As reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on January 14, 2026

As ordered reported by the House Committee on Financial Services on January 22, 2026

As ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on February 12, 2026

As reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on September 15, 2025

As reported by the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry on October 27, 2025

As ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on December 17, 2025

What GAO Found Statutory Maintenance of Equity (MOEquity) requirements generally prohibited states and districts from disproportionately cutting funds from districts or schools serving high percentages of low-income students. Beginning in July 2021, the Department of Education provided guidance and technical assistance to help states and districts meet these requirements as part of receiving certain COVID-19 relief funding. Education officials said they developed and refined this guidance in real time. As a result, the agency did not develop internal written procedures for its staff to use when providing related technical assistance. Federal oversight and performance principles and practices note the importance of internal guidance and written documentation to ensure consistency. Without these, Education could not ensure states received consistent information on implementing MOEquity. Moreover, the risk of inconsistently applying guidance may increase with staff turnover, which Education said occurred during MOEquity implementation. Selected State and District Maintenance of Equity Requirements GAO's analysis of six states' data found that districts generally identified their poorest schools; however, Education lacked reliable data on how states implemented the state MOEquity requirements to identify their poorest districts. On average, high-poverty schools had more factors associated with need—for example, free or reduced-price lunch eligibility and students with disabilities—than other schools. However, because MOEquity required schools to be identified by district rather than statewide, MOEquity-identified high-poverty schools in a district were not always the poorest schools in the state. GAO could not determine if states paid appropriate districts or the total amounts paid in supplemental payments because of data reliability issues, such as duplicative or missing data. Education could not explain the data issues or provide documentation of data reliability procedures. Without reliable data, neither GAO nor Education could assess whether MOEquity requirements fully achieved their intended results. Selected states and districts described challenges implementing MOEquity—e.g., staff capacity issues and limited access to data—and expressed interest in lessons learned, but Education officials said they did not document and share them because the agency does not have procedures ensuring it does so and it was not a priority at the time. Yet, Education officials noted that MOEquity provided an opportunity to inform how they may handle similar situations going forward. Key practices for effectively managing federal efforts include identifying and applying lessons learned for future decision making. Doing so limits the chance of recurrence of failures or difficulties. Absent a way to ensure Education identifies, documents, and shares lessons learned, insights from such efforts may be limited or lost. Why GAO Did This Study To receive certain funds under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, states and districts generally agreed to not make certain cuts. These include disproportionately cutting funds from districts or schools serving high percentages of economically disadvantaged students for fiscal years 2022 and 2023. GAO was asked to examine MOEquity implementation. This report addresses (1) how Education assisted states and districts in complying with MOEquity requirements; (2) what data show about state and district implementation of MOEquity; and (3) what challenges states and districts faced in implementing MOEquity and what lessons Education learned. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws and analyzed Education's MOEquity guidance and data. GAO also interviewed Education officials, as well as officials from seven states. GAO selected states for varied approaches to implementing MOEquity. In three of these states, GAO interviewed officials from districts that received the most supplemental funding. GAO also analyzed school-level data from six of these states that had reliable data for this analysis.

AI Takeover Complete: Data Center Construction Surpasses Office Construction For The First Time

On August 19, 2025 we published what we thought was "the most insane chart", one showing that value of data center construction was about to surpass the value of office construction. We added that we would reach the intersection point within 6 months. 

The most insane chart: value of data centers being built will surpass all offices in construction within 6 months pic.twitter.com/kQBGegx9Fj

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 19, 2025

We were right: earlier today the US published the much-delayed Construction Spending report for the month of December. It confirmed, that just as expected, the value of Data Centers constructed in the US has officially surpassed the value of Offices, a historical and very symbolic crossover which makes it clear that going forward machines, and not human workers will provide the bulk of US productivity. 

Source: Census Bureau

And while the long-term trend here is assured - at least until there is a new luddite revolution and (soon to be unemployed) humanity revolts against its new chatbot masters, burning down every data center in sight - there may be some near-term volatility. That's because according to more real-time measures, real estate brokerage CBRE reported that construction of new data centers in the US fell for the first time since 2020 despite soaring demand for artificial intelligence computing capacity, as developers face delays in permitting, zoning and power procurement.

