A recently departed Trump aide is accusing the White House of systemic corruption. Calley Means, who left his position as a White House adviser on October 22, says that top Trump aides abandoned the administration’s priorities on health issues to serve corporate interests.

Means, who is closely associated with the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement, first levied the charge on a November 6 appearance on the Joe Rogan podcast. Several of his allegations involve Susie Wiles, a former lobbyist, who served as Trump’s chief of staff until last Friday.

On the Rogan podcast, Means said that Wiles blocked Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary, from issuing a definition of “ultraprocessed” foods, the first step toward limiting such foods in school lunches. “I need sugar money,” Wiles said, according to Means. “I need the money from the sugar people to win the midterms.”

Florida Crystals Corporation, one of the world’s largest cane sugar refiners, donated $3 million to Trump’s super PAC, MAGA Inc., this cycle. The most recent $1 million donation came on July 23.

A spokesperson for Wiles called Means’ account “outrageous, defamatory, and provably false.”

Although there is no way to authoritatively resolve the conflicting narratives of Means and Wiles, prior reporting did indicate that the White House played a role in blocking RFK Jr.’s efforts to define ultraprocessed foods. According to a September 28 report in the Wall Street Journal, “White House staffers” expressed concern that RFK Jr.’s proposed definition could “support existing efforts to sue food companies over bad health outcomes.” Those same staffers also raised the “potential impact on the food industry and international trade agreements.” The Wall Street Journal reported that the White House’s objections “stalled three separate efforts to curb the country’s reliance on ultraprocessed foods.”

Means also pointed a finger at Brian Ballard, a top lobbyist who has raised tens of millions of dollars for Trump’s political operation. Wiles previously worked at Ballard’s firm. Here is what Means said about Ballard in a Sunday interview on CBS News:

So, you know, when you have the midterm strategy, and- and a belief that money for the midterms is more important than voter promises, you’re basically able to excuse everything. And that was, you know, those donations, right, is what Ballard helps you do. They help you donate to the right place, and, and then that’s more of a reason to do things.

One key example cited by Means was a Trump administration decision to loosen regulations on fruit-flavored vapes, which are seen as a key way to hook teens on the devices. The decision was set into motion during a May 2026 lunch at Trump’s golf club in Florida attended by Trump, Ballard, and top executives from two tobacco companies, Reynolds and Altria. During the meeting, Trump was convinced that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should allow U.S. companies to sell fruit-flavored vapes more freely. Shortly afterward, the FDA released new guidance, circumventing the normal rule-making process, to that effect. It was seen as a blow to public health and, shortly after the guidance was issued, FDA Commissioner Marty Makary resigned, reportedly over concerns about the new policy.

“I know that Susie set up a lot of meetings [for Trump] with Brian Ballard,” Means said on CBS. Since the start of Trump’s second term, Reynolds has paid Ballard over $1.1 million in lobbying fees. Reynolds also donated $8 million to MAGA Inc. this cycle and $8 million more to other GOP super PACs. The company also donated an undisclosed amount to the White House ballroom, Trump’s pet project.

Means also cited a February 2026 executive order declaring glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, an herbicide sold by Bayer, to be “crucial to the national security and defense.” The World Health Organization declared glyphosate “probably carcinogenic to humans” in 2015, although that finding is disputed. Bayer has already paid over $10 billion to settle legal claims alleging Roundup causes cancer. The company proposed another $7.25 billion class action settlement earlier this year.

Trump’s executive order allows the government to require Bayer to continue to produce Roundup and provides some measure of liability protection. Although it does not end the existing litigation, it likely makes it easier for Bayer to obtain a favorable settlement.

Means told Rogan that Wiles and her deputies pushed through the executive order after Bayer paid Ballard “a ton of money.” Bayer hired Ballard shortly after the 2024 presidential election and has since paid the firm $660,000.

Overall, Means claims that, as White House chief of staff, Wiles did the bidding of the corporate clients of Ballard and another lobbying firm, Continental, where Wiles’ daughter is a partner. Is Means correct? The jury is still out.

What is undeniable is that Wiles’ tenure as White House chief of staff was extremely lucrative for both Ballard and Continental.

Ballard fights back

Brian Ballard issued a detailed statement on Sunday afternoon, asserting that “Means has made specific claims about Ballard Partners that are false.” The statement, however, is extremely carefully worded.

Regarding fruit-flavored vapes, Ballard says that “No one at Ballard Partners advocated to Susie Wiles or anyone on the White House staff for the authorization of fruit-flavored vapes.” Of course, this says nothing about Ballard’s direct lobbying of Trump, which he did at the May lunch with tobacco executives. He also does not address whether Wiles had any role in setting up the lunch.

On glyphosate, Ballard claims no one “lobbied or communicated with Susie Wiles or anyone in the West Wing” regarding the executive order. This is a narrower universe (”West Wing”) than his statement about vapes, which precluded contact with all “White House staff.” This suggests that Ballard may have lobbied White House staff. It also does not preclude lobbying other agencies involved in preparing the order.

Further, a disclosure shows Brian Ballard was personally listed as a lobbyist for Bayer “on the importance of crop protection tools for agricultural purposes” in the first quarter of 2026, when the executive order was signed. The lobbying was targeting the “White House Office.”

After a historic defeat in the 2026 midterm elections, President Trump named Stephen Miller as his new White House chief of staff, elevating his longtime aide to one of the most powerful positions on earth.

Who is Stephen Miller?

The Washington Post described Miller as someone who “has long railed against political correctness“ and “a prominent voice on issues such as race, gender and immigration.” The Wall Street Journal said Miller has “zealous views.” The New York Times noted that Miller is “a perennial target of critics of Mr. Trump, who have highlighted his right-wing views.” The AP cast Miller as “an immigration hardliner and a bombastic critic of Democrats.” Reuters called Miller “caustic and uncompromising.”

These are all euphemisms for Miller’s actual beliefs, which nearly every major media outlet neglected to state in plain terms. The record is clear: Miller has repeatedly promoted white nationalist ideas.

A Popular Information review of 105 articles about Miller’s appointment in 36 mainstream publications — including CNN, NBC News, CBS News, ABC News, CNBC, NPR, Newsweek, Axios, The Atlantic, The New Yorker, Time, and Semafor — found only two (USA Today and Politico) used the term “white nationalist.” Even those two articles attributed the description to an outside group or “critics,” rather than stating it as a fact.

That Miller frequently advances ideas that are central to white nationalism is undeniable. While Miller has done so throughout his adult life, it is not something that is limited to his past. It is something he continues to do regularly.

In an October 10 post on X, Miller promoted “remigration,” the mass removal of non-European immigrants and their descendants. It is a “white supremacist policy concept,” according to the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism.

The Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a UK-based NGO, explains that remigration is used by the European far-right to mean “forced deportation of migrant communities, with the intent of creating an ethnically or culturally homogeneous society.”

Miller also claims that Democrats are involved in a conspiracy to “displace” Republican voters with non-white immigrants. This is known as the Great Replacement Theory, and it plays a central role in white nationalist movements across the globe.

Miller expressed his views at length in an interview with Fox News’ Mark Levin on January 14, 2024. Levin said it was not a “replacement theory” but “replacement reality.” He said that “leftists” have “condemned the White Europeans for settling this country and that White Europeans are actually the illegal aliens and every other person in the world… who wishes to come [to] the United States, they are the indigenous peoples.” Levin continued that he “cannot even think of another rationale for allowing over 10 million foreigners in this country.”

Miller’s response:

Well, Mark, once again, I mean, you’ve asked exactly the right question. Is there another explanation? Of course, there isn’t another explanation…

They have been open for years. I mean, I grew up in Southern California and I can remember from the age I was in high school, especially that the left talked openly about the fact that they saw mass illegal immigration as a social justice endeavor to reduce the voting and economic power of the descendants of the people who founded and settled this country and to bring in people that were the victims, in their mind, of European colonialism and European conquest, and Western expansionism. And they were very open about this, and have been for so many years.

And so you’ll just have to, excuse me for being outraged to now have major corporate media figures saying, oh, some kind of conspiracy theory, that there’s some sort of demographic or other goal to having a wide open border.

An investigation by New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) found that the Great Replacement Theory was “an organizing principle of white supremacist extremists across the globe.” The Anti-Defamation League explains that it is closely associated with the infamous “14 words,” a white nationalist rallying cry: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.”

In a June 30 appearance on Fox News, Miller said that the United States needed to end birthright citizenship because people from “third world nations” — code for non-white immigrants — are civilizationally inferior to the West.

We have people from all over the world, from third world nations, nations that on their own would have never invented the wheel, let alone modern technology, let alone medicine, let alone air travel, and they can just come into the country, have a baby at a hospital, paid for by you and me, and then that baby is automatically a citizen.

In a June 25 Fox News appearance, Miller said that if people from third-world countries “never had contact with the West [they] would have never developed the combustion engine or airplanes or televisions or radio or the Internet.”

A core tenet of white nationalism is the “alleged inferiority of nonwhite groups.” The supposed superiority of “Western Civilization” has “been used to justify racism since it was coined,” according to historians David Perry and Matthew Gabriele.

Miller has also promoted the 1924 Immigration Act as a model. In a December 9, 2025 Fox News appearance, Miller was asked “[D]o we need something like the 1924 act?” Miller responded that the law was “such a good example” of an effective immigration policy because it had “very strict immigration quotas” and ushered in an era of “negative migration.”

The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum explains that the quotas imposed by the 1924 Immigration Act were “inspired in part by American proponents of eugenics” and “calculated to privilege ‘desirable’ immigrants from northern and western Europe.” The law “limited immigrants considered less ‘racially desirable,’ including southern and eastern European Jews.” (Specifically, the law “provided immigration visas to two percent of the total number of people of each nationality in the United States as of the 1890 national census.”)

The U.S. State Department acknowledged that “the most basic purpose of the 1924 Immigration Act was to preserve the ideal of U.S. homogeneity.”

The email leak

In the run-up to the 2016 election, “Stephen Miller promoted white nationalist literature, pushed racist immigration stories and obsessed over the loss of Confederate symbols,” according to hundreds of leaked emails obtained by the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Hatewatch.

