The Department of Justice has had enough of California’s open defiance of federal law.

After giving Democrat Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Los Angeles County election officials a clear 48-hour deadline to review a federal list of more than 20,000 people the government believes are likely noncitizens who were mailed live ballots for the November 3 midterm election, California refused.

The Trump Justice Department filed a federal court action seeking an emergency order requiring the state to sequester those ballots until citizenship can be verified.

First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bilal A. Essayli of the Central District of California put it plainly on X:

“Time is up for California. We gave California 48 hours to review and flag more than 20,000 noncitizen voters recently mailed live ballots. California refused. This morning we filed a federal court action seeking an emergency order requiring California to sequester ballots returned by suspected noncitizens. This is not political or controversial. 18 U.S.C. § 611 makes it a federal offense for noncitizens to vote in a federal election. We will not allow California to dilute the votes of American citizens.”

Time is up for California

We gave California 48 hours to review and flag more than 20,000 noncitizen voters recently mailed live ballots.

California refused.

This morning we filed a federal court action seeking an emergency order requiring California to sequester ballots returned by suspected noncitizens.

This is not political or controversial. 18 U.S.C. § 611 makes it a federal offense for noncitizens to vote in a federal election. We will not allow California to dilute the votes of American citizens.

— F.A. United States Attorney Bill Essayli (@USAttyEssayli) October 15, 2026

The federal lawsuit, filed in the Central District of California on October 15, requests an order preventing the tabulation of ballots belonging to individuals identified as likely noncitizens until their citizenship can be determined.

Under California law, registered active voters are automatically mailed ballots. That practice has become central to the DOJ’s concerns about individuals who may be improperly registered.

The Justice Department says Homeland Security Investigations and federal partners examined voter-registration records and conducted additional verification work to identify potential noncitizens.

In its official announcement, the DOJ confirmed it is asking the court to require California to set aside the disputed ballots, rather than automatically cancel them.

The letter from Acting Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter, dated October 13, 2026, lays out the facts with devastating clarity. Federal law prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections.

The Supreme Court has long held that states may not induce or encourage private persons to do what the Constitution forbids.

On July 16, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin warned Weber that large numbers of noncitizens were registered to vote in California. Weber’s response the following week did not deny it. She simply asked for more information.

The Trump administration provided that information. Earlier this week, federal officials delivered a password-protected thumb drive to the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk containing the names of people the government believes are likely noncitizens who were sent vote-by-mail ballots under California’s automatic mail-ballot system.

The DOJ offered to send Weber a digital copy as well. The demand was straightforward: review the list within 48 hours.

For any individual whose citizenship cannot be independently confirmed, segregate, not cancel, the returned ballots and do not verify signatures or tabulate them until citizenship is determined. For those not yet mailed a ballot, withhold it.

California refused.

The Gateway Pundit reported yesterday that the Justice Department had given California exactly this 48-hour window or face emergency legal action. That deadline has now passed. The lawsuit followed.

California’s all-mail system, made permanent after the COVID emergency, automatically sends ballots to every registered voter. That means tens of thousands of people the federal government flags as likely noncitizens have already received, or will receive, official ballots for a federal election.

Every one of those votes, if counted, cancels the vote of an American citizen. As McCotter’s letter states: “Allowing noncitizens to vote cancels citizen votes.”

Secretary Weber and Governor Gavin Newsom’s allies have already begun the familiar media spin, claiming the list is inaccurate, the process is “voter suppression,” and the Trump administration is somehow the threat to democracy.

They said the same thing when DHS first raised the issue in July. They said the same thing when other states cooperated and cleaned their rolls. California’s position is that American citizens must simply trust the system while thousands of suspected noncitizens receive and potentially return ballots in a critical midterm election.

The law is clear. 18 U.S.C. § 611 makes it a federal crime for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. States run elections, but they do not get to nullify federal criminal statutes or dilute the votes of citizens. The Department of Justice under President Trump is treating this as the serious national security and election integrity issue it is.

Essayli and the DOJ are now in federal court seeking emergency relief. The American people deserve to know that only American citizens are choosing their leaders. California’s refusal to even review the list and sequester the questioned ballots makes that impossible without court intervention.

The post “TIME IS UP FOR CALIFORNIA!” — Trump DOJ Officially Sues Far-Left California After State Refuses to Review More Than 20,000 Suspected Noncitizens Sent Mail-In Ballots appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The U.S. Department of Justice has taken the highly unusual step of filing a Statement of Interest in a Michigan trial-court case — telling the Court of Claims that electronic poll book data, including all metadata, are federal election records and that Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson is responsible for preserving them.