Capacity under construction fell to 5.99 gigawatts at the end of 2025 from 6.35 gigawatts at the end of 2024. Still, in light of the layoff tsunami, it is certain that construction of offices has slowed down even more thus keeping data centers in the pole position. 

The construction delays and faster long-distance networks are driving development to move outside traditional data center sites like Northern Virginia, Gordon Dolven, CBRE’s data center research director, said in the report. The good news is that overall vacancy rate in primary markets fell to a record low 1.4% at year-end.

“Combined with growing interest in markets that offer available land and power, this is spurring investment beyond traditional hubs and reshaping the North American data center market,” Dolven said.

Meanwhile, as we warned last year, local pushback against massive AI data center projects has intensified in recent months, with the tide turning from welcoming the economic benefits of major construction projects to scrutinizing their resource-intensiveness and the associated soaring electricity prices. 

Last week, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker sought to temporarily halt incentives for data centers in a bid to contain soaring power costs Bloomberg reported. An Oracle Corp. site in New Mexico that scored a package of tax incentives and support from government-backed bonds has prompted protests largely focused on its potential environmental impact. And tensions have flared in Northern Virginia, where some residents are now looking to flee what’s become one of the largest data center hubs in the world.

Still, these are just growing pains and once behind the meter power sources are mandated, and small modular reactors become an everyday phenomenon, data center construction will resume its surge. That's because AI demand is forecast to require $3 trillion in data center investment, including related power supplies, according to estimates from Morgan Stanley. New tenants absorbed a record 2.5 million gigawatts in 2025, up 38% from a year earlier, CBRE said.

Construction underway fell 29% in Northern Virginia, followed by a 15% drop in Hillsboro, Oregon, and a 14% decline in Silicon Valley, CBRE reported. Projects soared 169% in Chicago and 15% in Dallas-Fort Worth.

Atlanta had more than 2 gigawatts of projects under construction, ahead of 1.9 gigawatts in Northern Virginia, in the second half of 2025.

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 13:45

As reported by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on February 10, 2026

Biden Admin 'Invited' Fani Willis To Get Lucrative Grant While She Prosecuted Trump

Authored by Luis Cornelio via Headline USA,

The DOJ under the Biden administration “invited” disgraced Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to apply for a generous taxpayer-funded grant as she prosecuted President Donald Trump. 

The arrangement came to light after Willis referenced the grant in December 2022 correspondence with DOJ Senior Advisor Scott Pestridge of the Office of Justice Programs.  

The document was first revealed on Thursday by Just the News through open records requests filed by the outlet and nonprofit America First Legal. 

According to Just the News, Willis referenced the Office of Justice Programs’ Community-Based Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative grant, which ultimately awarded her office $2 million. 

The timing of the award coincided with her office’s aggressive prosecution of Trump, who at the time was running for president against then-President Joe Biden. 

“I want to document your recognition of our progress and services provided with dynamic partners, as we complete sole source steps for our new grant award, a grant in which you invited us to apply,” Willis wrote to Pestridge, according to Just the News. 

Willis described the award as a “sole source” grant, indicating her office faced no competing applicants. 

The $2 million award was part of roughly $18 million the Biden DOJ provided to Willis’s office between 2021 and 2024.  

She claimed the funds would help “at-risk” youth avoid falling into crime or assist with reintegration into society, according to Just the News. 

Documents released by Willis’s office in response to open records requests show her office maintained consistent coordination with the DOJ after Trump left office in 2021, when she became one of several left-leaning prosecutors pursuing cases against him.  

She later charged Trump under Georgia’s RICO statute, accusing him of attempting to subvert the 2020 election results in the state. 

Her case ultimately unraveled after it was revealed that she had engaged in an affair with Nathan Wade, the special prosecutor she selected to lead the prosecution.  

Willis took vacations with Wade while her office paid him, later claiming she reimbursed him in cash, though she never produced receipts to substantiate those payments. 

Both Wade and Willis were ultimately disqualified from leading the case. After Trump returned to office in 2025, the prosecution was effectively nullified. 