The emails reveal communications between Miller and Katie McHugh, then an editor for Breitbart, a far-right media outlet. In the emails, Miller sent McHugh a link from VDARE, a white nationalist website. He also recommended that Breitbart publish an article comparing the Pope’s comments in support of immigrants with the novel The Camp of the Saints, the 1973 book by French author Jean Raspail. The novel is “an apocalyptic tale that attempts to depict the destruction of white, Western society at the hands of mass immigration from the Global South.” The book gained popularity “among American white supremacist and anti-immigrant groups in the 1980s and 1990s.”

More than 80% of Miller’s emails dealt with race or immigration. After reviewing more than 900 emails, the SPLC “was unable to find any examples of Miller writing sympathetically or even in neutral tones about any person who is nonwhite or foreign-born.” McHugh said that years of communicating with Miller illustrated he was “a person who believes in discredited race science and eugenics“ and uses it to “craft policy to hurt people, especially people of color, especially Muslims.”

A Popular Information analysis of Federal Election Commission (FEC) data revealed that $1.4 billion in midterm spending came from non-profit organizations that do not have to disclose their donors. Spending from dark money organizations was over six times higher this election cycle than in 2018. Separately, a large amount of money came from a small handful of known donors. The top 10 known donors during the midterm election cycle donated over $1 billion, including $436 million from Elon Musk.

Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner has simultaneously represented the U.S. in high-stakes negotiations involving Ukraine, Iran, and Gaza while collecting untold millions in fees from Middle Eastern governments through his private equity firm. When Democrats take control of the House and Senate in 2027, they will have subpoena power to investigate his massive conflicts of interest and hold him accountable.

The best of the rest

In 2025, Republicans redrew the Texas congressional map in an effort to convert “five Democratic-held districts into ones Trump would have carried by at least 10 percentage points.” But the move did not prove successful, as Republican candidates on Tuesday “lost four of five seats their new congressional map was designed to flip and lost two of their own.” (Texas Tribune)

Across the United States, “[v]oters in at least 38 jurisdictions… passed bans or restrictions on data centers” during Tuesday’s election. Data center projects “also suffered setbacks in several states that are hot spots for the projects.” (Washington Post)

Two years ago, Missourians voted to enshrine abortion access in their state constitution. This year, there was another constitutional amendment on the ballot that would have banned almost all abortions and gender-affirming care for minors. The amendment was soundly rejected. (Mother Jones)

Under the 2022 Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) created a rule to provide accommodations for workers related to pregnancy and reproductive health, like providing time off for prenatal care appointments or fertility treatments. Now, the EEOC is seeking to roll back some of these protections. (New York Times)

Numerical information

$4.13: The average price of a gallon of gas on Tuesday morning, according to GasBuddy. Tuesday’s gas prices were the most expensive of any Election Day.

100: There will be at least 100 Democratic women in the House next session, a new record.

$168 million: The drop in Trump’s net worth on Wednesday after the price of Trump Media & Technology Group shares sank to an all-time low following the midterm election.

Quote of the week

“This war must end. It must end. And make no mistake, whenever Trump defies the will of the American people or the law, we will launch investigations, take him to court, and entangle him in legislative razor wire. The days of Trump’s supplicant Senate are over.”

– Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer

Photo of the week

Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law, has represented the United States in high-stakes negotiations involving nearly every major foreign policy issue of Trump’s second term — including Iran, Ukraine, and Gaza. Simultaneously, Kushner has collected untold millions in fees from Middle Eastern governments in his role as the founder of Affinity Partners, a private equity firm.

How is it legal for someone representing the United States in foreign policy negotiations to be on the payroll of foreign governments? It’s not.

The Foreign Emoluments Clause prohibits any officer of the United States from accepting “any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” This is likely why, prior to Trump returning to the White House, Kushner pledged not to be involved in any “foreign policy work” in a second Trump administration. “I served in government, and I think my track record is pretty impeccable,” Kushner told Axios’ Dan Primack in February 2024. “Now I’m a private investor.”

Kushner quickly broke that pledge. He maintains that his conduct is legal because he is not working for the government at all. The Trump administration calls him a “volunteer” and argues the legal restrictions on government officials do not apply to him.

This argument is not credible. According to the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), an individual’s status is not definitively determined by whether there was an official appointment. Rather, anyone “quite clearly engaging in a governmental function” and “working under the direction or supervision of the President” is a government employee. Kushner clearly meets that standard. Kushner has also declined to file the standard financial disclosure required of senior government employees.

Kushner’s decision to disregard legal requirements and remain on the payroll of foreign governments is one of the most egregious conflicts of interest — and corruption scandals — in American history.

Democrats in the House and Senate have repeatedly requested Kushner appear under oath and testify about his conduct. But, lacking a majority in any committee, they were effectively powerless to do so. In a March 16 letter, for example, Democrats on the House Foreign Affairs Committee asked Trump to direct “Jared Kushner to appear before the House Foreign Affairs Committee for a public hearing at the earliest possible opportunity.” Trump simply ignored the request.

Now, the balance of power in Washington has changed.

In 2027, Democrats will take control of the House and Senate, giving them subpoena power. That gives them a number of options to hold Kushner accountable.

Subpoena Jared Kushner

Democrats, once the new Congress is sworn in, will have a majority in every committee of the House and Senate. This will give Democrats the ability to issue a congressional subpoena compelling Kushner to testify under oath.

Kushner would likely attempt to fight such a subpoena but, ironically, his insistence that he is merely an informal “volunteer” would make it more difficult for him to prevail. The president cannot be required to testify before Congress. As a result, the Department of Justice (DOJ) says that the president’s “immediate advisers“ are also immune from testimony.

An “immediate adviser,” however, is defined by the Justice Department “as the President’s alter ego, assisting him on a daily basis in the formulation of executive policy and resolution of matters affecting the military, foreign affairs, and national security and other aspects of his discharge of his constitutional responsibilities.” In other words, not just a government official but among the most important officials in all of government.

The administration has spent the last two years arguing that Kushner is the opposite — a volunteer with no formal government role. It is impossible to simultaneously argue that Kushner is such an essential part of the government that he cannot be compelled to testify but also not part of the government at all. (Although Kushner doesn’t qualify under the DOJ’s standard, two federal courts have rejected the DOJ’s standard as overly broad, finding that “presidents are not kings.”)

Even if, somehow, courts determined that Kushner qualified as an “immediate adviser” generally immune from providing testimony, such immunity does not apply to an “inquiry related to their own private affairs.” Kushner’s work with Affinity is, by definition, a private affair.

If Congress is successful in compelling Kushner to comply with the subpoena, he could be asked to detail all communications with foreign officials regarding investments in Affinity. He should also be required to disclose any conversations about U.S. foreign policy he has had with those same foreign officials — or their colleagues elsewhere in foreign governments. The lack of transparency makes it impossible to know when Kushner is representing the interests of the United States and when he is advancing his own financial interests.

In addition to his personal testimony, Congress could demand all physical and electronic records of these communications, including his reported WhatsApp messages with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

Kushner could also be asked about his contacts with foreign leaders outside the Middle East. Kushner’s plans to develop a luxury resort on ecologically sensitive land in Albania, for example, have spurred months of protests calling for the ouster of the country’s prime minister. Kushner could be asked about his contacts with the Albanian government and whether those contacts were made in his role as foreign policy adviser to Trump or as manager of Affinity’s private equity fund.

Subpoenas, of course, only matter if they can be enforced. There is virtually no chance that the DOJ would file a contempt charge against Kushner. But, under the law, the Senate can initiate a lawsuit to enforce a subpoena. That power does not extend to “an officer or employee of the executive branch of the Federal Government acting within his or her official capacity,” but Kushner insists that classification does not apply to him.

Subpoena Affinity and Kushner’s business partners

Congress also has the power to subpoena Affinity, a private company. Even if a subpoena request for Kushner got held up in court, Congress could still get detailed information from the company itself. While Affinity could also fight the subpoena in court, the firm would have even weaker claims than Kushner.

Thus far, Affinity has ignored multiple requests from Democrats for information about its activities.

Specifically, Congress could subpoena Affinity and demand details on the firm’s fundraising, including how much the company is being paid. Congress could ask for information on who exactly is paying Affinity, what the terms of the deals are, when the fundraising was conducted, and when investors are able to withdraw.

Congress could also subpoena Affinity for information on whether Kushner fundraised for the company after Trump took office. In March, the New York Times reported that Kushner was trying to fundraise “$5 billion or more” for the firm, contradicting earlier statements by Kushner that suggested that he would not fundraise while Trump was in office. Representatives for Affinity reportedly met with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF), and were expected to ask for additional funding from sovereign wealth funds in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar.

Kushner reportedly “discussed his plans to raise billions in new investments for Affinity in private meetings with international business leaders” while in Davos, Switzerland, “as part of the official U.S. delegation at the World Economic Forum.” Affinity’s chief legal officer later told the Times that the company had “early conversations” concerning fundraising, but that it “does not intend to take in any additional capital while Jared is volunteering for the government.”

Congress could subpoena Affinity for details on who exactly was sought for additional funding and what the terms were. Congress could also ask for details about what, if any, official procedures were taken to bifurcate the fundraising efforts from Kushner’s foreign policy role.

Congress could also subpoena the companies involved with Affinity and ask these same questions. According to a March Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing, Affinity’s administrator is SEI Investments Company; its auditor is Ernst & Young; and Bank of America, First Horizon, and the Israeli bank Mizrahi Tefahot are its custodians. These companies have broader interests than Kushner and the Trump administration, and therefore may be more willing to provide information.

Affinity’s counterparties could also be subpoenaed for information. For example, in August, a consortium including Affinity and PIF completed the acquisition of video game company Electronic Arts. The deal also involved Silver Lake, a private equity firm, which could also be subpoenaed.

Since 2025, Democrats have sent letters demanding information into the void and Kushner has continued to act with impunity. Those days should be coming to an end.

In advance of the 2026 midterms, President Trump told voters to “pretend I’m on the ballot because in a way, I am on the ballot.” Many voters listened, and delivered a stinging repudiation of Trump and his hand-picked candidates across the country.

