with him before he died.
An AFRICOM press release on March 19 alleged the victims were "three terrorists," without citing any evidence. It also stated AFRICOM "was aware of reports alleging civilian casualties," and would review any relevant information about the incident.
However, in May, a journalist writing for Foreign Policy provided AFRICOM with evidence that Ibrahim Mohamed Hireywas a civilian and passed on contact information for his relatives. But to date AFRICOM has not reached out to them.
Amnesty International shared further information about the case with AFRICOM in August, but AFRICOM has refused to back down on its claim that the three men were "terrorists", stating: "This airstrike was conducted against lower level al-Shabaab members to decrease morale ahead of Somali Army operations... Specifically, information gathered before and after the strike indicated that all individuals injured or killed were members or affiliates of al-Shabaab". AFRICOM did not provide any evidence for its claim or indicate that it will be investigating further. It has not changed its position on any cases in Somalia that Amnesty International has brought to its attention to date.
Amnesty International interviewed 11 people - in person and remotely - about the March 18 strike, including family members, those who visited the scene, and staff at Hormuud Telecom, a company where one of the men also worked.
The organization also assessed media reports, U.S. government statements, vehicle purchase records, official IDs, medical records and videos and photographic evidence of the scene of the attack and injuries sustained by the victims.
Everyone the organization spoke to was adamant that none of the men was a member of Al-Shabaab. Also, Al-Shabaab did not prevent the relatives of those killed from collecting and burying their remains, which the armed group generally does when its own fighters are killed.
AFRICOM's reporting on the strike and correspondence with Amnesty International raise serious questions about its intelligence-gathering and its targeting of what it claimed were "affiliates" of Al-Shabaab, which may have violated international humanitarian law.
At least two dozen civilians killed or injured
To date, Amnesty International has documented six cases where U.S. air strikes are believed to have resulted in civilian casualties - killing a total of 17 people and wounding eight.
On March 20 this year, the organization's ground-breaking report, The Hidden US War in Somalia, published reams of evidence to counter AFRICOM's repeated claims until then that its operations in Somalia had resulted in "zero civilian casualties". Just over two weeks later, on April 5, AFRICOM admitted to its first-ever civilian casualties in Somalia, stating that Amnesty International's work had prompted it to review its records. Six months later, AFRICOM has not shared any update on the status or outcome of that review.
U.S. air strikes in Somalia surged in early 2017, after President Trump signed an executive order declaring the south of the country an "area of active hostilities." Since then, AFRICOM has used drones and manned aircraft to carry out at least 131 strikes in the country.
The attack in Abdow Dibile is one of 50 strikes the U.S. military has admitted to in Somalia so far this year (up to mid-September). This outstrips the 47 strikes in 2018, and the 34 strikes carried out in the last nine months of 2017.
"This is yet another crushing injustice - three civilian men died agonizing deaths while their families are left questioning why the U.S. military targeted and killed them. It is also potentially unlawful and raises questions about how seriously AFRICOM takes its obligations under international law," said Daphne Eviatar, Amnesty International's Director of Security with Human Rights.
"The U.S. government must ensure thorough, impartial investigations into all credible allegations of civilian casualties are carried out, with accountability for those responsible for violations and reparation made to the victims and survivors. It can start by establishing an accessible mechanism for Somalis to safely report civilian casualties of U.S. military operations."
In the middle of the afternoon on March 18, 2019, a U.S. air strike hit a vehicle carrying three civilian men near the hamlet of Abdow Dibile, approximately 5km southwest of Afgoye, Lower Shabelle. The vehicle was carrying three men - Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey (30), a farmer; Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim (46), a farmer and employee of Hormuud Telecom (Hormuud), a telecomunications company; and his half-brother Mahad Nur Ibrahim (46), also a farmer. The vehicle was destroyed and Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim and Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey were killed instantly. Mahad Nur Ibrahim was badly burnt and taken to a hospital in Mogadishu, where he later died. US Africa Command (AFRICOM) acknowledged responsibility for the strike and referred to the deceased as being "terrorists" and "lower level members of Al-Shabaab".
Testimonies and other evidence gathered by Amnesty International indicate that the three men in the vehicle were civilians and none were members of Al-Shabaab.
In researching this strike, Amnesty International interviewed 11 people, including family members, Hormuud Telecom staff, and three individuals who visited the scene after the attack. Amnesty International also analyzed media reports, U.S. government statements, medical records, vehicle purchase records, official ID, satellite imagery, and videos and photographs of the scene of the attack and of injuries sustained by the victims.
Al-Shabaab controls much of Lower Shabelle, including the area around Abdow Dibile, although in recent months Somalia government forces have regained control over several key towns in the region, including Sabiid, Barire and Awdheegle. According to residents interviewed by Amnesty International, while Al-Shabaab members come and go in the area around Abdow Dibile, they do not have a permanent presence in the hamlet.
On March 18, 2019, Abdiqadir and Mahad Nur Ibrahim and Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey were travelling towards the hamlet of Abdow Dibile from the village of Muuri, Lower Shabelle, in a white Toyota Surf SUV. They had been visiting their farms near Muuri that day, as they often would, and were returning from the farms to their respective homes in Mogadishu, Leego and Yaaq Bariwayne. Between 3 and 4pm, when the vehicle was approximately 750m north of Abdow Dibile, it was hit and destroyed by a munition launched by a U.S. aircraft.
A friend of Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim, living in Mogadishu, told Amnesty International that he learned on the night of the attack of his death from a relative of Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim. Early the following morning, the friend left Mogadishu and travelled to Abdow Dibile. At around 8am he arrived in the hamlet where he found Mahad Nur Ibrahim, badly burnt but alive, inside a vehicle bound for hospital. Amnesty International also viewed photographs of these injuries. Mahad Nur Ibrahim told his friend that the three men had been travelling from their farms near Muuri, when their car was struck. Shortly after they spoke, Mahad Nur Ibrahim was driven to Digfeer hospital in Mogadishu, approximately 30km away. "Mahad later succumbed to his injuries and died in a Mogadishu hospital," the friend told Amnesty International. According to hospital records viewed by Amnesty International, Mahad Nur Ibrahim died on 6 April 2019. The records state that the cause of death was cardiac arrest, after suffering from sepsis and burns on more than 50% of his body.
