OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

GOP Slams Alaska Decoy Dan Senate Ballot Ploy

4 sources · updated 2026-11-01
Left 0% Center 0% Right 100%
0 left · 0 center · 4 right

What happened

In Alaska’s 2026 U.S. Senate race, incumbent Republican Sen. Dan S. Sullivan is opposed by Democrat Mary Peltola. Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. sought ballot listing as “Dan Sullivan,” having registered as a Republican two days before filing despite prior voter registration as Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. and never having been affiliated with the Alaska GOP; the Alaska Division of Elections initially invalidated the candidacy, citing a website resembling the incumbent’s and other indicators of voter confusion, but the Alaska Supreme Court overturned that ruling and he advanced under the state’s ranked-choice system. The New York Times reported on October 28, 2026, based on interviews, text messages, and documents, that Peltola campaign aides and other Democratic-aligned figures recruited Sullivan Jr. as part of a broader effort to confuse voters; Peltola’s campaign denied involvement. House Oversight Chairman James Comer, Sen. Ron Johnson, the Justice Department, and Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy then opened inquiries, issued records-preservation requests, or expanded a criminal investigation with grand-jury subpoenas.
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 4 articles

2 of 2 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.

What these terms mean and how they're counted
On the record · names a source 2 of 2
On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Rep. James Comer, Ron Johnson, The New York Times and Department of Justice
Primary evidence · cites a document or data 1 of 2
Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: records preservation requests, news report
Credits another outlet 0 of 2
The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
Unnamed sources 0 of 2
The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
How it developed
When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Oct 30, 15:21 UTC by Breitbart, naming its source. First document 2 hours later, from The Federalist (records preservation requests).
Not counted 2
Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
ONE-SIDED THIS WEEK. Only right-leaning outlets have covered this story in the last two days; The Guardian reported it on 2026-10-28.
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

Right-leaning coverage reports a coordinated effort to put a second Dan Sullivan on Alaska's Senate ballot, and left-leaning coverage has not reported the story at all. That coverage cites texts indicating Peltola's team worked with recruiters, and it adds that the Justice Department sent new grand jury subpoenas. A reader of the silent side would miss that Alaska election officials called the filing a ploy and that the Alaska Supreme Court still let the candidate reach the general election. Right-leaning coverage also splits its lead. Breitbart puts Comer's cheating charge up front. The Federalist leads one piece on Johnson's records letters and another on the SAVE Act, giving the court reversal only a passing line. Did the Alaska Supreme Court weigh the deception evidence when it restored the candidacy?
Bottom line

Left-leaning outlets have not covered Alaska's second Dan Sullivan, even as The Federalist reports the Justice Department sent dozens of new grand jury subpoenas.

The receipts — 1 fact one side's coverage lacks
  • Sen. Ron Johnson sent records preservation letters to Peltola's former campaign manager, former chief of staff, and a ballot specialist, due Nov. 12. official statementin The Federalist · absent from left-leaning coverage
The Right View
Right-leaning outlets framed the episode as a coordinated, months-long Democratic scheme to deceive Alaska voters by placing a second Dan Sullivan on the ballot to siphon support from the incumbent Republican. They quoted Rep. James Comer calling it “cheating” and “dirty politics” orchestrated with Peltola staff and Democratic operatives, and Mark Levin describing it as a conspiracy to steal Senate control. Coverage highlighted Sen. Ron Johnson’s records-preservation letters to named Peltola aides, an Elias Law Group attorney, and a DSCC employee; DOJ grand-jury subpoenas exploring conspiracy-to-violate-voters’-rights charges; and Gov. Dunleavy’s inquiry. Outlets also argued the alleged ploy undercuts Democratic opposition to the SAVE Act, portraying Democrats as objecting to proof-of-citizenship rules while allegedly creating ballot confusion.
Our Take (balanced)
The story is substantive: it rests on named actors, a specific New York Times report citing interviews, text messages, and documents prepared for potential litigation, plus contemporaneous official actions (elections-division findings, a state supreme-court ruling, congressional records requests, DOJ subpoenas, and a gubernatorial inquiry). Established facts include Sullivan Jr.’s filing details, the Division of Elections’ initial rejection and the court’s reversal, the Times publication, the denials from Peltola’s campaign, and the subsequent probes. Remaining alleged are coordinated recruitment by Peltola’s team and Democratic operatives, any transfer of money, criminal conspiracy, and involvement of figures such as Chuck Schumer. No left-leaning outlet has reported this. Watch for production of the requested records, charging decisions or declinations by the Justice Department, on-the-record responses from the named individuals, and any further court or elections-administration rulings.

4 sources

More stories

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.