Many candidates who won key races — Jon Ossoff in Georgia, James Talarico in Texas, and Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan — made Trump’s corruption a central issue in their campaigns.

The political balance of power in America changed dramatically last night. Popular Information’s job, however, remains unchanged. We will continue to dig up facts, root out corruption, and hold the powerful accountable.

Today, we’d like to hear from you. What are your thoughts about last night’s results? What do you think it means for the country? And what would you like Popular Information to investigate in the weeks and months ahead?

Leave a comment

Dark money spending in 2026 dwarfs previous cycles. Spending from organizations with secret donors is more than six times higher this cycle compared to 2018.

(To facilitate the comparison, this analysis covers spending through the pre-general report each cycle, which is filed about two weeks before election day. Other comparisons in this report take the same approach.)

This figure is an underestimate as it does not include TV and radio ads that do not expressly advocate voting for or against a candidate aired more than 60 days before the general election. (These are the ads that say: Call Congressman Smith and tell him to stop raising your taxes.) Digital ads and postal mail without express advocacy is excluded entirely.

Among donations from known donors, an increasing amount comes from a handful of donors. The top ten known donors this cycle donated over $1 billion dollars. The top donor this cycle, Elon Musk, has spent more money this cycle ($436 million) than the top ten donors combined in the 2018 cycle ($352 million).

Large donations have fueled an increasing amount of activity by hybrid and super PACs, which do not have any limitations on the size of the donations they can accept. Hybrid and super PACs have spent $7.4 billion in the 2026 election cycle, five times more than such spending in 2018.

In 2026, spending from hybrid and super PACs will account for a majority of the total spending, reflecting the increasing importance of outside groups over campaigns and parties. Through the pre-general report, about $13.4 billion has been spent on the 2026 midterms, smashing previous records.

For more on the role of dark money during this year’s midterms — and what can be done to curtail its influence in the future — check out my new column in The Guardian.

On October 26, the Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee released a report that contains a new, detailed allegation of rape against President Trump. The committee interviewed Beatrice Keul, a Swiss model who met Trump when she was a contestant in the Donald J. Trump American Dream Pageant in November 1993. According to Keul, during the pageant, “Donald Trump’s representative invited Keul to go upstairs at the Plaza Hotel to meet with Trump.” After she was ushered into the New York hotel suite, Keul said Trump grabbed her from behind “and forcibly raped her… tearing her dress and causing bleeding and bruising on multiple parts of her body.”

The allegation was included in the report as evidence of a broader claim regarding Trump’s relationship with child sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein. Specifically, “[a] growing body of evidence demonstrates that Donald Trump was an active participant in Jeffrey Epstein’s sexual abuse of young women during the mid-to-late 1990s.”

Although Keul’s allegation is unproven, the report found that there were multiple factors that enhanced the “credibility of her claims,” including multiple witnesses who confirmed that Trump was sexually pursuing other contestants that evening. Epstein was also at the pageant, and the report noted that Trump’s alleged behavior that evening, including offering to arrange Keul’s admission to New York University, matches a pattern of activity by Epstein and his associates.

Keul has previously discussed a disturbing interaction with Trump at the pageant where she said he groped her, but she did not disclose the alleged rape. It is not uncommon for victims of sexual assault to take years to tell their stories, as a result of the trauma and fear of retribution from powerful figures.

Further, in 2023, Trump was found liable by a jury for the sexual abuse of E. Jean Carroll in 1996, about two years after the alleged rape of Keul. In 2005, Trump was also recorded bragging about sexually assaulting women. “I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything,” Trump told Access Hollywood’s Billy Bush. “Grab ‘em by the pussy. You can do anything.” Overall, the report included detailed accounts involving 11 women. Five of them, including two who were minors at the time, accused Trump of rape or sexual assault.

A White House spokesperson denied the allegations in the report. “None of these allegations are true,” White House spokesperson Lauren Bis said. “This ‘report’ is nothing more than a desperate attempt by crazed Democrats to distract Americans from the surging Republican momentum driven by President Trump’s historic achievements.”

Presented with these facts, a large majority of major media outlets have completely ignored Keul’s new detailed allegations. A Popular Information review of coverage by 25 major news outlets found that 20 did not publish any substantive news reporting on Keul’s allegations.

Of those 20 outlets, 13 did not cover the report from the House Judiciary Committee Democrats on their websites at all: ABC News, CBS News, CNN, NPR, PBS News, Business Insider, Axios, The Associated Press, Bloomberg, The Atlantic, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and Reuters.

Five outlets covered the report but did not mention Keul’s allegations: NBC News, The New York Times, Politico, The Hill, and The Guardian. The New York Times story on the report, which was just 323 words, not only ignored Keul’s new rape allegation but explicitly described the report as a rehashing of information that was already public:

A new report written by Democratic staff aides on the Judiciary Committee accuses Mr. Trump of being “an active participant in Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse of young women,” though it largely cites allegations that have already been public.

A story in Forbes briefly referenced Keul’s allegations in a parenthetical, without naming her or providing any information about her allegations. “Only one of those five allegations had not previously been made public, journalist Julie K. Brown noted Monday,” Forbes reported. The LA Times produced no news reporting on Keul’s allegations but did publish an opinion column on November 1 covering the topic.

Five outlets provided substantive coverage of Keul’s allegations: USA Today, Time, Newsweek, HuffPost, and the Miami Herald.

In an interview with Newsweek, Keul said that since the report was issued she received an anonymous threat against her and her family. “I am scared,” Keul said. She also discussed why she did not report the rape contemporaneously. “In the 90s, it was impossible,” she said. “In the 90s, we didn’t have a voice, we didn’t have associations, we didn’t have anybody who was listening. It was taboo, and therefore, it was impossible to rely on anybody.”

Keul’s allegation was also featured prominently in a Miami Herald report co-written by Julie K. Brown, who won a Pulitzer Prize for her coverage of Epstein. Brown discussed Keul in even more detail in her newsletter. She says that the new account from Keul and accounts from other women have “patterns and similarities in their stories even though many of the women didn’t know each other.” Overall, Brown suggests the report could indicate that Trump and Epstein were “engaged in an intrasexual competition.” She said the issuance of the report indicates Democrats in Congress could launch a real investigation of these allegations against Trump — something the Department of Justice has apparently never done.

Brown suggests that the public should not only take Keul’s allegations seriously but also “take a new look” at previous allegations that have faded from the headlines. As it stands, however, the majority of the public is probably unaware of the existence of a new rape allegation and the broader issues raised in the report because most media outlets have chosen to ignore it.

There appears to be a different standard for Trump than President Clinton. In 1999, the Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and the New York Times, all published news stories about Juanita Broaddrick’s allegation that she was raped in a hotel room by then-Arkansas Attorney General Clinton in April 1978. The Washington Post published the story on its front page and the New York Times ran an interview with Broaddrick. The papers covered the allegation even though Broaddrick’s account of her interactions with Clinton evolved over time. In January 1998, Broaddrick signed a sworn affidavit denying that Clinton had made “unwelcome sexual advances.”

On Monday, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee released a new staff report about President Trump’s alleged relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The report includes a new allegation that Trump raped a young model in 1993. The report also details allegations involving 11 women, five of whom accuse “Trump of rape or sexual assault in Jeffrey Epstein’s close company or presence.”

In 2018, then-Congressman Roger Marshall (R-KS) and his wife purchased $250,000 worth of stock in Ionics Life Sciences, an Irish holding company for Genzada Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. A week after the stock purchase was finalized, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cleared a Genzada product for a human clinical trial. As a senator, Marshall has oversight of the FDA and has sponsored bills that could benefit Genzada.

Since entering national politics, Trump has tried to sow doubt about election results — including the outcome of next week’s midterm elections. The Trump administration has sued to block the certification of Alaska’s results if Democrat Mary Peltola wins the Senate race, offered a $1 million bounty for evidence of voter fraud that leads to a conviction, and tried to disqualify voters the administration claims are noncitizens.

The best of the rest

An investigation by the Intercept “found critical shortcomings in the U.S. military’s procedures for documenting and preserving records of homicides that result from domestic abuse.” Between 2019 and 2024, “the Pentagon recorded 41 domestic abuse-related homicides committed by service members,” but the Intercept found “nearly twice as many.” (The Intercept)

Donald Trump Jr. was reportedly joined on a hunting trip in Mongolia by Umar Kremlev, “a businessman with a criminal record who has close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s personal security service.” The trip took place “after Kremlev attended and paid for some of Trump Jr’s wedding celebrations.” (President Trump has said that his son repaid Kremlev.) (Financial Times)

Since the start of Trump’s second term, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has fired roughly 100 immigration judges as it attempts to ramp up deportations. One judge, Karen Donoso Stevens, who was reassigned despite denying about 85% of the asylum cases that came before her, says that the DOJ began to tell her how to rule on cases. (Washington Post)

Since his wife filed for divorce last year, Texas Attorney General and Republican Senate candidate Ken Paxton has tried to keep his new relationship with Tracy Duhon out of the public eye. She is an aspiring Christian influencer from Louisiana who is registered to vote there as a Democrat. She maintains a public profile in Louisiana, despite staying out of the spotlight in Texas. (New York Times)

Numerical information

Around $3.9 billion: The expected advertising spending across Congressional races for the midterm general election, according to a New York Times analysis.

Over $47 billion: How much the military has spent on the Iran War, according to a Pentagon estimate obtained by Reuters. A Popular Information analysis, however, found that the U.S. spent over $103 billion on the Iran War in just the first 120 days.

250,000: The number of trees Google illegally cut down in Finland to make room for a new data center.

Quote of the week

“What’s up with the gold? Everything, more gold. He’s got the White House looking like Saddam Hussein opened a Cheesecake Factory.”

– Barack Obama, 10/24/26

Photo of the week

Since President Trump entered national electoral politics in 2015, a core part of his political strategy has been undermining confidence in election results.

Before the 2016 election, for example, Trump posted on Twitter, “Of course there is large scale voter fraud happening on and before election day. Why do Republican leaders deny what is going on?” Trump has also repeatedly claimed that mail-in voting leads to rigged elections and that voter fraud by noncitizens is rampant.

This strategy allows Trump to either declare victory or, as with the 2020 election, declare the election was stolen.