The friend described to Amnesty International what the scene of the attack looked like when he arrived, and how he identified the two victims whose bodies remained at the scene. On arrival, he found Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey's body cut into pieces and lying near the wreckage, after local people had removed him from the back of the vehicle. Amnesty International reviewed photographs that appear to show Ibrahim's burnt head and torso.
The friend and relatives of Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim and Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey buried the two men in Abdow Dibile on Tuesday March 19.
An elder in the Wadalaan Gorgaate clan and distant cousin of Abdiqadir and Mahad Nur Ibrahim explained that the families of the men received no support from the Somalia or U.S. government after losing their loved ones:
"No one apologized or even asked us about their death. We came together as a family after their death, but we just could not give them any support. We left it to God. We don't know what actually happened and why they were killed, maybe it was a mistake. We would like justice to be served and the families of the deceased supported."
Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim was a father of eight. He owned electric generators supplying the village of Leego in Wanlaweyn district, Lower Shabelle, and farmed land near Muuri, in Afgoye district. He was also the head of Hormuud's Leego office. Mahad Nur Ibrahim was a father of four. Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey was a father of seven. In addition to farming, he leased out farm equipment and ran a business transporting foodstuff between Mogadishu and Muuri. Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey previously lived with his family in Muuri, but they fled to Mogadishu five years ago due to the conflict between Biyamal and Habargidir clans.
Amnesty International interviewed family members, neighbors, and colleagues of the victims, all of whom unequivocally stated that the men were not members of Al-Shabaab.
All 11 people Amnesty International spoke to were adamant that the three men were civilians. "He was not Al-Shabaab" a relative of Mahad Nur Ibrahim explained. "He owned a truck and he transported charcoal to Mogadishu. Al-Shabaab banned charcoal business in Leego and Lower Shabelle so he was not doing much in the past two years. He wanted to invest in the farms with the help of his brother, but both were killed while coming back from the farms."
A Habargidir clan elder and relative of Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey was also clear on this point: "I can confirm before anyone that Ibrahim was a civilian and not an Al-Shabaab guy". Another relative concurred: "He was a civilian, he was not member of Al-Shabaab. If he were Al-Shabaab we would not have run away from the Biyamal-Habargidir conflict. We were basically IDPs in Mogadishu with Ibrahim supporting us. I don't know why he was targeted. It was a clear aggression."
According to a fellow employee at Hormuud who Amnesty International interviewed, as well as relatives, Abdiqadir Nur Ibrahim had worked for Hormuud for over a decade and was also not an Al-Shabaab member. Those who knew the men questioned why they had been killed. "I don't know why [Abdiqadir's] car was targeted but I think it was a mistake," a friend said. "The three people who were killed in that car were farmers and not members of Al-Shabaab".
In addition to the testimonies, there is additional circumstantial evidence which indicates that the deceased were civilians. Al-Shabaab did not treat the three men as if they were members of the armed group. Families of the victims were not prevented from recovering the bodies and taking the injured to hospital. Testimony gathered throughout Amnesty International's research in Somalia has consistently shown that Al-Shabaab will collect and bury their dead themselves, often before they permit civilians back into the area. Additionally, Mahad Nur Ibrahim was transported from Abdow Dibile to government-controlled Mogadishu, where he was treated at Digfeer hospital, a civilian facility, where it would have been relatively easy for Somalia government forces to question or arrest him.
In a press release published on March 19, 2019, US Africa Command (AFRICOM) stated that the previous day, March 18, 2019, U.S. forces conducted an airstrike "in coordination with the Federal Government of Somalia's continued efforts to weaken al-Shabaab" in the "vicinity of Awdheegle," Lower Shabelle. AFRICOM claimed it assessed that three "terrorists" were killed in the strike. It went on to confirm however, "we are aware of reports alleging civilian casualties resulting from this airstrike. As with any allegation of civilian casualties we receive, U.S. Africa Command will review any information it has about the incident, including any relevant information provided by third parties."
According to media reports, AFRICOM was presented with the contact details of Ibrahim Mohamed Hirey's family in May 2019. Amnesty International understands that the family have not been contacted by U.S. authorities in relation to the attack that killed their relative.
Amnesty International wrote to AFRICOM on August 19, 2019 presenting details of the allegation that the three victims of the attack were civilians, and seeking its response. AFRICOM replied on September 18, 2019, stating:
"In coordination with the Federal Government of Somalia, U.S. Africa Command did conduct a precision-guided airstrike that corresponds to the time and location of this allegation. This airstrike was conducted against lower level al-Shabaab members to decrease morale ahead of Somali Army operations.
Pursuant to our thorough assessment procedures, we determined that U.S. Africa Command is not likely to have caused the civilian casualties alleged on 18 March 2019. Specifically, information gathered before and after the strike indicated that all individuals injured or killed were members or affiliates of al-Shabaab. We have not received any new or additional information that contradicts this information."
Further, AFRICOM stated:
"To date, U.S. Africa Command has only received an allegation of a civilian casualty with respect to the driver of the vehicle - there have been no other allegations that the additional two passengers were civilian. Based on detailed methods and a body of multi-intelligence reporting, to include the actions observed from the vehicle, U.S. Africa Command arrived at reasonable certainty the vehicle and its occupants were al-Shabaab and actively supporting al-Shabaab operational activity."
Amnesty International also wrote to the Somalia government on September 20, presenting the details of the allegations. At the time of publishing, the government had not replied.