Statements of Interest from the Justice Department in pure state-court cases are rare. It is even rarer for DOJ to intervene at the trial-court level rather than on appeal. It is rare for the department to appear in a state trial court at all. The only recent election example is a 2022 Wisconsin circuit court case over absentee ballot witness addresses.

The filing lands in the middle of Bridgewater Township Clerk Michelle McQueer’s lawsuit challenging Benson’s rule that forces clerks to delete electronic poll book files just seven days after an election is certified.

Attorney Kevin Kijewski, who represents McQueer, explained the significance:

“The United States enforces the voting records law, so when it tells the court what the law requires, that matters. It said poll book data, including all metadata, are federal election records and that the Secretary of State is responsible for preserving them. That’s exactly what Michelle McQueer has been saying since October of last year, when she first asked the Secretary which law to follow and got no answer.”

Kijewski added a critical caveat about timing:

“The government’s statement was written from the Secretary’s September 30 ruling. The day before it was filed, the Secretary’s own data manager swore in an affidavit filed with the court that the list of voters each precinct used on election day is never copied into the state database. So the facts the government was asked to assume aren’t the facts anymore. The judge has the affidavit. He’ll decide.”

The Justice Department also said that if the Secretary’s factual claims were accurate and all poll book data were uploaded and preserved, it would not prioritize prosecuting clerks who deleted files under the rule. That is the condition Kijewski says the new affidavit now contradicts.

On the DOJ’s decision to enter the case, Kijewski said:

“We didn’t invite anyone in, and we didn’t oppose anyone coming in. This is a clerk asking a judge a simple question. When a state rule says delete, and a federal law says keep, which one does she follow? Anyone who wants to help the court answer that is welcome.”

The conflict at the heart of the case

Michigan Rule R 168.48 requires clerks to delete electronic poll book software and associated files within seven days after certification. Federal law — 52 U.S.C. § 20701 — requires every officer of election to retain and preserve those records for 22 months. Willful destruction is a federal crime.

McQueer asked Benson’s office which law controlled. She waited months. She asked again. She received no ruling. In August, she sued. The Secretary’s office issued its ruling on September 30, after the lawsuit was filed. She won a temporary restraining order protecting her August 4 electronic poll book file and remains the only clerk in Michigan known to still possess one. On September 22, the Court of Claims denied the State’s first motion to dismiss on every ground. The Republican National Committee and Michigan Republican Party later joined as intervening plaintiffs.

The affidavit Benson’s office filed undercuts her position

In the reply filed Thursday, McQueer points to a new sworn statement from Rachel Clone, a data manager in the Bureau of Elections. Clone admits that the actual list of voters each precinct used on Election Day—the list poll workers looked at when people came in to vote—is never saved in the state’s main voter database. Officials say uploading it would be “duplicative.”

Instead, after the election, the state updates its database. The original list the poll workers used is gone. The only way to recreate it later is to dig through a change log in a system that is constantly being updated.

McQueer’s reply puts it simply: if you have to rebuild a record after the fact, you didn’t keep the record. Getting a receipt that something was uploaded and then deleting the original is not the same as preserving it. That admission matters even more now that the Department of Justice has told the same court that poll book data are federal election records the Secretary of State is required to preserve.

Why Kijewski took the case

Kijewski described his decision this way: “Because township clerks told me about this problem, nobody would help them. Michelle was willing to stand up for the rule of law. Her state told her to erase the election files seven days after certification. Federal law told her to keep them for twenty-two months. She asked the Secretary of State to resolve it. She waited eight months. She asked again. Nothing. People have been prosecuted over election data, so this wasn’t an academic question for her. She just wanted to follow the law, both laws, and nobody would tell her how.

“It’s a small case on paper. One clerk, one township, one flash drive in a locked cabinet. But the principle isn’t small. The record of how a federal election was run shouldn’t be destroyed a week after it’s certified, by anyone, in any party. Every clerk in this state has already deleted theirs for August. Bridgewater’s is the only copy left. I thought that was worth protecting.

“And honestly, I liked the client. Michelle isn’t a political person. She runs elections carefully and was told to do something she thought was wrong. People like that deserve a lawyer.”

What happens next

The Court of Claims now has the affidavit Benson’s office filed, McQueer’s reply, and a rare Statement of Interest from the U.S. Department of Justice declaring that poll book data are federal election records Benson is obligated to preserve. The question McQueer first posed nearly a year ago remains the only one that matters: when a state rule says delete, and federal law says keep, which one does a Michigan clerk follow?