The reality is that there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in United States elections. Studies have also shown that noncitizen voting in the U.S. is “extremely rare.”

Nevertheless, when asked if he would respect the upcoming midterm election results regardless of the outcome, Trump responded, “I will, if they’re honest elections.”

Trump and Republicans seem particularly worried about a bad election result this year, as Republicans fight to retain control of both the House and the Senate. A recent PBS News/NPR/Marist poll found that “Democrats hold an 8-point lead among likely voters.” Trump’s approval rating has also plummeted. Earlier this month, Trump’s approval rating reached a record low of 31%, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll.

As a result, the Trump administration has made multiple moves to potentially cast doubt on the outcome of the midterm elections.

The Alaska lawsuit

Last week, Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to block certification of the results of a U.S. Senate election in Alaska if Democratic candidate Mary Peltola wins. The DOJ is taking issue with a Republican candidate, Daniel J. Sullivan, who shares the same name as the current Republican incumbent, who is also on the ballot. The DOJ’s lawsuit argues that “the sole purpose of his candidacy is to benefit the Peltola campaign.” The DOJ’s challenge was filed less than two weeks before the election.

Sullivan, a former teacher, has said that he is not running to confuse voters. The state has already made efforts to distinguish the two candidates on the ballot. For example, it lists Senator Dan Sullivan as a Republican incumbent, while the newcomer is listed without a party affiliation. Senator Sullivan is also listed as Dan, while his challenger is listed as Daniel. Each candidate is also listed with their middle initial. According to the AP, Alaska’s “Republican officials made the decisions about how to list him on the ballot.”

On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that operatives aligned with Peltola tried to recruit the new Sullivan to run. Peltola’s campaign has denied any involvement in the new Sullivan’s campaign. The Times reported that Peltola was “not directly involved,” but was “definitely aware.”

The results of the Alaska election could have a big impact on which party controls the Senate. The DOJ is asking that the results of the election not be certified if the incumbent Sullivan loses within a margin where he would have won with the inclusion of the votes for the other Sullivan.

Trump told reporters that he was the one that told the DOJ to file the lawsuit. Republicans attempted to remove the new Sullivan from the ballot earlier this year, but the efforts were rejected by the Alaska Supreme Court.

Experts have said that the DOJ’s lawsuit “has no merit.” A motion to dismiss the lawsuit was filed by lawyers for Peltola and Senate Democrats. The state has also asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit.

$1 million bounty

Trump is also encouraging people to come forward with claims of voter fraud. On Monday, Trump announced in a post on Truth Social that he would be offering a $1 million reward to people who successfully report voter fraud leading to an arrest and conviction. “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! Thank you for your attention to this matter,” Trump wrote.

Trump did not offer any additional information about the reward, including where the money for the rewards would come from.

Disqualifying tens of thousands of voters

Over the last year, the Trump administration has sued 30 states and the District of Columbia in an attempt to access their unredacted voter rolls and look for noncitizen voting. So far, the administration has lost in 27 of those cases — most recently in Utah, where the state’s Republican lieutenant governor has resisted sharing voter data.

Despite these losses, the Trump administration has continued to claim it identified noncitizen voters in some states. Over the summer, the administration told Nevada it found up to 16,000 noncitizens on the state voter rolls. A month later, the administration revised that number down to just 185. When Nevada officials looked into those voters, they found that all of them were citizens.

Earlier this month, the DOJ made similar claims in California, saying it had identified 20,000 noncitizen voters. The DOJ gave California election officials 48 hours to review the names, and when they refused, Trump threatened them with jail time. He wrote on social media that the officials “will all go to jail for a long period of time!!!” The Trump administration sued the state, demanding that a federal court prevent the state from counting the ballots of those voters. An appeals court ruled against the Trump administration on Monday.

Late last week, Attorney General Todd Blanche told reporters the DOJ was considering bringing similar cases against other states. “There’s a number of states that we’re looking at,” he said. On Monday, the DOJ asked the state of Washington to set aside the ballots of 400 voters it claims are noncitizens.

Threatening local election officials

Over the summer, the DOJ sent letters to election officials in all 50 states and Washington, D.C., warning that they “could face criminal charges for allowing noncitizens to remain on their lists of eligible voters.” The letters were sent by Harmeet Dhillon, who heads the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division.

“Any election officer, including the chief election officer of the state, who knowingly retains noncitizens on the state’s SVRL [state voter registration list] or facilitates noncitizens in receiving and casting ballots could be subject to criminal liability,” one letter said, according to Reuters.

The letters gave state election officials five days to say how they would comply with federal voter laws.

Filling the Department of Justice with election deniers

Trump has also stacked his administration with election deniers who could potentially validate conspiracies about election results. During the 2020 election, for example, Dhillon pushed for donations to Trump’s legal defense fund. “We’re waiting for the United States Supreme Court, of which the president has nominated three justices, to step in and do something,” Dhillon said in an interview on Fox Business after the election, Democracy Docket reported.

In August 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appointed election conspiracy theorist Heather Honey as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Election Integrity. After the 2020 election, Honey falsely claimed that she had discovered that, in Pennsylvania, more votes were reported than voters. Trump cited the false claim to justify his denial of the election results, and repeated the claim to the crowd on January 6, 2021.

Eric Neff, the acting chief of the Voting Section at the DOJ, was formerly a Los Angeles County prosecutor, and “was put on administrative leave in 2022 after he based a prosecution around tips from a right-wing group that has promoted election fraud conspiracy theories,” Mother Jones reported.

Gutting election security

The second Trump administration has also made major cuts to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which provides states with support for election security efforts. According to September reporting by the AP, the Trump administration “cut some 1,000 employees from CISA and slashed $10 million from two cybersecurity initiatives, including one dedicated to helping state and local election officials.”

The agency, which was created during the first Trump administration, did not release an election infrastructure security plan until 40 days before the midterms this year. Election officials in multiple states have said that the agency “provided them no assistance — and no explanation for its absence — during the most critical planning stages for the upcoming midterms,” ProPublica reported.

On November 8, 2018, then-Congressman Roger Marshall (R-KS) and his wife completed a purchase of 1,250 shares of Ionics Life Sciences, a privately held company, according to documents from the Irish Companies Registration Office obtained by Popular Information. The Marshalls spent $250,000 to acquire the stock at a price of $200 per share.

It was an impeccably timed purchase.

Ionics Life Sciences is an Irish holding company with no employees. Its wholly owned subsidiary, Genzada Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., is a Kansas-based firm that is developing GZ17-6.02, an experimental cancer treatment developed from plant extracts, including the black calla lily. The company was founded by Gene Zaid, who has donated $6,800 to Marshall during his career in Congress.

On November 16, 2018, about a week after the Marshalls were allocated their shares, Genzada Pharmaceuticals USA announced the FDA “approved” its application “for a Phase 1 human clinical trial of the company’s flagship molecule GZ17-6.02 (6.02) for patients with advanced solid organ tumors or lymphoma.”

The approval of clinical trials on humans is a major benchmark for the development of any new drug. It typically increases the value of a company by clearing a major regulatory hurdle, moving the drug from the preclinical to clinical stage. Investors value companies like Genzada based on the odds of the drug ultimately reaching the market and, while still a long shot, being cleared for human trials improves those odds.

During a January 2019 visit by local lawmakers to Genzada’s offices in Sterling, Kansas, weeks after the FDA clearance, Zaid described the company as a newly attractive investment. “Now we have something,” Zaid told the lawmakers, according to the Hutchinson News. “Now, if you want to invite friends to invest, you can.”

Under the STOCK Act, Marshall was required to disclose his joint purchase of stock in Ionics Life Sciences within 45 days of his purchase. Marshall did not file his required transaction report, however, until August 28, 2019, more than 240 days late. Subsequent disclosures reveal that the value of his Ionics stock, by 2020, had increased and was now worth up to $500,000.

On the disclosure, Marshall lists the initial purchase date as October 1, 2018, and incorrectly lists its location as Sterling, Kansas. It is Genzada that is based in Kansas, not Ionics. Marshall did not report that Genzada was a subsidiary of Ionics until his August 2026 report.

Marshall’s campaign and Senate office did not respond to detailed questions about Marshall’s purchase of Genzada stock.

Marshall now oversees FDA, proposed bills that could benefit Genzada

When Marshall joined the Senate in 2021, he joined the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, which oversees the FDA, the organization that will ultimately determine whether Genzada’s GZ17-6.02 will be approved.

While in this role, Marshall has sponsored legislation that could ultimately benefit Genzada. In 2025, for example, Marshall co-sponsored the Small Biotech Innovation Act. It would exempt drugs created by small pharmaceutical companies from having to negotiate their prices with Medicare. In 2022, Marshall offered an amendment to a reconciliation bill that would similarly exempt “breakthrough treatments and life-saving medicine” from “federal government-controlled drug pricing.” He highlighted that his amendment would benefit emerging cancer drugs. “If Congress eliminates incentives for an industry with a 95-100 percent fail rate in cancer drugs, we’ll never get a cure,” Marshall said. “Americans deserve better.”

He has also publicly advocated for greater access to experimental drugs, a category that includes Genzada’s GZ17-6.02, once they have been determined to be safe. “I think this is the balance here,” Marshall told the right-wing website Just the News in May 2026. “Let’s make sure the drug is safe, but then let the doctors and the patients have more skin in the game and make that determination if they think they should try it or not.”

He has also spoken about his role in evaluating complaints from pharmaceutical companies whose drugs are rejected by the FDA. “[T]he people that struggle to get their drugs approved blow up my office, but then I dig down with the FDA,” Marshall said during an April 16, 2026 committee hearing. Marshall praised the FDA for approving drugs in record numbers despite funding constraints.

This is not the first instance of Marshall’s official advocacy overlapping with his personal financial interests. Last week, the American Prospect reported that Marshall has introduced legislation benefiting Nueterra, a Kansas private equity firm run by Marshall’s longtime business partner and donor Dan Tasset. Marshall’s family has invested in Nueterra funds.

On Monday, House Judiciary Committee Democrats released a new staff report about President Trump’s alleged relationship with convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The report details allegations involving 11 women, including five of whom accuse “Trump of rape or sexual assault in Jeffrey Epstein’s close company or presence.”