Amnesty International's evidence above indicates that, regardless of its intention, U.S. forces failed to undertake necessary measures to ensure that they were targeting fighters directly participating in hostilities and not civilians. Contrary to AFRICOM's assessment, there is significant evidence that the deceased are civilians and were killed unlawfully. Failure to take feasible precautions that are necessary to verify that a target is a military objective is in itself a violation of international humanitarian law and can result in indiscriminate attacks. Indiscriminate attacks in which civilians are killed or injured can constitute war crimes.
The description by AFRICOM of those killed in this attack as "members or affiliates of Al-Shabaab" [emphasis added] is concerning. As Amnesty International explains in-depth in its March 2019 report, The Hidden US War in Somalia: Civilian casualties of US air strikes in Lower Shabelle, the US military appears to be applying an overly broad concept of who is targetable. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, individuals suspected of membership in armed groups must not be targeted on the basis of "abstract affiliation, family ties, or other criteria prone to error, arbitrariness or abuse." AFRICOM's response to Amnesty International suggests that U.S. forces may have targeted these men on the basis of criteria that do not conform to the requirements of international humanitarian law. Amnesty International's concern about the arbitrary nature of targeting based on supposed Al-Shabaab membership is compounded by the reference to targeting on the basis of the vague notion of "affiliation." In response to a request by Amnesty International, the US Department of Defense previously refused to explain how it determines affiliation to Al-Shabaab, stating that this would "jeopardize the intelligence process which we gather that information [sic]". Based on Amnesty International's findings in this and previous cases, we fear that the term "affiliates of al-Shabaab" may be used by the U.S. military to describe any military-aged male who is unfortunate enough to be in the vicinity of a suspected Al-Shabaab fighter at the time of a U.S. strike. This would be an unlawful practice that could amount to targeting civilians who are not directly participating in hostilities.
In the context of a non-international armed conflict, only individuals who are directly participating in hostilities may lawfully be targeted. Direct attacks against the civilian population and individual civilians not directly participating in hostilities are prohibited and constitute war crimes. Further legal analysis, including regarding what constitutes direct participation in hostilities, can be found in chapter four of The Hidden US War in Somalia.
Further, there is strong evidence to call into question the "detailed methods" and "body of multi-intelligence reporting" that the U.S. military used in this strike. In its press release the day after the attack, AFRICOM claimed to have killed three people. But at that time only two were dead, the third still alive and would soon be in Digfeer hospital. The U.S. has not corrected this error in further statements. Additionally, if the U.S. was confident Mahad Nur Ibrahim was an Al-Shabaab operative, then there was also ample opportunity to arrest him in hospital after the strike. That the U.S. post-strike intelligence assessment was not sufficient to correctly note the number killed, nor the location of the third victim of the strike, speaks to the quality of the U.S. intelligence and the degree to which it should be trusted to correctly identify and categorize members of Al-Shabaab.
U.S. and Somalia authorities must ensure an independent, impartial, and thorough investigation is conducted into this attack. They should also ensure that anyone responsible for violating international humanitarian law is held accountable, compensate the victims' families, and implement an effective mechanism to ensure a safe and accessible means for people to self-report civilian casualties from military operations.
This extended press release is available at: https://www.amnestyusa.org/press-releases/u-s-military-shows-appalling-disregard-for-civilians-killed-in-somalia-air-strike
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
"We cannot let the billionaire class take these kinds of risks with our future."
Progressive author Naomi Klein and comedian Ilana Glazer on Monday warned that America's billionaire class is taking "unprecedented risks with our future," and said US policymakers must block further Big Tech initial public offerings and mergers to prevent even more damage from occurring.
In an op-ed published by The Guardian, Klein and Glazer outlined how US billionaires have used tax loopholes, corporate mergers, and IPOs to enrich themselves at an unprecedented scale, as their wealth has grown by an estimated 40% over just the last two years.
Klein and Glazer argued that the upcoming IPOs of artificial intelligence giants OpenAI and Anthropic could be particularly risky to the economy given questions about their ability to be consistently profitable.
"It’s no secret that the AI companies Anthropic and OpenAI are intending to go public in the near future," they wrote. "Both of these players also had major security flaws exposed recently, and openly acknowledge mind-bogglingly huge amounts of debt."
The risk will only grow, they added, if Nasdaq grants OpenAI and Anthropic the same exception it granted to Elon Musk's SpaceX earlier this year by allowing their shares to be immediately included in index funds without having to wait through the one-year "seasoning" period.
"June’s highly contentious SpaceX IPO already carries great risk for regular investors," they explained. "If more speculative tech companies with staggering risk profiles are allowed to follow suit, the results will become too much for the market to bear."
Klein and Glazer said that policymakers need to intervene to put a halt to new Big Tech IPOs, and also pass a wealth tax to take away billionaires' power to spend cavalierly even as they leave working people potentially holding the bag for their failed investments.
"We cannot let the billionaire class take these kinds of risks with our future," they emphasized. "To stop these reckless IPOs we must stand together, take collective action, and push for real change."
Economist Jeffrey D. Sachs last month similarly called for AI IPOs to be halted until Congress "has enacted a public system of licensing, independent safety evaluation, liability, and financial backstops for frontier AI."
Sachs noted that Anthropic executives and employees, including CEO Dario Amodei, have warned that AI could pose a threat to all human life, and he questioned why the creators of such technology should become unfathomably wealthy before such risks are understood and eliminated.
"A company should not disclose a risk of catastrophe to humanity and then sell its shares to the public before any public authority has the power to evaluate that risk or to stop deployment," argued Sachs. "In fact, to proceed rapidly in the face of such dire warnings is beyond folly."
"If your agents continue any unauthorized use of these lots, New York City will take legal action to prevent this unlawful commandeering of city property."