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 13:05

Kristi Noem Says DHS Staffers Put Spyware On Her Phone And Laptop To Record Meetings

Authored by Debra Heine via American Greatness,

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem revealed on Thursday that certain DHS staffers had allegedly installed spyware on her phone and computer, as well as on devices belonging to other political appointees.

“You wouldn’t even believe what I’ve found since I’ve been in this department,” Noem told conservative podcaster Patrick Bet-David .

Noem said she discovered the spyware last year with the assistance of former DOGE chief Elon Musk and his team.

“They helped me identify that some of my own employees in my department had downloaded software on my phone and my laptop to spy on me to record our meetings,” Noem said.

Bet-David was flabbergasted by the bombshell revelation.

Stop it!” he exclaimed. Wow!”

“They had done that to several of the politicals,” Noem added.

The DHS Sec. said that if it wasn’t for Musk’s technology experts, there would probably still by spyware on DHS laptops and phones.

Noem also disclosed that a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) was just recently discovered containing files “no one knew existed.”

“An employee walked by a door and wondered what it was and started asking questions,” she explained, adding that when Trump officials went inside to check it out, they found “individuals working there that had secret files that nobody knew about” on controversial topics.

Noem told Bet-David that the secret files were turned over to attorneys for review.

The secretary went on to say she has seen “eye-opening” data from Customs and Border Protection (CPB) and the National Laboratories regarding the scientists who traveled to the infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology in China to conduct gain of function experiments on coronaviruses.

“It was eye-opening,” she said.

The FBI and Department of Energy (DOE) have determined with moderate/low confidence that COVID-19 leaked from the Wuhan lab.

Noem told Bet-David that she never doubted that the “deep state” (entrenched liberal resistance within the bureaucracy) existed, but never would have guessed that it was a bad as it is.

“I’m still every day trying to dig out people who don’t love America, not just in this department, but throughout the federal government,” she said.

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 12:25

The post The Ellisons Taking Over Warner is Pants on Fire Stuff, but Team Progressive Just Whines appeared first on CEPR.

Most people understand a basic truth: you get what you pay for. Skip maintenance on your roof, and you shouldn’t be surprised when leaks appear.

The same is true of government. If we want a high-functioning public sector—and we should—there is no shortcut. It requires sustained investment in the people and capacity that make government work. Starve it of resources, and its performance will inevitably suffer.

In a recent New York Times essay, academics Nicholas Bagley and Robert Gordon argue otherwise. In their telling, government underperforms because public-sector unions have too much power, driving up costs and resisting efficiencies. Their solution is simple: rein in unions and invest less—largely by cutting pay for public-sector workers. It’s a tidy story that promises an easy fix.

It is also economically incoherent.

The central constraint on public-sector performance is not the power of unions—it is chronic underinvestment. For decades, policymakers have allowed public-sector pay and prestige to fall behind comparable private-sector jobs and have outsourced key functions that should have been performed by skilled civil servants, not profit-maximizing private contractors that are the real source of excess costs for state and local governments. The predictable results have been staffing shortages, uneven service quality, and degraded state capacity—not because we are paying too much, but because we have been trying to get government on the cheap.

Start with the most basic implicit claim Bagley and Gordon return to again and again: that public-sector unions have extracted excessive compensation and resisted efficiencies at every turn. If that were true, we would expect to see the total compensation of public-sector workers rising as a share of the overall economy. In fact, the opposite has happened—the combined compensation of public employees has shrunk noticeably as a share of national income for the last quarter century.

To be sure, policymakers should always aim to deliver value for taxpayers. And—just as in the private sector—there are surely instances where some public employee’s pay is out of line or workers resist useful improvements. But if overpayment for services delivered inefficiently was a general feature of the public sector, their aggregate compensation wouldn’t be shrinking sharply over time.

Bagley and Gordon support their claims with a shotgun blast of anecdotes about public-sector unions able to muscle excess pay out of colluding Democratic politicians that are almost laughably context-free. L.A. Mayor Karen Bass gave larger-than-normal raises to public-sector employees in 2024? I’d hope so—prices had risen 23% in the previous five years (this inflation had made some news) and private-sector pay for non-supervisory employees was up 28% over that time. The suggestion by Bagley and Gordon that these raises were untoward only makes sense if you actively want the desirability of public employment to crater relative to the rest of the economy.