Bridgewater’s file is still under court order. Every other clerk’s August electronic poll book is gone.

Since Michigan’s Democrat activist Attorney General Dana Nessel has done nothing to stop Jocelyn Benson in her 8 years as Secretary of State, Michiganders may have a glimmer of hope that the federal government can do something to prevent Jocelyn Benson from making Michigan’s elections the laughingstock of the nation once again.

The post BREAKING: In Rare Move, DOJ Files Statement of Interest in Michigan Trial Court — Tells Judge Poll Book Data Are Federal Election Records–Jocelyn Benson Must Preserve appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

In a Newsmax exclusive interview with Rob Finnerty, President Donald Trump made clear he will not stand by while the radical left tries to drag his people through endless legal hell the way they tried to destroy him.

Trump stated bluntly that he did nothing wrong, that he is allowed to issue a self-pardon, and that he has no intention of letting loyal Americans who work for him suffer the same lawfare nightmare he endured.

“I can tell you this: I don’t want to see my people go through years of nonsense,” Trump said. “Because these people are lunatics on the left. I don’t want to see people that work for me go through years of nonsense, hire lawyers and everything else — all for nothing.”

He continued: “I did nothing wrong… I’m allowed to do a self-pardon. I’m allowed to pardon… They say it’s the most powerful thing a president has.”

Trump noted he could have pardoned himself on the way out of office the first time but chose not to, because he knew he was innocent. He won those cases the hard way. Now, with the full power of the presidency restored and the Democrats’ playbook fully exposed, he is signaling he will protect those who stand with him.

This is pure Trump: fighting for the people the deep state and weaponized DOJ tried to crush.

WATCH:

JUST IN: President Trump hints at PARDONS for his allies, and even potentially HIMSELF

“I can tell you this: I don’t want to see my people go through years of nonsense.”

“I did nothing wrong…I’m allowed to do a self-pardon.”

I SAY, PARDON AWAY!

DEMOCRATS wrote this playbook. On his way out the door, Biden handed preemptive pardons to Fauci, Milley, the entire J6 committee, and members of his own family!

None of them had been charged with anything.

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) October 16, 2026

During a September 28 interview with TIME magazine, published October 1, Trump was directly asked whether he was considering pardoning members of his administration before leaving office.

His answer was unequivocal:

“Yeah, sure I’d do that.”

Trump pointed to Joe Biden’s use of presidential clemency, including preemptive pardons issued near the end of his presidency.

When reporters pressed Trump about the possibility during an October 1 exchange, the president said he was not currently focused on such pardons but emphasized the precedent he believes Biden established.

According to a transcript published by Roll Call, Trump said:

“It’s not something I’m thinking about now, but based on Biden, I can do whatever I want.”

The president’s remarks suggest he is keeping his options open as Democrats seek to regain congressional power in November.

The Gateway Pundit also covered the self-pardon controversy as far back as November 2020, when a reporter asked Trump whether he intended to pardon himself after the annual White House Thanksgiving turkey ceremony.

The left has zero standing to complain. On his way out the door in January 2025, Joe Biden handed out preemptive pardons like candy, to Anthony Fauci, Gen. Mark Milley, the entire sham January 6 committee, and members of his own family. None of them had even been charged with a crime.

Biden’s own DOJ and FBI had spent years targeting Trump and his supporters while the Bidens operated with near total impunity.

As The Gateway Pundit has repeatedly documented, those last-minute Biden pardons were a cynical attempt to shield the very people who orchestrated the lawfare campaign against Trump and the America First movement. Trump has repeatedly pointed out the irony: Biden pardoned everyone around him… but not himself.

In January 2025, shortly after taking office, Trump told Sean Hannity that Biden received “very bad advice” by failing to pardon himself.

The post Trump Floats Sweeping Pardons for His Allies — Even Raises Possibility of Pardoning HIMSELF: “I Did Nothing Wrong… I’m Allowed to Do a Self-Pardon” (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Notorious fake Indian “Pocahontas” Liz Warren had a rough day.

Paleface Warren posted a tweet on X concerned that a merger between McCormick spices and Unilever may result in an increase in your grocery prices.

The tweet had 3.6 million views. It is shocking to think that so many leftists still respect this fraud!

And, since when does this far left socialist who supports the green agenda and higher taxes complain about grocery prices?

You must ask yourself – what is she getting for this statement from the man behind the curtain?

That’s when Frank McCormick, who says he is a grandson of the McCormick Spices founder jumped in to deliver a gut punch to Pocahontas.