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Monday threatened the Trump administration with legal action over federal immigration agents' use of city parking lots to stage raids, which the Democratic elected official said amounted to "unlawful commandeering" of public property.
"This use of city property in furtherance of federal immigration enforcement is unauthorized and is therefore illegal, endangers city residents, and sows fear among those who seek to access city property," Mamdani wrote in a letter addressed to US Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin and Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) acting director, David Venturella.
Mamdani's letter notes that ICE agents have "reportedly parked their vehicles and conducted meetings in several city-owned, unstaffed parking lots"—including ones near a park and a city-run preschool.
"ICE has not secured any authorization from the city to use these lots for immigration enforcement. To be clear: the city does not authorize ICE using its property in this manner," Mamdani wrote. "Parking lots connected to city parks are reserved for the safe use and enjoyment of New Yorkers and visitors who wish to use our parks. Use of these lots for other purposes, including ICE’s reported use of these lots, amounts to unauthorized activity on City property. Accordingly, you must immediately issue guidance to your agents prohibiting them from using any City lots to stage or conduct enforcement operations."
Mamdani's letter comes weeks after a plainclothes ICE agent shot a Dominican immigrant in the Bronx while his 5-year-old son was in the car, infuriating community members and intensifying pressure on the mayor to do everything in his power to remove the rogue agency from New York City.
"We know that ICE is rotten to its core," Mamdani said after the shooting. The mayor has called on President Donald Trump to end all ICE operations in New York City and has demanded abolition of the agency, saying it is "making a mockery of what law and order is supposed to be."
In mid-October, Mamdani and more than 100 other elected New York officials called on private parking lot owners to bar ICE agents from using their property.
"In solidarity with immigrant New Yorkers and in our shared commitment to the city we love, we ask that you do not rent, lend, or otherwise make your property available to ICE as a staging area for its enforcement operations," reads the October 16 letter. "Make it known to ICE that it is not authorized to use your garages and lots."
"This is an illegal campaign, carried out with flagrant disregard for the rules of war, and appears to be designed to create unlivable conditions for Ukrainian civilians."
As Russia continues to strike energy infrastructure in neighboring Ukraine over 4.5 years into a full-blown invasion, Amnesty International on Monday sounded the alarm over such attacks, with winter weather approaching.
"The Russian Federation is once again implementing a large-scale campaign against Ukrainian energy and heating infrastructure ahead of a freezing winter, including attacks far from the frontlines of conflict," said Scott Edwards, who directs the human rights group's Crisis Response Program, in a statement.
"These attacks on essential infrastructure are creating a deadly situation for civilians, who directly suffer the consequences," he continued. "This is an illegal campaign, carried out with flagrant disregard for the rules of war, and appears to be designed to create unlivable conditions for Ukrainian civilians."
Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine in February 2022, and just over a year later, the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for his arrest. The following year, the ICC also ordered the arrests of various Russian military leaders for allegedly directing attacks on Ukrainian electrical infrastructure.
"Under international humanitarian law, electricity and heating installations are civilian objects unless and for such time as they meet the strict definition of a military objective," Amnesty explained. "Even where an installation constitutes a military objective, attacking forces must comply with the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution."
"Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, launching indiscriminate attacks, or carrying out attacks expected to cause excessive civilian harm in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated can constitute war crimes," the group highlighted. Both Putin and the Russian Ministry of Defense "have made public statements announcing intentional attacks on Ukraine's energy infrastructure."
Last winter, Russia "carried out at least 423 attacks on electricity infrastructure and 74 strikes on heating facilities," Amnesty detailed, citing the United Nations. "These attacks caused rolling outages affecting millions of people and interrupted heating for hundreds of thousands as temperatures fell below -20°C. The resulting loss of electricity, water, and heating disrupted healthcare and education, and also disproportionately harmed older people, persons with disabilities, women, and families with children."
Amnesty's statement came a day after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on the social media platform X that "overnight alone, our energy infrastructure came under Russian attack in four regions: Dnipro, Vinnytsia, Zhytomyr, and Khmelnytskyi."
"Substations, transformers, and power lines that supply electricity to our people's homes were targeted," Zelenskyy noted. "Repair crews are working everywhere. As of now, hundreds of thousands of families remain without power."
"Massive Russian attacks on Ukraine's other critical infrastructure are also continuing unabated," he wrote. "This past week Russia has launched 1,940 attack drones, more than 1,580 guided aerial bombs, and 44 missiles of various types against Ukraine, including 36 ballistic missiles."
The president added that "the intensity of the strikes is extremely high, and the Russians are trying to take maximum advantage of the shortage of ballistic missile interceptors," expressing a need for "Patriot missiles to America, Europe, and other partners who can help."
As Reuters reported Sunday:
On Friday, Russia said Ukraine had resumed strikes on its oil refineries and accused Kyiv of ignoring a request from US President Donald Trump to stop such attacks, which Trump has blamed for raising the cost of diesel before US midterm elections next week.
Ukraine says it supports a full ceasefire on energy targets, including its own battered power grid, but that Moscow is unwilling to agree to this.
Last month, shortly after signing a bipartisan bill targeting Russian revenue from fossil fuel exports, Trump controversially waived sanctions against Russia and struck a deal on diesel, while also blaming Zelenskyy for high US diesel prices—which are tied to Trump and Israel's illegal war on Iran. Trump is also waging war on the ICC, over its warrants for Israeli leaders.
Amnesty—which has forcefully spoken out against Trump's attacks on the tribunal—said Monday that all parties to the conflict in Russia and Ukraine "must respect the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution and protect civilians and civilian objects."
"States supporting accountability mechanisms must provide the expertise and resources needed to effectively investigate allegations of violations, secure evidence, and identify suspected perpetrators, including commanders and senior officials who may bear responsibility," the group continued. "All states must urgently act to protect the functioning of the ICC and should execute arrest warrants when and where they can."