Bagley and Gordon also note darkly that “more than half” of local government expenditures are paid to employees. So what? Local government spending is not like federal government spending where the overwhelming majority of it is simple transfer payments—sending checks to people (Social Security) and medical providers (Medicare and Medicaid). Local governments must directly deliver public goods and services, like public education. That’s going to be done by people who need to be paid. The private sector, too, devotes the majority of its spending to labor (in the corporate sector, labor’s share is well over 70%.)

Even the data they cite for this irrelevant point show that compensation—including the benefits that Bagley and Gordon decry—in state and local jobs is lower than for similar workers in the private sector. That gap matters. Public-sector employers must compete in the same labor markets as everyone else, and low relative pay for skilled workers in the public sector compromises the ability of public-sector employers to attract and retain highly effective workers.

This ignorance of how labor markets in the private and public sectors interact is the root of many of Bagley and Gordon’s economic misunderstandings.

Consider their discussion of education spending, where they note that California spends more per pupil than Mississippi. California does spend more per pupil in nominal dollars, but prices in California are far higher than in Mississippi. Even more importantly, private-sector salaries for college-educated professionals in California are much higher than in Mississippi—and those are the jobs that set the outside options that talented college graduates weigh when deciding whether to enter and remain in teaching. Put another way, it is competition from the private sector that determines how high pay must be to attract and retain high-quality teachers. Education researchers know this, and that’s why the generally accepted way to assess the sufficiency of education spending is not nominal dollars spent per pupil, but per pupil spending scaled to per capita GDP in a state. In forthcoming work we show that on this measure, California ranks 36th in the nation—lower than Mississippi.

This also shows why the Bagley and Gordon claim that “…blue states and cities often also pay state and local government workers more than similar jobs pay in red jurisdictions, even after adjusting for the cost of living” misses the point so spectacularly. State and local governments are embedded in their local economies and public-sector pay has to rise in line with private-sector pay in the economy around them, or the quality and quantity of available public employees will suffer.

The big problem over recent decades is that public-sector pay has not kept pace with the surrounding economy, which has made it harder to recruit and retain qualified workers. Teacher shortages, for instance, stem directly from the huge gap that has emerged in recent decades between what public school teachers earn and what comparable private sector workers earn, even in the highest-spending states. How would making these jobs lower-paying and lower-prestige add excellent new teachers and improve educational outcomes?

Another common complaint about the public sector is that it slows infrastructure projects. The public is often invited to imagine huge teams of paper-pushing bureaucrats gleefully stamping “no” on planning documents. But the clearest finding in empirical research about the drivers of higher-cost infrastructure is that costs have risen fastest where states reduced the number of transportation department employees. Fewer public-sector workers means that more of the planning work has been outsourced to more expensive private consultants.

Bagley and Gordon claim that when policymakers bargain with public-sector unions, there is no constraint on their incentives to grant union demands in exchange for electoral support. In reality, there is a crushing countervailing constraint—the overwhelming perception that voters are rabidly anti-tax. This results in a deep reluctance by policymakers to call for the level of revenue needed for public sector excellence. It is a far bigger structural problem today than any supposed excess power of public-sector unions.

Public-sector workers don’t just bear the brunt of underinvestment, they are also one of the few consistent voices arguing for robust financing of state and local governments, bargaining directly for the public good. They advocate for libraries to remain open in rural communities so that everybody has at least some access to the internet, for higher levels of K–12 education spending, and for proper training for EMTs and other first responders to ensure public safety.

Despite these efforts, public sector financing has been throttled in recent decades, and the results have been a predictable degradation of services. Even worse is coming, as the Republican tax and spending megabill will impose crushing cuts to safety net programs that states administer and jointly fund.

For decades we have been relying on the admirable intrinsic motivation of public employees to shield us from some of the damage of underinvestment—nurses, first-responders, and teachers going above and beyond the strict demands of their jobs to provide services they feel called to perform. But we’ve already asked too much while paying too little. If we want a truly excellent public sector—and we should—we need to pay for it.