The report is based on interviews conducted by Judiciary Committee staff, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) records, released documents, and survivor accounts. While the majority of the allegations included in the report were already public, it includes a new allegation that Trump raped a young model at a 1993 pageant.

“The report concludes that, based on the available evidence and witness testimony, Trump and Paolo Zampolli—who until recently served as a senior Trump Administration official and diplomat—may have been co-conspirators in Jeffrey Epstein’s conspiracy to traffic and abuse young women in the 1990s,” a press release states.

The report alleges that “Trump has lied about the nature and extent of his relationship with Epstein dozens of times.” For example, Trump has claimed that he kicked Epstein out of his club at Mar-a-Lago. But according to the report, members of Congress reviewed a 2009 document that reveals that Trump “stated unequivocally that Epstein ‘was never asked to leave’ Mar-a-Lago.” The file is redacted in public documents. Trump has also denied ever being on Epstein’s plane, but files show that Trump is listed on the plane’s flight logs “at least eight different times” throughout the 1990s.

Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee are now asking for a new independent investigation. The report calls for an independent special counsel to be appointed to investigate potential co-conspirators.

A press release argues that the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) “conflict of interest and obstruction make clear that Trump’s appointees cannot be trusted to pursue accountability.” The report alleges that the DOJ “actively obstructed the Epstein investigation into any co-conspirators, attempted to prevent the release of the Epstein files, and then released an incomplete and heavily redacted set to the public.”

The report also reveals that documents in the Epstein files allege that Attorney General Todd Blanche, who was Deputy Attorney General at the time, “likely knew about certain survivors’ claims against” Trump when he interviewed Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell in prison. According to a transcript, Blanche, on at least three occasions, “directed Maxwell not to discuss” an individual whose report to the FBI implicated Trump, but whose allegations were not yet public. The report alleges that by doing so, Blanche “may have engaged in criminal obstruction of justice.”

“The bottom line: there is more than sufficient evidence to launch a criminal investigation,” the report states.

“The women who survived Epstein deserve to be heard, Congress must have the complete files required by law, and an independent special counsel must investigate Epstein’s co-conspirators and DOJ’s cover-up and ensure that state and foreign prosecutors have the evidence they need to pursue justice,” Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee Jamie Raskin (D-MD) said.

The White House has denied the allegations laid out in the new report. “None of these allegations are true. This ‘report’ is nothing more than a desperate attempt by crazed Democrats to distract Americans from the surging Republican momentum driven by President Trump’s historic achievements,” a White House spokesperson told NBC News.

“I will take care of you”

The report reveals new allegations against Trump from Beatrice Keul, a former Swiss model who participated in the Donald J. Trump American Dream Pageant in 1993 at age 24.

According to an interview she gave to committee staff, both Trump and Epstein introduced themselves to Keul when she arrived and promised to take care of things like her travel and education. Keul said Trump told her “I will take care of you” several times. So, when a Trump representative asked her to come to his room later in the day, she assumed he was following up on his promises to get her a visa and a New York University education.

Instead, Keul alleges that Trump raped her in a “brutal” assault that left her bleeding and covered in bruises. She said she went through the rest of the pageant in a “daze” because her passport had been taken from her and she did not want to raise alarms. After the pageant, she got her passport back and returned to Switzerland. She declined to participate in another Trump-sponsored pageant a few weeks later, but Trump called her and repeated his offer to take care of her.

In 2024, Keul told a different version of this story to the Daily Mail. At the time, she said when she arrived in Trump’s room, he “jumped” on her and began “grabbing and touching” her, but that ultimately she was able to hold him off. “I’m very tall, that’s what helped me a lot,” Keul said to the Daily Mail. The report does not say why Keul changed her story.

The report also includes the stories of four other women who have accused Trump of sexual assault.

Stacey Williams, a swimsuit model who dated Epstein in the early 1990s, has accused Trump of groping her when she and Epstein visited Trump’s office in 1993. According to CNN, three friends of Williams have separately confirmed that she told them about the incident, which Williams later described as “trophy hunting” for the two men.

Jill Harth, who recruited young models for Trump’s pageants, filed a lawsuit against Trump in 1997 claiming that he had “forcibly kissed, fondled, and restrained” her at a Mar-a-Lago party in 1993 when she was 31. The lawsuit also claimed that the same year, Trump had demanded Harth provide him with access to an 18-year-old contestant “whom Trump referred to as a ‘sex object.’” Harth’s lawsuit was resolved as a part of a settlement by Trump in a separate contractual suit brought against him by Harth’s then-partner.

A woman identified by the pseudonym “Katie Johnson” filed a lawsuit against Trump in 2016 accusing him of raping and sexually abusing her in 1994 at a party hosted by Epstein when she was 13 years old. According to DOJ documents, Johnson “was asked to strip down to her underwear and give a massage to Epstein” and “massage the penis of Epstein’s guest, Trump, with her hands.” Johnson later dropped the suit.

In 2019, a woman described as Jane Doe 4 came to the FBI with claims that in 1983, when she was 13 or 14 years old, she “bit [Trump] while performing oral sex” and that he “hit [her] in the face after she laughed about biting [him].”

Although Jane Doe 4’s claims have not been substantiated, the report alleges that the DOJ may be “still withholding a huge number of documents related to the allegations,” stating that the Post and Courier reported that it had reviewed FBI agents’ notes that contained new details about Jane Doe 4’s interview, but that those notes have been withheld by the DOJ for being “duplicative.”

In addition to these five women who claim to have been abused by Trump, the report also details the accounts of three Epstein survivors who believe that Trump participated in Epstein’s crimes.

Maria Farmer, a former assistant to Epstein who was abused by him, has said that on one occasion she went to meet Epstein in his office and Trump approached her there. But Epstein told Trump, “No, no. She’s not here for you,” before taking Trump to a different room. Farmer believed that there was a different young woman in that room waiting for Trump. She has said that she urged authorities to look into Trump decades ago. According to the report, Farmer’s “reports to FBI appear to be unlawfully omitted from the files released by DOJ pursuant to” the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA).

DOJ documents released under the EFTA detail other concerning incidents involving Trump. In one case, Trump was accused of agreeing with Epstein that one of Epstein’s victims, who was 14 at the time, was a “good one.” In another instance, a Jane Doe described how she was introduced to Trump by Maxwell and felt she was being offered to him for sex. She recalled Maxwell saying “things like, ‘Oh I think he likes you. Aren’t you lucky. This is great.’”

The report also provides three additional examples of women who seemed to have connections to Trump and Epstein. The first woman, Lauren Petrella, has never made accusations against Trump herself, but Harth’s lawsuit claimed that he sexually assaulted her. The other two women, Jane Does 5 and 6, spent time with Trump and Epstein during the 1990s, but have not accused Trump of any wrongdoing.

The flier does not mention Crowley’s Republican opponent, Congressman Tom Tiffany, but urges Wisconsinites to “VOTE NO NOVEMBER 3RD.” The mailer was obtained through Popular Information’s new app, PaidForBy.info:

The latest polls showed Crowley clinging to a small lead over Tiffany. Crowley, a political moderate, beat democratic socialist Francesca Hong in the primary by just 2,700 votes. So if even a small number of Hong’s most progressive supporters vote against Crowley — as the mailer encourages them to do — or decide to stay home, it could plausibly swing the race to Tiffany.

While the Progressive Alliance of Wisconsin purports to be politically left-leaning, its organizers have gone to considerable lengths to conceal who is behind the organization. It was only registered a few days ago, on October 19. Although it claims to be a Wisconsin organization, it is registered to a Chicago address. Since it has filed so recently, the Progressive Alliance of Wisconsin will not have to disclose its donors until 2027.

A Popular Information analysis of Progressive Alliance of Wisconsin’s initial expenditures, however, reveals that it is linked to Republican operatives.

Progressive Alliance of Wisconsin has reported $298,836 in expenditures, all for political mailers opposing Crowley. All of the money has gone to The Classen Group. The Classen Group has been active in Oklahoma, where it has been paid $470,000 for political services between 2022 and 2026. All of its political clients have been Republicans, including $236,449 from Majority Fund, an Oklahoma super PAC supporting state House Republicans.

Jake Parsons is the chair and treasurer of Majority Fund. On a 2022 FEC donation to a Republican candidate, Parsons also lists himself as a partner at The Classen Group. In Oklahoma campaign finance filings, Majority Fund and The Classen Group list the same address. Parsons has also been listed as a partner of G.R. Pro, another political consulting firm that is located on Classen Boulevard in Oklahoma City.

James Trammell is listed as the treasurer of Progressive Alliance of Wisconsin. James Bruce Trammell is also a GOP operative who was paid as a consultant for Charles McCall’s unsuccessful campaign for governor this cycle. Parsons was the manager for McCall’s 2018 Oklahoma House campaign and incorporated McCall’s 2026 gubernatorial campaign.

Parsons did not respond to requests for comment over phone, email, and text.

In addition to its connection to Republican operatives, the anti-Crowley mailer is highly deceptive. It quotes Crowley saying, “We cannot defund the police” during a July 2026 debate. But Crowley continued, “We should be investing in public safety, and that doesn’t mean more money to police officers. That’s like investing in systems like community violence interruption.” Hong, Crowley’s progressive opponent, said roughly the same thing, “The governor cannot defund police, and I’m not here to govern by slogan. I’m here to make sure that I am the governor that is most serious about public safety, and that means investing in the things that we know prevent crime.”

The connection to another sketchy operation in Minnesota

The mailers targeting Crowley in Wisconsin are very similar — in substance and style — to mailers attacking Senator Amy Klobuchar, the Democratic nominee for governor in Minnesota. In Minnesota, a group called Citizens for Public Safety Transparency, LLC is sending mailers attacking Klobuchar from the left, citing police accountability and single-payer health care.

Citizens for Public Safety Transparency, LLC has not registered as a political committee with the Minnesota Campaign Finance Board, so there is no information about whether it is paying The Classen Group or someone else to produce the mailers. The entity has only registered as an LLC in Delaware.