Edwards added that "whatever the motives behind the Kremlin's plan to make life unbearable for civilians, it is criminal and cannot be tolerated. World leaders seeking to end this conflict must immediately use their leverage to minimize any potential harm to civilians, before another intentional humanitarian catastrophe begins with the arrival of winter."
"You can't make this up," said one critic, who noted that in the UK, "you can openly cheer for mass murder, but you can't protest against it."
British police on Saturday arrested 325 people outside the US Embassy in London—almost all of them supporters of the banned peace group Palestine Action—while allowing at least one demonstrator to hold a sign reading "I support genocide."
Metropolitan Police said 320 of the people arrested at the demonstration organized by the group Defend Our Juries were apprehended for showing support for a proscribed group under the Terrorism Act. Many of those taken into custody were holding placards reading, "I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action."
Meanwhile, video posted to social media showed a Met officer allowing a woman to hold a sign with the deliberately provocative message, "I support genocide, I oppose Palestine Action."
It was the largest mass arrest of Palestine Action supporters since Prime Minister Andy Burnham took office following the resignation of former Prime Minister Keir Starmer—both members of the Labour Party.
"The Kafkaesque UK laws adopted under the Starmer [government] to appease Israel are such that you'll get arrested for terrorism if you hold a sign saying, 'I support Palestine Action.' But if you hold a sign saying 'I support genocide, I oppose Palestine Action,' then you'll be fine," said Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the US-based Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.
The arrested protesters are charged under Section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000, which carries a punishment of six months' imprisonment for carrying the signs.
Among those arrested Saturday were 94-year-old human rights lawyer Margaret Owen, who was also apprehended outside September's Labour Party conference in Liverpool for holding a sign supporting Palestine Action. According to reporting, Owen is Jewish.
"This is truly dystopian," UK Green Party Leader Zack Polanski said in response to Owen's arrest Saturday. "Not in our name."
"Israel killed eight people, including a child, in Gaza this weekend as they continue their genocide," Polanski noted in a separate social media post on Monday. "After a weekend of arresting pensioners for protesting against this horror, Labour has [put] Israel far above serving our local communities."
More than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces since the Hamas-led attack of October 2023. That figure includes over 74,000 Palestinians killed, including upward of 21,500 children.
Undaunted, Owen was reportedly arrested again on Monday along with other members and supporters of the peace group No More Bloody Wars, who blocked an entrance to Royal Air Force-Lakenheath, a military base used by the US Air Force.
Rev. Bill White, 72—who also held a sign at Saturday's protest reading, "I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action"—told The Guardian that he had "hoped for better" from Burnham's government.
“This is the right thing to do," White said of the protest. "There’s a bad law, and it is wrong to criminalize people that are trying to prevent genocide,” he added. “How can I not be here?”
A spokesperson for Defend Our Juries said Saturday that the "overzealous response outside the US Embassy today only serves to further expose how far authorities in the UK will go to appease American interests."
"Israel’s war crimes that have caused death and injury to thousands could not happen without the US’ approval," the spokesperson added.
Saturday's crackdown came as Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori prepared to challenge the ban before the UK Supreme Court starting on Wednesday. The lower High Court found the proscription unlawful in February, finding violations involving the government's own policy and free expression protections. The Court of Appeal overturned that decision in June, prompting Ammori's appeal.
The Palestine Action ban took effect in July 2025 after members of the group damaged warplanes on the Royal Air Force base at Brize Norton.
On Monday, members of another UK direct action group, People Against Genocide, broke into a factory in Tring, Hertfordshire owned by the Texas-based arms manufacturer Ultra Intelligence and Communications—which reportedly supplies UAV Tactical Systems, a subsidiary of Israeli weapons-maker Elbit Systems—and smashed equipment with hammers. Three people were reportedly arrested.
According to Novara Media, Monday's action "was timed to coincide with the 109th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, a statement issued by the British government in 1917 that is widely seen as laying the foundation for the colonization and ethnic cleansing of Palestine."
"I will not bury my head in the sand and pretend that I cannot read a calendar," said US Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui, referring to the 2026 midterm elections.
A federal judge on Monday delivered a blistering rebuke of the US Department of Justice as he dismissed criminal charges brought against two former FBI officials.
As reported by The New York Times, Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui slammed the office of US Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro for bringing charges against former FBI counterintelligence officials Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides without even establishing probable cause to believe that a crime had been committed.
Pirro's office indicted Floris and Benavides just over one week ago, alleging that the two had lied to Congress about the FBI's investigation into Hunter Biden, son of former President Joe Biden.
During an hourlong speech dismissing the charges, Faruqui apologized to the two defendants, whom he said had been "dragged through the process" for transparently political reasons.
"I am deeply troubled by what happened here in the case," Faruqui said, according to the Times. "What has transpired here cannot be described as anything other than weaponization."
Faruqui also accused Pirro's office of charging the two former FBI officials in an effort to impact the 2026 midterm elections.
"I will not bury my head in the sand and pretend that I cannot read a calendar," said the judge in reference to the elections, according to The Associated Press.
The Times noted that Faruqui dissected all of the allegedly false statements made by Floris and Benavides cited in the DOJ's criminal complaint, showing that most of the statements were not false, and that the few statements that were false were not made knowingly.
According to NBC News, the case against the FBI officials was brought by Pirro's office as a criminal complaint, meaning it was never presented to a federal grand jury.
The DOJ could revive the case by seeking a grand jury indictment, although NBC explained that jurors in Washington, DC "have been skeptical of politically-tinged cases against purported Trump enemies, most recently rejecting the attempted indictment of Cassidy Hutchinson."
One journalist suggested that in order to understand AIPAC-backed Democratic Rep. Haley Stevens' sudden flip to support Rogers, it is worth "following the money into foreign interests."
