The Justice Department is investigating allegations that Democratic operatives recruited Alaska Senate candidate Daniel J. Sullivan, dubbed “Decoy Dan,” to siphon votes from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan—prompting liberal-leaning election-law experts to accuse the Trump administration of federal overreach.
But former Federal Election Commission member Hans von Spakovsky argued that the Biden-era Justice Department’s prosecution of Donald Trump over alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election laid the groundwork for the Alaska probe.
“The Justice Department has talked about a potential conspiracy to defraud the voters of Alaska and people are saying, ‘Oh, he’s got no case. That’s a weak case,'” Spakovsky, senior legal fellow at Advancing American Freedom, told Fox News Digital. “Well, I suggest you do a Google search and pull up the indictment that Jack Smith got against Donald Trump in the District of Columbia. He set a precedent for this.”
Joined by FBI officials and Alaska State Troopers, Alaska U.S. Attorney Michael Heyman announced at a Friday press conference that the Justice Department has been investigating whether Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired school teacher who will appear on the ballot without a party affiliation, was colluding with Democratic operatives tied to Democratic candidate Mary Peltola’s campaign.
The Justice Department previously sued Alaska election officials, seeking to block certification if Sen. Dan Sullivan loses re-election by fewer votes than those cast for Daniel J. Sullivan. The lawsuit was amended Friday to include reporting by The New York Times that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and senior aides of Peltola’s campaign allegedly worked to recruit candidates who could pull votes away from Sen. Sulllivan. Heyman mentioned the Times reporting repeatedly in the press conference.
MARY PELTOLA’S CAMPAIGN, DEMS BACKED COVERT SCHEME TO FIELD SPOILER CANDIDATES IN ALASKA SENATE RACE: REPORT
“We are taking that extremely seriously,” Hetman said.
Sources at the Justice Department told Fox News Thursday that the Trump administration had issued more than 30 subpoeanas in a span of 24 hours as part of its criminal investigation into the alleged collusion, but Heyman did not say at the press conference what criminal charges are being pursued.
“I’m not making any assumptions on whether a crime has been committed or not,” Heyman said. “That’s why we are conducting that thorough investigation.”
Von Spakovsky, a former Federal Election Commission commissioner, said potential indictments of Democratic operatives in the Alaska Senate race could rely on federal statutes similar to those Smith, the former special counsel, used in his 2023 indictment of Trump over alleged efforts to overturn the election.
Spakovsky pointed to charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy against rights. In Trump’s case, prosecutors alleged that he used fraud and deceit to obstruct the federal government’s process for certifying the 2020 election and conspired to deprive voters of having their lawful votes counted and honored.
Spakovsky said prosecutors could potentially apply similar theories in Alaska if they determine that Democratic operatives knowingly recruited Daniel J. Sullivan to confuse voters and divert votes from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan.
ALASKA’S GOVERNOR ORDERS INVESTIGATION AFTER NYT REPORT ON ALLEGED DEM-LINKED SENATE ELECTION SCHEME
Smith’s “indictment is basically along exactly those same lines, claiming that that Donald Trump was trying to defraud U.S. voters from fair and honest elections. So Jack Smith and Democrats, they set the precedent for the kind of investigation Justice Department is doing now.”
Aubrey Wieber, executive director of 907 Initiative, a progressive advocacy group running critical ads against Sen. Sullivan, told Alaska Public Media that the press conference announcing the investigation “on the eve of the election” may be stemming from ulterior motives.
“One could say it appears that they are trying to interfere in an election and put their thumb on the scale,” Wieber said.
The Justice Department’s lawsuit was filed on Oct. 22, prompting a parade of condemnations from those who argued the federal government had “no authority” to intervene, with many pointing to the Alaska Supreme Court rejecting the state’s push to disqualify Daniel J. Sullivan from appearing on the ballot.
GOVERNOR PROBING ‘DECOY DAN’ SULLIVAN ELECTION SCANDAL WARNS SYSTEM FLAW HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT
“DOJ’s theory: two candidates named Sullivan might confuse voters. The Alaska Supreme Court settled that in June and the ballot labels the incumbent. DOJ has no role in state election law,” Omar Noureldin, senior vice president of policy and litigation at Common Cause of Common Cause, a self-described no-partisan watchdog organization.
Spakovsky called recruiting a candidate with the same name as a political opponent a “dirty trick,” but said the recruitment itself was not necessarily a criminal violation. He said the legal analysis could change if operatives paid the candidate or provided services to help organize his campaign.
“The place you run into potential issues is not only if you just recruit a candidate, but you’re being paid to recruit that candidate, and you then provide services to help him run his campaign and organize it,” Spakovsky said.
Providing campaign assistance outside of being a volunteer is an in-kind contribution subject to federal reporting and contribution rules. Spakovsky said any failure to properly report such contributions could create a separate campaign-finance violation.