Brutal: Democrats Walked Straight Into This

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

A new advertisement from conservative group American Sovereignty hammers Democrats for staying seated during President Trump’s State of the Union call to prioritize American citizens over illegal aliens, using footage that lays bare their priorities.

The ad, which dropped Thursday, features Trump stating, “If you agree with this statement, then stand up and show your support: The first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.” 

Republicans rose in applause while Democrats remained glued to their seats, with overlays labeling the divide and accusing Dems of siding with “illegal immigrant criminals.” 

The spot cuts to Trump’s “These people are crazy” remark before closing with “Republicans are for you.”

As we highlighted in previous coverage, Democrats’ behavior during the SOTU revealed whose side they’re on—and it’s not the American people. 

Many boycotted the event or sat through applause for victims of illegal alien crime, exposing their allegiance to open borders over citizen safety.

They doubled down afterward, with figures like Debbie Wasserman Schultz labeling the speech “absolutely revolting” for prioritizing Americans.

Even more telling, Rep. Rashida Tlaib appeared to chant “KKK” while Republicans chanted “USA!”—a moment ripe for its own ad.

The ad’s release comes as Republicans eye midterms, with a GOP spokesperson telling the Washington Examiner that vulnerable House Democrats should “get comfortable re-watching the moment they revealed they’re nothing more than America-hating scums who stayed glued to their seats.”

The Democrats handed Republicans a raft of campaign material just in time for the midterms. They don’t even try to hide their hate for Americans

If they can’t stand for ‘protect Americans first,’ what exactly are they standing for?

This ad marks the first in a seven-figure blitz targeting battleground states like North Carolina, Michigan, and Georgia, per Politico, aiming to leverage the SOTU optics for electoral gains.

Trump himself called out Democrats during the speech, saying “you should be ashamed of yourself” for not standing, a moment echoed in White House criticisms and conservative commentary.

As midterms loom, this footage serves as a stark reminder: Democrats’ refusal to stand for American priorities hands Republicans ammunition to rally voters against policies that put citizens last.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 11:45

Using a fair-value approach, CBO estimates that the cost of increasing the United States' financial commitment to the International Monetary Fund is about 1.36 percent of the country's current commitment.

Pakistan Declares 'All-Out War' Against Afghanistan, Hundreds Dead In Overnight Clashes With Taliban

Overnight, Pakistan launched airstrikes across Afghanistan, including targets in the capital of Kabul, soon after which Pakistan's Defense Minister Khawaja Asif by Friday morning declared an "all-out war" between the two countries.

Hours prior to the commencement of airstrikes and heavier clashes, Afghan Taliban forces reportedly attacked Pakistani border troops Thursday night in retaliation for Pakistani airstrikes earlier in the week.

A Pakistani military spokesman has said that 274 Taliban fighters have been killed and more than 400 injured by Pakistani strikes, adding that 74 Taliban posts were destroyed and 18 captured - and counting.

Taliban near the Torkham border, via AFP.

The Taliban for its part has said that 55 Pakistani soldiers were killed and 19 posts seized. Kabul have acknowledged Taliban fighters killed, 11 wounded, and 13 civilians injured in the mountainous northwest border region where the line of fighting is concentrated.

Since the Taliban returned to power in 2021, relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan, which share the disputed 1,600-mile Durand Line, have shifted from cautious engagement to open hostility. The history has been marked by shifting from one-time allies to on-and-off again enemies. Many analysts are pointing to 'blowback' for Pakistan after sponsoring the Taliban's rise in the first place, decades ago (which also had the help of the CIA in 'Operation Cyclone').

Islamabad accuses Afghanistan of sheltering Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) militants who carry out cross-border attacks.

Analysts say the latest escalation marks the first time Pakistan has directly targeted Taliban government sites, or essentially going all out against Kabul, rather than limiting strikes to alleged TTP positions.

Pakistan has said its forces have taken out a number of tanks and armored vehicles, as well as artillery positions. The Taliban relies on equipment left behind and confiscated after US and NATO forces rapidly withdrew from the country in the summer of 2021.