When Democratic US Rep. Haley Stevens announced her stunning flip to endorse Republican Senate candidate Mike Rogers on Sunday, she did so with two registered agents of the Israeli government standing behind her, according to a report from Drop Site News.
The person who opened the press conference outside a Detroit church was Abigail Ronson, a spokesperson for the Rogers campaign, whom Drop Site found had registered as an agent working on behalf of the Israeli government under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) on May 18, 2026.
The registration lists Ronson as a part-time contractor for Clock Tower X, a communications company owned by Brad Parscale, a former campaign manager for President Donald Trump.
In May, Responsible Statecraft and The Intercept reported that through Clock Tower X, Parscale has run a multimillion-dollar operation funded by the Israeli government aimed at influencing American public opinion, which has turned dramatically against Israel amid its genocidal assault on Gaza and systematic ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in the West Bank.
This campaign reportedly involves producing and distributing pro-Israel content aimed at younger Americans, particularly conservatives and evangelical Christians, creating articles meant to influence artificial intelligence chatbots like ChatGPT and Claude to give answers favorable to Israeli narratives, and conducting text messaging campaigns to direct Americans toward pro-Israel content.
Ronson, who works for the Republican consulting firm Convergence Media, was one of 14 employees at the firm working on Parscale’s pro-Israel influence operation. Convergence’s chief of staff, Jesse Stokes—who registered as an agent of Israel in October 2025—is also part of the Rogers campaign. The campaign has separately paid millions of dollars to Convergence.
Both Ronson and Stokes have been involved in campaign activities. Ronson helped organize the launch of the astroturfed "Democrats for Mike Rogers" campaign, an alleged "grassroots" coalition of Democratic voters who said they supported Rogers over his Democratic opponent, Abdul El-Sayed. The funding for the initiative overwhelmingly came from Republican-aligned sources, as well as Rogers' own campaign, and many of the supposed "Democrats" had long-standing GOP ties, according to a previous Drop Site investigation.
Stokes has no official title with the Rogers campaign. But metadata reviewed by Drop Site shows that he wrote the email launching Rogers' Senate campaign in March 2025, about seven months before he registered as an Israeli agent. Since then, he is shown to have written numerous other press releases for the campaign.
In June, after Ronson posted an AI-generated image of a “buff” Mike Rogers on social media, the campaign denied that she was a staffer. But she’s since acted as an official voice of the campaign in comments to several media outlets, including Reuters, Fox News, and The New York Times. In those comments, she defended Rogers’ attacks on El-Sayed’s Muslim background and accused the Democrat of fueling “anti-Israel hate.”
On Sunday, before Stevens (D-Mich.) suddenly abandoned her months of support for El-Sayed to back Rogers, Ronson told NBC News that “Mike welcomes her.”
Questions about the influence of the Israeli government and pro-Israel donors have hung over Michigan's Senate race since it began. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) spent an unprecedented $30 million in a failed effort to help Stevens defeat El-Sayed in August's Democratic primary, the pro-Israel lobbying group's single largest expenditure ever in a congressional race.
Israel was also at the center of Stevens’ widely reviled decision to flip against El-Sayed less than 48 hours before Election Day. After months of expressing support for her primary rival, Stevens called on El-Sayed to denounce an advertisement by an outside political action committee that blamed rising grocery prices on US support for Israel, which helped to push Trump toward launching a war with Iran. She also called on him to take back other critical statements he’d made about Israel.
Stevens’ fiancé, Jason Turkish, an outspoken pro-Israel Democrat, announced last week that he’d be supporting Rogers and appeared at a Republican Jewish Coalition event with Rogers and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). He also accused El-Sayed of fueling “death threats” against Jewish Americans by describing Israel’s conduct in Gaza as a “genocide,” a description that has been used by United Nations experts and leading human rights organizations.
After days of giving behind-the-scenes assurances that she’d continue to support the Democratic nominee, Stevens abruptly shifted her support on Sunday, appearing with Rogers. She said she made the decision after being disinvited to a campaign event with El-Sayed and because of El-Sayed’s association with the pro-Palestine left-wing streamer Hasan Piker, who she said was fomenting “hate.”
In a CNN appearance that night, she struggled to explain her decision to endorse Rogers, who has routinely trafficked in explicitly Islamophobic rhetoric during the campaign and whom she’d described months earlier as a “rubber stamp for Donald Trump’s dangerous agenda.”
According to a friend of Stevens' who spoke to The Washington Post, the congresswoman's decision came after Turkish had spent days "working her over" to abandon El-Sayed and back Rogers and telling her that she'd "betrayed" Jewish supporters by standing by the progressive Democrat.
Stevens’ romantic relationship with Turkish reportedly began during the Democratic primary, and the two became engaged in May, though the engagement was not announced until after Stevens’ primary loss. One former Stevens staffer told CNN that the congresswoman became increasingly defensive of Israel and AIPAC in May, after her engagement to Turkish, at the expense of other issues such as Michigan’s economy and manufacturing. This was despite AIPAC growing increasingly toxic among Democratic voters and becoming a target of attacks from El-Sayed.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), whom Stevens had reassured on Saturday night that she had no intention of flipping to Rogers, said he was "dumbfounded" by her decision the following day.
"Something doesn’t compute about this whole sequence of events," he said.
On MS NOW’s “Morning Joe” Monday, journalist Pablo Torre brought up the reporting on Rogers’ ties to Israel as a possible factor worth investigating when trying to make sense of Stevens’ reversal.
“This is one of the questions around corruption,” Torre said, noting that Stevens’ own pinned post on X spoke about the importance of “defeating Mike Rogers” at the time she endorsed him.
Torre said it was worth asking “whose country are we actually prioritizing” and examining “whether or not there’s a there there around following the money into foreign interests.”
"In a democracy, it’s supposed to be one person, one vote, and the more one person can influence, the less egalitarian our system becomes," said one expert.