Minnesota Democrats “filed a complaint on Thursday with the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board against Citizens for Public Safety Transparency,” the Star Tribune reports. The address printed on the mailers “leads to an office and storage property in Walker, about three and a half hours north of the Twin Cities.” The owner of that property told the Star Tribune that Citizens for Public Safety Transparency, LLC “has no lease or office there.”

On Monday, Elon Musk announced in a post on X that he plans to give “every kid in America” one share of SpaceX, his rocket, satellite, and AI company. At current prices, Musk’s giveaway would be valued at around $10.5 billion. But there are reasons to be skeptical of Musk’s motivations.

No Going Back PAC, an offshoot of Trump’s MAGA Inc. super PAC, is spending about $2.4 million to attack a Florida Democrat for buying stock in Blackstone, a New York private equity firm. Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman is one of the largest funders of MAGA Inc. and Trump himself has owned between $1.35 million and $2.93 million in Blackstone stock.

When Amy Acton was twelve, her stepfather was charged with raping her. Now, she is the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Ohio and her opponent, Vivek Ramaswamy, has turned her abuse into fodder for an attack ad. Popular Information named the corporations and executives bankrolling Ramaswamy’s campaign and asked them if they supported the ad.

The best of the rest

Julio Herrera Velutini, a billionaire banker who faced felony bribery charges before striking a plea deal, wanted to be pardoned. His family hired Alina Habba, one of Trump’s former personal lawyers, and guaranteed her “more than $50 million over four years.” Weeks after Habba began her new job, “Trump granted Mr. Herrera a full and unconditional pardon.” (New York Times)

A defense contractor allegedly made “campaign cash-for-contracts” deals with former South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham and Congressman James Clyburn (D-SC). The FBI was investigating the interactions, but then Trump began his second term and gutted the teams investigating public corruption. (ProPublica)

For decades, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has abided by an unwritten rule to avoid any activities that could influence an election for 60 days prior to election day. This year, that rule has gone out the window. In recent weeks, the DOJ sued California for refusing to investigate voters’ citizenship, federal agents raided the home of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), and Attorney General Todd Blanche stumped for Republican candidates. (The Guardian)

A major argument against California’s proposed wealth tax is that billionaires would simply leave the state rather than pay up. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg threatened to do that. To convince him to stay, a Meta special committee made a deal with Zuckerberg this week providing him with financial incentives in exchange for remaining in California for at least eight years. (Politico)

Numerical information

$431 million: The amount that Musk-backed PACs have spent on ads during the midterm elections, according to a Washington Post analysis.

$6.29: Shares of Trump Media & Technology Group hit a record low intraday price this week.

$25 billion: The amount Meta will pay to New Mexico after a jury found the company liable for misleading Meta users in the state about how the company would protect their data privacy.

Quote of the week

“There is no person who hates the idea of people enriching themselves fraudulently over access to the government than Donald J Trump.”

– Vice President JD Vance.

Photo of the week

At 12 years old, Amy Acton was the victim of sexual abuse. After her stepfather was indicted on charges of raping Acton, her estranged mother, Donna Arthur, took her stepfather’s side and left the state with him as he fled justice.

Now, Acton is the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Ohio and her Republican opponent, Vivek Ramaswamy, is turning her history of abuse into a political attack ad. In the ad, Arthur accuses Acton of lying about her past. Arthur also came out against Acton in 2020, when Acton was leading Ohio’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic as director of the state’s Department of Health, saying that she did not grow up in poverty and she was not raped by her stepfather. Court and police records cast doubt on Arthur’s claims.

The ad has been widely condemned by Democrats and Republicans as “morally wrong” and “revolting.” Acton’s brother, Philip Stearns, responded to the ad on Tuesday, saying, “It’s not surprising that Vivek Ramaswamy has stooped to such a despicable low as to attempt to turn the sexual abuse Amy endured at twelve years old from our birth mother’s husband into a political talking point.”

A Popular Information analysis of campaign finance records reveals that the ad was funded, in part, with contributions from the PACs and executives of major American corporations, including Bank of America, Deloitte, DraftKings, Kroger, and Nationwide.

The ad began circulating on social media on Monday night when it was included in a political survey. On Tuesday evening, Ramaswamy told reporters that the ad came from his campaign but had not yet been shown on TV. Despite bipartisan backlash, Ramaswamy’s campaign decided to dig in later on Tuesday night, spending $4 million to air the ad across Ohio.

In the ad, Arthur did not specifically mention the rape charges against her husband, but repeatedly called her daughter a liar. “Amy has a serious problem. She is a liar. She lies about her past. She says she grew up living in a tent. None of that is true. She’s lied her entire life,” Arthur said.

Arthur’s account, however, is not credible.

Court records indicate that Acton’s stepfather was found living in a tent when Acton was a child, and Acton’s campaign provided documents to CBS indicating that the family lived in a tent for a year.

Arthur has previously claimed that Acton lied about being raped by her stepfather. In a 2020 interview with an anti-abortion group called Operation Rescue, Arthur said, “I haven’t seen my daughter since she was 12 years old and that was when my daughter lied and said my second husband raped her.”

Acton’s stepfather, Cledith Arthur, was arrested and charged with raping Acton in 1978. He pleaded not guilty but was later indicted by a grand jury. Arthur supported her husband after his arrest. She went with him when he fled Ohio for Pennsylvania to avoid prosecution, abandoning her children. Cledith Arthur never returned to Ohio, despite warrants for his arrest. He died in 2004.

In the same 2020 interview, Arthur said that a rape accusation by Cledith Arthur’s daughter from a previous marriage against him was also false. Arthur said, “She had accused him of rape, but that was wrong too.” Court and newspaper records show that Cledith Arthur was charged with incest in 1974 for allegedly raping his eldest daughter, according to HuffPost.

After moving to Pennsylvania with her husband, Arthur was found guilty of theft by deception in 1995 and 1996 and animal neglect in 2021. When Arthur attempted to appeal the animal neglect case, a judge found her “not credible.”

The ad was condemned by a host of prominent Republican officials and political commentators. Alyssa Farah Griffin, a former communications director for President Trump, said it was “the grossest ad I can think of… anyone behind it should be ashamed.” Lydia Mihalik, the director of the Ohio Department of Development for Ohio Governor Mike DeWine (R), said, “There are lines we shouldn’t cross, and this is one of them… I don’t have to agree with Amy Acton’s politics to believe that exploiting someone’s childhood trauma is wrong.” Republican strategist Leslie Shedd described the ad as “despicable” and “morally wrong and reprehensible.”

The ad was financed by Ramaswamy’s campaign, which has raised money from numerous major corporations — both through corporate PACs and from top executives.

Popular Information contacted these companies and asked if they believed the ad featuring Acton’s mother was acceptable. DraftKings declined to comment and the other companies did not respond.

At President Trump’s urging, the Florida legislature redrew the state’s electoral maps in an effort to increase the number of Republicans in Florida’s Congressional delegation. One of the members targeted by the changes is Congresswoman Kathy Castor (D-FL), who represents the state’s 14th Congressional District. Republicans changed the borders of Castor’s district in May 2026. The new 14th Congressional District supported Trump over Harris by more than 10 points.

In an election where Republicans are facing political headwinds, flipping Castor’s seat is a top priority. No Going Back PAC, an offshoot of Trump’s MAGA Inc. super PAC, has spent at least $6.4 million opposing Castor.

About $2.4 million of No Going Back PAC’s spending, according to AdImpact, has gone toward broadcasting an ad that attacks Castor for buying stock in a financial company that bought up property in Tampa. “In Congress, Kathy Castor traded stocks in a Wall Street firm that bought more than 1,600 Tampa Bay homes, raising rents and pricing people out,” the narrator says. “Kathy Castor profited.”

Although the ad does not name the “Wall Street firm,” it cites a June 22, 2013, article published in the Tampa Bay Times. According to that report, Blackstone, a New York private equity firm, through its subsidiary Invitation Homes “spent more than $250 million acquiring 1,650 homes in the Tampa Bay area.”

One of MAGA Inc.’s largest donors is Blackstone CEO and co-founder Stephen A. Schwarzman, who donated $5 million to MAGA Inc. in December 2025 and another $5 million in September 2026. MAGA Inc., which funds No Going Back PAC, is now spending millions to attack Castor for buying Blackstone stock.

Castor’s investment in Blackstone was tiny. According to reports filed by the House of Representatives, Castor purchased Blackstone stock worth between $1,000 and $15,000 in February 2015. She added to her position in January 2019, although the combined value was still $15,000 or less. When Castor sold her position in Blackstone in March 2020, the value was still somewhere between $1,000 and $15,000. At most, Castor made a few thousand dollars from her brief ownership of Blackstone.

In response to a request for comment from Schwarzman about the ad, a Blackstone spokesperson said that “Blackstone no longer owns Invitation Homes” and sent Popular Information a fact sheet titled, “Supply Deficit, Not Institutions, Driving Affordability Challenges.” The spokesperson did not address that Castor ad directly.

Trump, who says he controls the super PAC behind the Castor ad, has made far larger purchases of Blackstone stock. At the end of 2025, Trump owned Blackstone stock worth between $1.35 million and $2.93 million. He has continued to purchase Blackstone stock this year, most recently disclosing a purchase of between $250,000 and $500,000 worth of Blackstone stock on August 21.

Although Blackstone sold its ownership stake in Invitation Homes in 2019, it subsequently acquired more real estate companies. In 2024, Blackstone owned nearly 4,000 homes in the Tampa area. This did not get in the way of Trump buying millions in Blackstone stock.

Trump’s super PAC is banking that the public will not find out who is funding the ad or the details of its attack against Castor.

On Monday morning, Elon Musk announced in a post on his social media platform X that he plans to give American children one share of SpaceX, his rocket, satellite, and AI company. “Next year, I will give one of my SpaceX shares to every kid in America,” Musk wrote. “This will be the first of many.”

One share of SpaceX stock would be worth around $146 for each child, based on Friday’s closing price. According to 2025 census data, there are around 72 million children in the United States. If Musk donated one share to every child, the giveaway would be valued at around $10.5 billion today.