Pakistan has struck Kabul and declared it’s in an ‘open war’ with Afghanistan, after Islamabad accused the Afghan Taliban of opening fire along the shared border.

The fighting follows days of hostilities, despite a ceasefire agreement in October. pic.twitter.com/uQO1NT4H9f

— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) February 27, 2026

It remains that Pakistan's army has total force domination; however, the Taliban can still inflict pain through acts of terrorism, which Pakistani cities have suffered immensely under.

Acts of terror by Islamist groups have become almost a regular occurrence in Pakistan - with many suspected of having support through Afghanistan. For example, we reported on this major incident just weeks ago as follows:

At least 31 people were killed and 169 others injured on Friday when a suicide bomber struck a Shia mosque on the outskirts of Islamabad during Friday prayers, Pakistani officials said, in one of the capital’s deadliest attacks in over a decade.

The blast happened in the Khadija al-Kubra Imambargah mosque in the outskirts of Islamabad, with police saying the attacker had been stopped at the mosque gate before opening fire and setting off explosives among worshipers, according to officials cited by Reuters.

As for how the warring sides compare, regional publication Al-Monitor lays out the following:

Pakistan's armed forces benefit from good recruitment and retention, bolstered by equipment from its main defense partner China. Islamabad continues to invest in its military nuclear programs and is also modernizing its navy and air force...

Pakistan has 660,000 active personnel in its defense forces, of whom 560,000 are in the army, 70,000 are in the air force, and 30,000 are in the navy.

The strength of the Afghan Taliban's military is thinner, with only 172,000 active personnel. The group has, however, announced plans to expand its armed forces to 200,000 personnel.

The Taliban's international isolation has meant that it cannot modernize its military - but still, there have been reports of drone usage against Pakistan positions.

As is typical, Pakistan points the finger at Israel and India for fomenting instability in the region:

“I think we must not miss out at this point the timing of this attack by Afghanistan. If you look at the visit of Indian PM Narendra Modi to Israel, it will be easier for you to connect the dots and understand that who is behind these attacks.” – Foreign affairs expert Dr Hassan… pic.twitter.com/uGjwMADETA

— Pakistan TV (@PakTVGlobal) February 27, 2026

Taliban authorities said their forces carried out drone strikes against military targets inside Pakistan as clashes between the two countries continued, according to statements from the defense ministry and a government spokesperson on Friday.

Pakistan’s Information Minister Attaullah Tarar said Pakistani Taliban militants attempted to deploy drones against targets within Pakistan, but air defense systems intercepted them and no casualties were reported.

via Al Jazeera

Overall, Pakistan is experiencing some serious blowback for its years-long policies... Sky News' Yalda Hakim points out that "Pakistan spent decades backing and sheltering the Afghan Taliban - its defense minister acknowledged that to me on camera. Now it says Taliban-ruled Afghanistan is providing sanctuary to militants attacking Pakistan. The consequences are unfolding in real time."

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 11:25

Justice Department Sues 5 More States For Refusing To Provide Voter Rolls

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

The federal government has filed lawsuits against five states—Utah, Oklahoma, Kentucky, West Virginia, and New Jersey—accusing local officials of failing to provide full voter registration lists as requested, the Department of Justice (DOJ) said in a Feb. 26 statement.

“The Attorney General is uniquely charged by Congress with broad authority to request election records under the Civil Rights Act of 1960,” the DOJ said. “This Act allows her to demand the production, inspection, and analysis of statewide voter registration lists that can be cross-checked effectively for improper registrations.”

However, the states have failed to produce voter rolls requested by the attorney general, according to the complaints.

 

The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has now filed complaints against 29 states and the District of Columbia over the issue.

 

The lawsuit against Utah argued that the attorney general sent a letter seeking the state’s computerized statewide voter registration list on July 15. The state did provide the information on July 31, but this was the publicly available redacted version of the list.

On Aug. 14, the attorney general sent another letter, demanding that Utah provide a current, unredacted, electronic copy, the lawsuit said.

The state subsequently raised privacy concerns related to the demand for federal election records, and has yet to provide the full list as requested.