Frank McCormick: “My grandfather built McCormick Spices from nothing after your ancestors tomahawked his wife and kids. I’ll be damned if you take another scalp from my family fortune!”

Too funny!

The McCormick reply has 4.2 million views! The fake Indian got ratioed!

Honorable mention: Spencer Pratt referencing Warren’s “Pow Wow Chow” recipe book contribution.

For the record: Liz Warren is only 1/1,024 Native American — She is less Native American than the majority of American caucasians today.

She lied about being an American Indian to leapfrog ahead of other rivals during her career, including at Harvard. And still looney leftists admire this fraud.

The post Liz “Pocahontas” Warren Gets Public Spanking and Sent Back to Her Wigwam by Spice Family Heir appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

What Is Going On?  Defense Attorney Represents Man Against the US Government While Also Representing the US Government in Separate Proceedings.

LAS VEGAS, NEVADA — October 9, 2026 — A shocking Miscarriage of Justice has created a constitutional question for the federal criminal prosecution: How can an attorney defend a man against the United States while simultaneously serving the Department of Justice?

The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees essential rights to individuals facing criminal prosecution, ensuring a fair and transparent judicial process.

On October 7, 2026, Dr. Surajit Khanna filed a 34-page Brief of Amicus Curiae, including eight supporting exhibits, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, exposing an apparent conflict of interest involving Lt. Col. Aniela K. Szymanski, Esq., defense attorney for federal criminal defendant Rick Kiran Saga, a U.S. citizen.

Federal court records document that Szymanski continued representing Saga while also appearing as a DOJ-USAO attorney representing the United States in separate federal proceedings.

Semper Fi is the short, everyday form of the Latin phrase Semper Fidelis, which means “Always Faithful” or “Always Loyal”. Lt. Col. Aniela Szymanski is a Judge Advocate (JAG) for the U.S. Marine Corps and attorney for Saga. Lt Col. Steven W. Myhre also served as a JAG for the U.S. Marine Corps. and is now the prosecuting DOJ-USAO attorney against Saga.

Is Myhre up to his old shenanigans? “When a federal judge dismissed the indictment against cattle rancher Cliven Bundy earlier this year due to what she described as “outrageous” misconduct by Nevada prosecutors, she repeatedly referred to similar wrongdoing in a case from a decade earlier. … A judge found that prosecutors, including then-acting U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre, withheld more than 3,000 pages of FBI reports and other documents and misled the court. This is the same sort of misconduct that led to the dismissal of the indictment in Chapman.”

(https://theintercept.com/2018/04/26/cliven-bundy-case-nevada-prosecutorial-misconduct/)

Why did Myhre characterize Saga as a Non-US Citizen to a Federal Magistrate Judge?

Was it so Myhre could detain Saga seven days longer than was necessary?

Who Was Defending Rick Saga When His Attorney Was Also Representing the United States? 

THE DOCUMENTED CONFLICT

The court filing presents a disturbing chronology:

• January 11, 2026: Szymanski submitted redacted military orders referencing the

Department of Justice in Memphis, Tennessee, while representing Saga.

• January 22, 2026: Federal court records identified Szymanski as a DOJ-USAO attorney representing the United States.
• February 19–26, 2026: Nevada court filings continued identifying Szymanski as Saga’s defense attorney.
• July 28, 2026: A separate federal criminal case, United States Shanks, identified Szymanski as DOJ-USAO counsel representing the United States.
• August 19, 2026: Szymanski continued appearing in Saga’s federal criminal case as his defense attorney.

The question is unavoidable: Was Saga’s defense attorney serving two opposing interests—and did the defendant, prosecutors, and Court know?

A POTENTIAL SIXTH AMENDMENT CRISIS

The Sixth Amendment guarantees every criminal defendant effective, conflict-free legal representation.

Dr. Khanna’s filing cites landmark Supreme Court decisions, Cuyler v. Sullivan and Mickens v. Taylor, and raises questions under 18 U.S.C. § 205, which restricts certain private representations by federal employees.

The filing demands answers to three critical questions:

1. Was Saga’s constitutional right to independent defense counsel compromised?
2. Did federal prosecutors know of Szymanski’s DOJ relationship, and was it concealed from Saga or the Court?
3. Did Saga’s confidential defense information become accessible to the government prosecuting him?

These questions remain unresolved. The filing does not establish that misconduct or a constitutional violation occurred.

WARNING: DEFENDANT AND FAMILY MAY BE IN DANGER

Dr. Khanna opens his filing with an extraordinary statement:

“It is my belief that Rick and his family’s lives may be in danger.”