Musk did not provide any details on the giveaway, including whether shares would be given to every person under 18 or the exact timing of the giveaway. It is also not immediately clear how Musk would distribute the SpaceX shares to American children. On X, Musk responded “Yes” to a post about the shares potentially being distributed via Trump Accounts. A person familiar with the matter told Bloomberg that Musk has “agreed in principle to distribute the stock through the Trump Accounts initiative.”

On Monday, President Trump celebrated Musk’s announcement, writing in a post on Truth Social that the shares would be going to Trump Accounts. “A BIG THANK YOU to our legendary friend, Elon Musk, for his incredible generosity in giving SpaceX Stock to millions of American children through TRUMP ACCOUNTS!” Trump wrote.

Trump Accounts are savings accounts for children that were launched on July 4. This summer, Trump said in an interview that he believed that Musk would donate SpaceX stock to Trump Accounts. “Well, I think that he will do that,” Trump told CNBC. In July, SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell separately announced that she and her husband would be donating a share of SpaceX to around two million children with Trump Accounts.

While, at first blush, it seems like an act of charity, there are reasons to be skeptical of Musk’s motivations.

Changing the narrative

A Quinnipiac poll conducted last month found that 74% of Americans have little to no trust in the leaders of AI companies. This is a major problem when AI companies are seeking approval from communities to build massive data centers, trying to convince millions of Americans to buy their products, and lobbying for legal protection from liability risks.

Is Musk motivated by a sincere desire to help American children? Or is this just a public relations gimmick? Influential figures in Musk’s orbit have suggested rehabilitating the image of the AI industry is at least part of the motivation.

David Sacks, Musk’s longtime friend and co-chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, has been advocating for AI companies to donate stock as a way to change the perceptions of the public. In a post on X, Sacks wrote, “I hope every AI company will follow the lead of [Shotwell] and give American kids a vested interest in their success. This would do much to improve the public’s image of AI.”

A memo from the Treasury Department on Trump Accounts says, “Donors are attracted by the hope that a stock contribution with a five-year holding period may lead recipients and their families to feel that they have a stake in the fate of the corporation to a greater extent than if the child’s holdings of the corporation were only through an index fund.” Any child who has a Trump Account will not be able to sell their donated SpaceX stock for at least five years.

There is considerable potential for Musk and other AI executives to use stock donations to sway the interests of an entire generation of children and their parents. While Musk announced donating one share to all children, future gifts could be targeted to specific geographic areas. For example, if a company wanted to construct a data center in a particular area but was facing pushback, it could donate stock to all of the children in the area.

For Musk, all of this comes at a small cost. Musk is the world’s richest person, with a current net worth of around $904 billion, according to Bloomberg. A donation of $10.5 billion is just over 1% of his net worth.

Musk also may have been seeking to keep up with one of his rivals in the AI industry. On Sunday, Anthropic committed 5% of its shares to the Anthropic Public Benefit Fund, which it described as “a new wholly owned entity dedicated entirely to the public benefit.” Overall, about 20% of Anthropic’s shares have been dedicated to the public good. The co-founders have personally pledged 80% of their equity to charity.

Under Anthropic’s announcement on X, Musk replied, “I recommend giving the shares directly to the public.” The next morning, Musk declared his own donations.

Tax benefits

The donation of SpaceX stock would provide huge tax benefits to Musk personally.

As the founder, Musk paid essentially nothing for his SpaceX stock. Giving the shares away allows Musk to avoid about $2.5 billion in federal capital gains tax.

Because stock donations must be routed to Trump Accounts through a non-profit charity, the donations also count as a tax-deductible charitable donation and can generally be written off at their full market value for up to 20% of the donor’s adjusted gross income.

Musk has not said which private foundation he would make the donation through, but it seems likely that he would use his own Musk Foundation. Not only would this help Musk secure a tax deduction, it would also help the Musk Foundation meet its minimum annual giving requirements — which it has a history of violating.

Private foundations, including the Musk Foundation, are required to give away 5% of their assets each year. According to the New York Times, the Musk Foundation fell short of this 5% requirement in 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024. The current value of the Musk Foundation is unknown, but its assets were worth over $14 billion in 2024.

The uncertain future

The pledge to donate billions of dollars in stock is just one in a long line of grand promises made by Musk. In several previous cases, he has reneged or not fully fulfilled his promises.

For example, in 2021, Musk told the United Nations’ World Food Programme (WFP) that if they could come up with a $6 billion plan to solve world hunger, he would sell Tesla stock to fund it. WFP quickly sent Musk a plan, but he did not donate the $6 billion.

Musk later donated $5.7 billion in Tesla stock — to his own foundation.

On Saturday, thousands of “No Kings” events were held around the country. It was a critical day for the anti-Trump protest group, which has attracted millions of participants since 2025. Saturday’s events focused on early voter activation ahead of the midterm elections.

Then, at around 1:30 p.m. Eastern, No Kings’ Instagram account was taken offline. It left the organization without its biggest megaphone during the height of the protests.

The account remained offline for approximately 90 minutes. Even after the account was restored, it took until after 5 p.m. before No Kings could post new content to the account. Common Cause called Meta’s actions “an alarming act of corporate censorship,” accusing the company of deplatforming “grassroots voter mobilization efforts.”

Just after 6 p.m., Meta spokesperson Andy Stone released a statement, claiming the suspension was an “error”:

When accounts post, share or comment at very high frequencies it can trigger automated systems. That’s what happened with the No Kings IG account in the lead up to today’s day of action. Unfortunately, that automated action was clearly taken in error. Everything is now working as it should and we sincerely apologize.

No Kings cast doubt on this explanation. “In the 24 hours before our account was shut down, we posted only a handful of times and livestreamed to thousands,” the group said. “Meta’s ‘high-frequency’ excuse doesn’t add up.”

Meta’s action against No Kings is the latest in a series of “errors” impacting the accounts of Trump critics. On October 15, a Brazilian court ordered Meta to stop throttling the accounts of President Lula, a Trump critic who is facing Trump’s preferred candidate, Flávio Bolsonaro, in a runoff election. Meta acknowledged that Lula’s accounts faced restrictions but, according to the Associated Press, blamed the issue on “unrelated global technical glitches.” In September, Instagram suspended the accounts of Albanian groups protesting Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who is planning to develop a luxury resort in the country. A Meta spokesperson said the accounts were “disabled by mistake.” Meta also initially rejected ads for the film Musk, a critical documentary of Trump’s political ally, calling it “an error.”

In other cases, Meta has shut down accounts at the explicit request of the Trump administration. Last October, then-Attorney General Pam Bondi said the Department of Justice (DOJ) contacted Meta and asked it to shut down a Facebook page called “ICE Sighting-Chicagoland.” Meta complied with the request. The Trump administration has been targeting anti-fascist and other left-wing groups through a controversial presidential memorandum, NSPM-7.

The censorship of Trump critics comes as Meta has sought to establish a close relationship with Trump and his administration. Meta donated $1 million to Trump’s second inauguration and $5 million to Trump’s White House ballroom, and paid $25 million to settle a lawsuit Trump filed over his suspension from Facebook after January 6, 2021. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg appointed UFC CEO Dana White, a top Trump ally, to the Meta board and named Dina Powell McCormick, a deputy national security advisor during Trump’s first term, as Meta’s president.

Zuckerberg has visited the White House frequently and reportedly talks to Trump regularly on the phone. He has been influential in shaping the administration’s AI policy.

Popular Information contacted Meta for comment and asked a spokesperson if it had received any communications regarding No Kings from the Trump administration or allied groups.

The company did not answer that inquiry but referred us to another post on X from a Meta spokesperson which claimed that the No Kings Instagram account was suspended after “our network security systems detected the use of a Claude tool reading profiles, posts, and hashtags, the rate of which sharply increased (~4x volume) in intense bursts on October 17.” This differs from the initial explanation by the same spokesperson which claimed the suspension was due to No Kings posting, sharing, or commenting at high volumes.

TikTok censors ads for Musk documentary

Another social network with close ties to the Trump administration, TikTok, is censoring ads promoting Musk, the critical documentary. After briefly feuding with Trump, Musk has once again emerged as a key ally. (Trump awarded Musk with the “National Medal of Science” earlier this month.) Musk has become the largest donor to groups supporting Republican candidates in the 2026 midterms by a wide margin, contributing over $300 million so far.

Musk has called Alex Gibney, the filmmaker behind Musk, an “idiot,” a “horrible human,” and a “tinfoil hat crackpot.” X has banned all ads for Musk on the social network he owns, X.

On Friday, Bleecker Street, the company distributing Musk, revealed that TikTok has permanently banned it from advertising the film. TikTok’s policies prohibit ads “referencing, promoting, or opposing” any “current executive, legislative, or judicial public officials.” Musk, however, is a private CEO and has no current public position. The policy also prohibits “[a]dvocacy for or against” any “past, current, or proposed elections.” These ads, however, promote a film, not any candidate.

The executive chairman and co-founder of Oracle, which owns 15% of TikTok and controls a board seat, is Trump-supporting billionaire Larry Ellison. Further, Ellison was a member of Tesla’s board, where Musk is the CEO, from 2018 to 2022. Oracle also provides some of the infrastructure to train Musk’s AI chatbot, Grok.

On Tuesday morning, Popular Information broke the news that newly appointed White House Press Secretary Katie Zacharia did not have a law license — despite claiming for years that she was a practicing attorney. On Friday, after days of intense scrutiny about her legal credentials, Zacharia was “transitioned out” of the role.

CNN reported that Zacharia’s removal was a direct result of her inability to satisfactorily respond to Popular Information’s reporting, which became a problem for her even on typically friendly platforms like Fox News:

After a string of surprisingly combative interviews on Fox News – specifically her appearance with Trump’s friend Sean Hannity on Thursday night, when the host grilled her over her legal credentials – the president decided it was untenable for her to remain in the role.

Zacharia’s abrupt removal was a damaging development for Republicans so close to the midterm elections. “18 days until Election Day, and instead of driving this unifying message, Republicans are dealing with the fallout of Katie Zacharia’s firing after just five days on the job,” CNN’s Laura Coates said.

That’s Popular Information’s mission: we investigate, uncover new facts, and hold the powerful accountable.

Right now, we are doing a paid membership drive to fund even more ambitious journalism in the run-up to the midterm elections and beyond. We set a goal of 225 new paid subscribers — and we need 31 more to hit it.