Some of the richest people in the US have spent unprecedented sums of money to influence the outcome of the 2026 midterm elections, and a Sunday report in The New York Times estimated that the top 20 biggest donors alone have spent a combined $2 billion in federal races this cycle.
The single largest funder of the 2026 midterms, by a wide margin, is far-right billionaire Elon Musk, who has shoveled nearly $450 million to help GOP candidates.
In fact, pro-Republican donors account for the five largest individual contributors to midterm races.
In addition to Musk, the other largest donors this cycle are industrialists Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein, who have given $150 million to help elect Republicans; flagship GOP Senate super PAC One Nation, which has spent $138 million; venture capitalists Marc Andreesen and Ben Horowitz, who have given $116 million; and hedge fund investor Jeff Yass, who has given $110 million.
On the Democratic side, the top spenders have been flagship Democratic Senate super PAC Majority Forward, which has spent $104 million, and George and Alexander Soros, who have given $103 million.
The Times' report echoes an analysis published last week by the Brennan Center for Justice showing that the 40 largest individual donors to the 2026 elections had spent a combined $2.4 billion as of mid-October.
According to Brennan, this represents the single largest amount of money spent on a midterm election ever since the US Supreme Court's landmark 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. FEC unleashed limitless political campaign spending.
The Brennan analysis reveals that the spending of the very largest donors has grown dramatically over the last decade.
"The donations coming from the top 40 donors for the midterms total eight times the amount from the top 40 donors by mid-October in the 2014 midterms (the first full midterm cycle after Citizens United), adjusted for inflation," the analysis explains. "The cutoff to be in the top 40 has also increased to 10 times what it was four cycles ago, to $25 million."
And while the biggest spenders used to favor Democrats, their loyalties have since shifted to the GOP, and in this election cycle "donors loyal to the GOP now give more than three times the amount that reliably Democratic donors give."
And while labor unions were once at least represented in the list of top 40 election donors, they have since fallen out and have been replaced by donors from the cryptocurrency industry, the Brennan Center analysis finds.
Ian Vandewalker, senior counsel at Brennan and co-author of the analysis, told The Guardian in an interview published Monday that it's become easier for politicians to be totally beholden to a single large donor while ignoring the needs of voters.
"In a democracy, it’s supposed to be one person, one vote," Vandewalker explained, "and the more one person can influence, the less egalitarian our system becomes."
Economist Paul Krugman expressed similar concerns about the influence of big money in US politics, writing on his Substack page Monday that "oligarchy is on the ballot" in the 2026 midterms.
In assessing the massive spending by megadonors on elections, Krugman said the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision deserved significant blame. However, he said it was also a simple reflection of the fact that the US economy for decades has been rigged to provide benefits primarily to the ultrawealthy.
"Now we... have men big enough to own the government of the United States," Krugman commented. "This midterm is a test of whether they will get away with it."
"I did it for J6," President Donald Trump said of the Capitol insurrectionists he pardoned just hours into the start of his second term.
US President Donald Trump said in a podcast interview released Monday that he would not hesitate to issue preemptive pardons for mega-billionaire Elon Musk and other allies to shield them from potential investigations if Democrats retake control of Congress in this week's midterms and win back the White House in 2028.
"I would not even think about it. I'd do it," Trump said of preemptive pardons for Musk, White House staff, and other allies during an interview on the Pod Force One podcast, hosted by New York Post columnist Miranda Devine. "I did it for J6."
The president claimed that Democrats—who have signaled plans to investigate Musk should they win the House or Senate in Tuesday's elections—"want to arrest" the world's richest man and leading GOP donor, along with his lackeys who rampaged lawlessly through the federal government with the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
"Big Balls. They want to arrest him," Trump said, referring to Musk associate Edward Coristine.
As Wired reported last year, Coristine—who was 19 when he was hired at DOGE—was one of the Musk operatives at the Small Business Administration "who sought access to HR, contracting, and payment systems and information."
Watch Trump's comments:
The Wall Street Journal reported in April that Trump has "repeatedly promised his top administration officials pardons before he leaves office," saying during one closed-door meeting that he would "pardon everyone who has come within 200 feet of the Oval [Office]."
The president's remarks came days after Politico reported that congressional Democrats are eager to investigate Musk's "alleged conflicts of interests" as his companies "rake in multibillion dollar federal contracts and subsidies."
"Members of House Oversight and other panels also want to examine Musk’s role in eliminating over 250,000 federal jobs during his time at DOGE, withholding congressionally appropriated money and accessing sensitive government data," the outlet noted. Democrats have also named Musk's deadly dismantling of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) as a potential target of investigation.
Musk, whose tenure at the head of DOGE ended in May 2025, has benefited massively from Trump's second White House term.
According to a recent analysis by the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, Musk is among the "top beneficiaries of the cancellation of corporate enforcement actions" under Trump. Musk's companies have "benefited from at least eight canceled enforcement actions," the group found.
Musk has funneled around $445 million in the 2026 election cycle to super PACs supporting Republican candidates in an effort to help the party maintain its congressional majorities.
"Billionaires and Big Tech have poured $2.7 billion and counting into Republican midterm campaigns, with Elon Musk breaking a new record as the largest political donor in American history," Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee wrote in a social media post on Monday. "This is what happens when the administration puts pardons, regulatory changes, tax cuts, and public policy up for auction to MAGA world."
"Democrats in Congress will investigate and uncover all the corrupt deals under the surface," the committee Democrats added.
"We know he will fight for the economic interests of working families in Michigan, unlike Mike Rogers, who is a tool of Donald Trump and billionaire donors."
Democrats across the party's ideological spectrum—in Michigan and around the country—rallied behind US Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed after his erstwhile primary opponent, Rep. Haley Stevens, endorsed Republican Mike Rogers two days before a race that could decide control of the upper chamber.