This is Dr. Khanna’s expressed concern, not a judicial finding of a verified threat.

CALL FOR AN INDEPENDENT FEDERAL INVESTIGATION

Dr. Khanna requests immediate preservation of relevant DOJ records, military orders, communications, and electronic evidence, followed by a neutral, conflict-free judicial inquiry.

The central demand is simple: Preserve the evidence. Expose the truth. Protect the Constitution.

The public filing raises a question that reaches far beyond one defendant:

If a criminal defendant’s own attorney also serves the federal department responsible for prosecuting him, who is protecting his constitutional rights?

The federal court has now been asked to answer that question.

FEDERAL COURT FILING

United States v. Rick Kiran Saga

U.S. District Court, District of Nevada Case No. 2:24-cr-00142-JAD-EJY

Document 83 — Filed October 7, 2026 34 pages, including Exhibits A–H Publicly available through PACER.

MEDIA CONTACT

Linda Szynkowicz

Awake America USA

2764 N Green Valley Pkwy, Ste. 149 Henderson, NV 89014

(860) 575-7125

AwakeAmericaUSA.com

Dr. Surajit Khanna, Amicus Curiae

2500 Coney Island Ave Brooklyn, New York, 11223

(202) 280-4842

The filing raises allegations and constitutional questions that have not been adjudicated. The documented overlap does not, by itself, establish intentional misconduct, disclosure failures, misuse of privileged information, or a Sixth Amendment violation.

### END ###

The post What Is Going On? High-Profile Nevada Case Involves Unusual Actions by DOJ Attorney appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Another alarming election-integrity report is raising serious questions about who has been voting in American elections and how thousands of allegedly ineligible ballots could have slipped through the cracks in the red state of Florida.

A new investigation by a coalition of Florida election-integrity organizations claims that 1,827 noncitizens who were removed from the state’s voter rolls cast a staggering 7,035 ballots between 2020 and the second quarter of 2026.

The findings, first reported by The Daily Signal on Wednesday, October 14, come as the Trump administration continues its efforts to tighten voter registration requirements and prevent noncitizens from participating in American elections.

According to the report, a Joint Task Force of Florida election integrity groups examined voter registration and voting histories across all 67 Florida counties.

The coalition reported the following figures:

• 5,612 noncitizens removed from Florida’s voter rolls during the period examined.

• 1,827 of those individuals allegedly cast a combined 7,035 ballots.

• Approximately 600 individuals were referred to Florida’s Office of Election Crimes and Security.

The report warns that the number of ballots attributed to individuals subsequently removed from the rolls could be significant in tightly contested elections.

Consider Florida’s November 2021 Democratic special primary election for the state’s 20th Congressional District, where the winning margin was just five votes.

The report also cited a 2018 Baker County School Board race decided by only three votes.

The coalition argued that the ballots it identified were numerous enough to potentially influence closely contested races.

The latest findings follow a major election fraud crackdown announced by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and Attorney General James Uthmeier last month.

As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, Florida officials announced on September 24 that 20 individuals faced charges in an election fraud investigation.

Sixteen defendants were noncitizens accused of falsely declaring themselves U.S. citizens before casting ballots. The remaining four were convicted felons accused of voting while still on probation.

Uthmeier declared:

Florida will not allow anyone to steal the vote of Americans at the ballot box.

The cases brought Florida’s total election fraud prosecutions above 100 since DeSantis established the Office of Election Crimes and Security in 2022.

The Gateway Pundit has extensively documented the Trump administration’s election integrity investigations.

In March, The Gateway Pundit reported that Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon disclosed troubling findings from a federal examination of voter registration records.

That review raised concerns about noncitizens, deceased voters, and duplicate registrations in state election databases.

In July, The Gateway Pundit reported that Dhillon’s Civil Rights Division warned election officials across all 50 states and Washington, D.C., about their obligations to maintain accurate voter rolls and prevent unlawful voting.

The administration’s aggressive approach has also encountered legal setbacks.

On October 9, U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan ruled against a Justice Department voter-data collection initiative, finding that the federal government’s approach exceeded its authority and violated legal protections.

According to The Daily Signal, officials in several Florida counties declined to validate the coalition’s conclusions without examining the underlying data.

Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections official Alison Novoa said her office could not independently verify the numbers or conclusions presented by outside organizations.

Read the report below via Daily Signal:

Skip to PDF content

The post BOMBSHELL FLORIDA ELECTION REPORT: 1,827 Noncitizens Removed from Voter Rolls Allegedly Cast 7,035 Ballots — Thousands More Removed as Election Integrity Groups Demand Answers appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.