As a special incentive we are offering a 20% discount that expires today. That means you can support independent journalism that makes an impact for just $40 per year or $4.80 per month.

Also this week in Popular Information

Zacharia repeatedly promoted the debunked Pizzagate conspiracy theory on social media, accusing elites from the Democratic Party and Hollywood of sexually trafficking children and eating people, a Popular Information review of Zacharia’s social media found.

Shortly after Zacharia’s first press conference, a reporter asked Trump where she had passed the bar exam. Zacharia, standing nearby, suggested she took the test in China, where she worked for a law firm from 2011 to 2013. But this makes no sense. China does not allow U.S. citizens to take its bar exam and no U.S. state offers a bar exam in China.

For months, Trump has celebrated data centers, calling them “absolutely beautiful” and a “Golden Goose.” Yet his super PAC (which he has said he controls) is paying for ads attacking Democratic congressional candidates for supporting data centers. A Popular Information review of two such ads found their claims to be misleading.

The best of the rest

Shortly before Trump retracted threats to strike power plants in Iran in March, “[b]illions of dollars’ worth of contracts predicting oil would fall and the S&P 500 would rise were placed.” After analysts at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) submitted a referral flagging the trades, a senior advisor to Trump’s CFTC chairman told a supervisor “to retract the referral.” (Bloomberg)

A Washington Post analysis revealed that around “two dozen former DOGE staffers have parlayed their government experience into relevant private-sector jobs or investments.” Start-ups linked to former DOGE workers “have raised at least half a billion dollars in funding.” (Washington Post)

A newly uncovered video shows Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R), who is currently running for Senate, partying in Dubai in late 2024 with two American fugitives and a woman who is not his wife. The fugitives, Anosh Ahmed and Sameer Suhail, had been indicted in the U.S. on health care fraud charges months before but had not returned to the country. Ahmed had donated nearly $200,000 to Paxton. (Wall Street Journal)

In 2024, Meta launched an invite-only Facebook Content Monetization program to pay certain creators for their posts. Since then, Meta has invited accounts that promote white supremacy, neo-Nazi ideology, and election fraud conspiracy theories. A report this week identified 29 accounts in the program that have a history of anti-LGBTQ rhetoric. (The 19th)

Numerical information

21: The number of U.S. troops who have died during the Iran war, according to an update from the Pentagon.

Around $2,000: The cost of the Iran war for the average American household, according to a new estimate by Moody’s Analytics.

445: The number of days during his second term that Trump has cast doubt on U.S. elections. That’s more than 70% of the days in the term so far.

Quote of the week

“We’re still running transgender ads. It’s just not resonating. $100 million in ads, $125 million in ads, and nothing’s moved the needle here in Texas in a month in the Senate race. Let’s be honest. The 8 to 10 percent of voters in the middle who are going to decide this election, when they hear stuff about boys in girls’ sports, they don’t even know what you’re talking about.”

— Former Texas House Speaker Dade Phelan (R) in an interview with Texas Monthly

Trump has called data centers “fabulous” and “absolutely beautiful.” Trump has also claimed that data centers make “a fortune” for the surrounding communities, calling them “tremendous WINS for the States and Communities that are lucky enough to get them.” In August, Trump argued that “data centers could be bigger than oil.”

In September, Trump claimed that “communities that were dying” before having data centers are now “wealthy.” In a July post on Truth Social, Trump wrote, “One of the biggest Driving Forces in the Future for Jobs, are Data Centers,” arguing that “[t]hey are big, strong, bold, and Money Machines for the State in which they are built.”

Trump has also claimed that data centers make communities safer. “Look, the data centers make a lot of money,” Trump said in a September interview with TIME. “If you want to be poor, you want to have no money, if you don’t want to have a job, and if you want to live in a crime-infested area, squalor, all the things that go along with it, you should not have a data center.” In the same interview, Trump said, “It doesn’t mean I want them right next to my house, but certainly I like them in my county.”

But while Trump is publicly championing data centers, his super PAC, which he has made clear that he controls, is paying for advertisements attacking Democratic candidates for allegedly supporting data centers.

Popular Information obtained a mailer from No Going Back PAC, an alter ego of Trump’s super PAC MAGA Inc., attacking Jamie Ager, the Democratic candidate for North Carolina’s 11th Congressional District. The mailer attacks Ager for being “open to large AI data centers” and “putting… AI data centers ahead of North Carolinians.”

The mailer was submitted by a North Carolina resident through Popular Information’s new web app, Paid For By.

So, why is Trump’s super PAC attacking Democrats for something he has publicly supported?

The reality is, despite Trump’s support, data centers are deeply unpopular. A Gallup poll conducted in March found that over 70% of Americans “oppose constructing data centers for artificial intelligence in their local area.”

Trump’s contradictory attack mailer is also inaccurate

Aside from being hypocritical, the mailer’s claims about Ager are unsupported.

As evidence for the claim Ager “is open to large AI data centers,” the mailer cites an April article by a news outlet called Mountain Xpress. But that article, in which Ager was asked about his stances on various environmental issues, does not show that he is “open” to data centers.

In the article, Mountain Xpress asked Ager his stance on data center development in relation to a moratorium enacted by the town of Canton, which is in the district he is running to represent. “Data centers need to work for us, not the other way around. If we’re going to let a data center be built in Western North Carolina, it needs to bring good local jobs; it cannot poison our water or our air, and it cannot drive up electric bills for families and small businesses,” Ager responded. “Canton asked the right questions. Every community deserves that ability to set the terms if they want a data center at all.”

Elsewhere, Ager has supported a moratorium on new data centers. In August, Ager said, “I’m really skeptical that centers are a good fit for Western North Carolina… We need to be very careful, and I support a short term moratorium to make sure we study the issue before we make any long term commitments.”

Most recently, Ager wrote in an October 8 Facebook post, “Western North Carolina’s natural beauty is irreplaceable. Data centers strain water resources, raise utility bills, and cause noise pollution. I support a 1-year moratorium on new data centers because these facilities are not good neighbors.”

The mailer also makes unsupported claims about Ager’s healthcare stances, stating that he “would expand giant health insurer profits” and “opposed $50 billion for rural healthcare.” These claims take Ager’s statements out of context. In reality, he has said that Affordable Care Act subsidies should be extended as a stopgap, in order to lower costs for enrollees. He also expressed opposition to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which did include $50 billion for rural healthcare, but also cut Medicaid for rural communities by an estimated $137 billion over ten years.

Trump super PAC’s TV attack on data centers

The Ager mailer is not the only instance in which No Going Back has pushed misleading claims about a Democratic candidate’s stance on data centers.

In a TV ad, No Going Back accused Democrat Jessica Killin, who is running to represent Colorado’s 5th Congressional District, of “profiting off companies pushing for data centers.” The ad specifically claims that a lobbying firm co-founded by Killin’s husband has been paid “$580,000 by tech companies pushing for data centers.”

As evidence, No Going Back cites a New York Times article about data centers that does not mention Killin at all, but does mention Meta and Alphabet — two companies in which Killin’s husband owns stock. According to the Colorado Sun, the claim about Killin’s husband’s lobbying firm is also misleading. The firm FS Vector does lobby on behalf of technology companies that seem to use data centers, but the Colorado Sun could not identify any clients who directly own or operate data centers.

Killin’s campaign told the Colorado Sun that she supports a moratorium on a new data center in El Paso County, Colorado.

For years, President Trump’s new press secretary, Katie Zacharia, has publicly claimed she is a lawyer. Zacharia has repeatedly said she was “outside counsel” to the World Bank and “general counsel” to a California non-profit. Trump himself touted Zacharia as an “attorney” in his post announcing her appointment on Truth Social.

On Tuesday morning, Popular Information reported that there was no evidence that Zacharia was ever licensed to practice law in any state.

A few hours later, Trump was confronted with Popular Information’s report on the South Lawn of the White House by the New York Times’ Shawn McCreesh. Trump motioned to Zacharia, who was standing behind him, to answer the question:

Q: You said she’s an attorney. Where did she pass the bar exam? Which state?

TRUMP (to Zacharia): Which state?

ZACHARIA: When I moved to China.

Q: Where did you pass the bar exam?

Watch:

When Zacharia was pressed again, she appeared to wave the question away.

Zacharia’s answer makes no sense. China’s bar exam is not available to U.S. citizens and U.S. states do not offer bar exams in China.

On Tuesday afternoon, Zacharia provided a somewhat different response to Politico’s Dasha Burns. “I practiced international transactional law, with all the appropriate credentials,” Zacharia said.

Zacharia did work for Zhong Lun, a Chinese law firm, from 2011 to 2013. Currently, a foreigner can only practice law at a Chinese firm if they have practiced for two years in their home jurisdiction, among other conditions. The position is called a “foreign legal consultant.”

Mark Jia, a Georgetown Law professor who specializes in China, explained that the formal rules for foreigners at Chinese law firms were put into place in 2017. But even before 2017, Jia said, he was not aware of anyone like Zacharia being hired as a foreign legal consultant. “Why would a Chinese law firm hire someone to advise on foreign law if they were not licensed to practice that law in their home countries?” Jia asked. He suggested it was more possible Zacharia was employed as a paralegal or another similar position.

Further, Jia argued that, even in the event that Zacharia was hired as a foreign legal consultant in China, it would not make her a lawyer:

It is not accurate for her to call herself a lawyer. There is a difference between being licensed to practice law and doing legal work… The Chinese government does not make someone an attorney simply by allowing them to perform some legal work for a law firm. You have to be admitted as a lawyer somewhere, and I have seen no evidence that she was admitted as such anywhere.

The questions about Zacharia’s legal credentials and her fumbling answers resulted in a flood of national and international news coverage.

It is quite clear now that Zacharia has never been licensed to practice law and is not a lawyer. But other questions remain unanswered. How did Zacharia act as general counsel for a California non-profit if she was not admitted to practice? Was the White House aware that she was not a lawyer before she was hired for the job?

Zacharia’s job as press secretary is to talk to the media. So it will be difficult for her to avoid answering these questions.

UPDATE (10/14): This piece was updated to more precisely describe Professor Jia’s views on Zacharia.