While Stevens claimed in a CNN appearance Sunday night that she's "been hearing from a ton of Dems" privately voicing support for her decision, she received nothing but backlash from fellow Democrats in public. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who quietly supported Stevens in her primary contest against El-Sayed, said that "this is a despicable betrayal from Rep. Stevens."
"Senate Democrats are united in our support for Abdul El-Sayed," Schumer added, "because we know he will fight for the economic interests of working families in Michigan, unlike Mike Rogers, who is a tool of Donald Trump and billionaire donors."
Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.), a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus who has represented Michigan in the House for more than a decade, suggested in a statement that Stevens' endorsement of Rogers was an effort to "get attention," and that "Michiganders are worried about how they are going to pay their mortgage and fill up their gas tanks, and the ability to afford groceries, healthcare, and housing."
"If we are going to fight to improve the lives of working men and women in Michigan," said Dingell, "we must stay focused on electing Democrats up and down the ballot, and that includes electing Abdul El-Sayed as Michigan's next senator."
Leaders of the Michigan Democratic Party, Michigan Sens. Elissa Slotkin and Gary Peters, Michigan's Democratic gubernatorial nominee Jocelyn Benson, Democratic National Committee (DNC) chair Ken Martin, DNC Black Caucus Chair Virgie Rollins, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) were among the many leading party officials and lawmakers who issued statements backing El-Sayed following Stevens' move.
So did two of the party's leading progressives: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
"What is so galling about this moment is we have to be clear about what the choice is," said Mamdani. "The choice is whether or not you want to fight for working people like what Dr. Abdul El-Sayed has been on, or whether you want to provide additional oxygen and amplification to a candidacy of someone who wants to cut Medicare even further than it’s already been cut. That’s what’s on the ballot.”
In addition to top Democrats reiterating their support, El-Sayed saw a major surge in donations in the hours after Stevens' endorsed his Republican opponent. The Wall Street Journal reported that El-Sayed raised $1.2 million in a span of hours on Sunday, making it "his second-best fundraising day since he clinched the Democratic Party’s nomination for Senate."
The administration quickly appealed the ruling, making it clear that it "still wants to interfere in Alaska's election and pursue an investigation that would violate the right to a secret ballot."
With numerous recent court rulings dismissing the Trump administration's attempts to intimidate election officials and its push to discount tens of thousands of ballots due to the dubious claim they were cast by noncitizens, a key midterm strategy of President Donald Trump—questioning the results of the election before it happens—is falling apart.
The US Department of Justice has focused in recent days on the Alaska US Senate election, with Trump personally calling on the DOJ to file a lawsuit arguing that a federal court must block the certification of the results if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan narrowly loses his reelection bid—but Chief Judge Sharon Gleason of the US District Court in Alaska threw that effort out on Sunday, as well.
The administration has focused on the election because, along with Sullivan and former Rep. Mary Peltola, the Democratic candidate, another Dan Sullivan appears on the ballots Alaskans have begun casting: Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired teacher.
The DOJ argued in its lawsuit that if Sullivan loses his reelection race but would have won if the votes for Daniel J. Sullivan had gone to him instead, the election results should not be certified.
The Republican senator is clearly marked with his party affiliation and the word "incumbent" on the ballots, and observers have noted that the state's ranked-choice voting system would likely stop Daniel J. Sullivan from acting as a "spoiler."
"Voters are familiar with the system," wrote Anna Griffin at The New York Times Sunday. "Any voter confused by the existence of two Dan Sullivans could simply rank both candidates."
Voters interviewed at the polls in recent days have said the ballot did not cause confusion.
Alaska Voter: I saw that it showed incumbent and Republican for the current incumbent, I wasn't worried about it at all. People are smart enough to see it's labeled clearly. It's already been determined by our Supreme Court in Alaska. I wasn't worried about it https://t.co/003wocOV7N
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 1, 2026
Still, the DOJ in its lawsuit called for an investigation should Sullivan lose narrowly, without explaining how officials would conduct a probe into the secret, anonymous ballots that American voters have a right to.
The administration, said Gleason as she rejected the lawsuit, "offers no rebuttal to the concerns regarding preservation of the secrecy of voting and provides no explanation of how its request for ballot segregation and a court-ordered investigation by law enforcement officers into certain voters’ intent could be implemented while preserving the secrecy of the ballot.”
As the DOJ filed an appeal to the ruling Sunday, a spokesperson for the department complained to the Times that Gleason had not addressed “the argument of the United States that Daniel J. Sullivan (a/k/a Decoy Dan) entered the race as a frivolous candidate to confuse voters.”
Entering an electoral race to act as a "spoiler," while potentially inconvenient and aggravating for another candidate and sometimes denounced as a "dirty trick," is generally not against the law in the US, according to legal experts. Neither is recruiting or encouraging someone to run as a spoiler, as Peltola's campaign has been accused of doing in the Alaska case.
"Regardless of who encouraged him to run, the second Dan Sullivan validly qualified for the ballot. And this is a matter of state law," Joshua Douglas, a law professor at the University of Kentucky, told Reuters this week.
Gleason rejected the DOJ's claim that the administration is not attempting to interfere in "the time, place, and manner of Alaskan elections," which the Constitution stipulates are to be determined by state officials.
"A court order preventing the state from certifying the election if certain circumstances occur; a court order requiring the state to segregate and preserve certain ballots; and a court order permitting the United States to conduct an investigation into the intent of those voters who cast ballots for Daniel J. Sullivan... certainly involve the time, place, and manner of Alaska’s election,” the judge wrote.
Sullivan said Sunday that he would accept the election results regardless of who wins, while also claiming the election could be "stolen."
The DOJ's decision to immediately appeal Gleason's ruling, said journalist Adam Klasfeld, made clear that the administration "still wants to interfere in Alaska's election and pursue an investigation that would violate the right to a secret ballot."