Multiple laws require state officials and election officers to maintain and preserve records relating to voter registrations and related actions. The lawsuit accused Utah’s chief election officer of violating the Civil Rights Act, the complaint said.

Similar allegations were made in lawsuits against officials from Oklahoma, Kentucky, West Virginia, and New Jersey.

“Accurate, well-maintained voter rolls are a requisite for the election integrity that the American people deserve,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said. “This latest series of litigation underscores that this Department of Justice is fulfilling its duty to ensure transparency, voter roll maintenance, and secure elections across the country.”

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Civil Rights Division said that many state election officials are fighting them in court “rather than show their work.”

“We will not be deterred, regardless of party affiliation, from carrying out critical election integrity legal duties,” Dhillon said.

The Epoch Times reached out to officials from the five states for comments and did not receive a response by publication time.

On Sept. 16, the DOJ sued Oregon and Maine, accusing them of failing to provide voter registration rolls. The same month, similar complaints were filed against California, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania.

In December, the DOJ filed lawsuits against Delaware, Maryland, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Georgia, Illinois, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. Last month, Arizona and Connecticut were sued by the department.

Following Bondi’s letter requesting Minnesota provide access to the state’s voter rolls, Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon said in response on Jan. 25: “The answer to Attorney General Bondi’s request is no. Her letter is an outrageous attempt to coerce Minnesota into giving the federal government private data on millions of U.S. Citizens in violation of state and federal law. This comes after repeated and failed attempts by the DOJ to pressure my office into providing the same data.”

Simon said that Minnesota’s elections were “fair, accurate, honest, and secure,” and that “the law does not give the federal government the authority to obtain this private data,” such as Social Security and driver’s license information.

Election Integrity

The Justice Department’s attempt to secure full voter rolls from states follows President Donald Trump’s March 2025 executive order “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections,” which required the attorney general to prioritize the enforcement of laws restricting voter registration and voting by noncitizens.

Republicans are also pushing forward the SAVE America Act, which requires Americans to prove their citizenship when registering to vote. It also mandates that citizens show photo identification when casting ballots, or include a photocopy of their identification when voting by mail.

The bill passed the House of Representatives on Feb. 11 but faces an uncertain future in the Senate.

Democrats have opposed the measure, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) saying that the bill was “dead on arrival” in the chamber.

“The goal of the SAVE Act is the same: disenfranchising American citizens and making it harder for eligible people to vote, particularly low-income Americans and people of color,” Schumer said on the Senate floor on Feb. 9.

Earlier this month, Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) criticized the SAVE Act, saying that it would do more harm than good, according to a Feb. 2 statement from the lawmaker’s office.

“Voting by noncitizens in federal elections is already a felony and it is extremely, extremely rare. This bill does nothing to secure our elections while seeking to disenfranchise millions of married women, military members and spouses, and rural, low-income, and minority voters,” Padilla said.

Several progressive and left-wing groups have opposed the voter ID requirements, including the League of Women Voters, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Brennan Center for Justice.

Meanwhile, Trump said in a Truth Social post on Feb. 13 that he plans to sign an executive order mandating voter ID for the midterm elections if the SAVE Act is not passed by the Senate.

“We cannot let the Democrats get away with NO VOTER I.D. any longer,” the president wrote.

“This is an issue that must be fought, and must be fought, NOW! If we can’t get it through Congress, there are Legal reasons why this SCAM is not permitted,” he said. “I will be presenting them shortly, in the form of an Executive Order.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 11:05

Members of Congress have asked what might cause deficits and debt over the next 10 years to be lower than CBO has projected. CBO's Director recaps his answers to their questions about economic growth, revenues, and spending.

Spanberger And Dems Lie About Gerrymandering Scheme

Authored by Ben Cline via RealClearPolitics,

Once you burn your credibility, it’s hard to get back.

Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger deceived voters and concealed her true leftist agenda to win the Governor’s Mansion last year. Now she and her fellow Democrats are lying to Virginians about a new gerrymandered congressional district map they placed on the ballot as a constitutional amendment on April 21.

It’s a naked attempt to make it impossible for Republicans to win election to Congress in most places in Virginia, and it’s why she was rewarded with the plum assignment of responding to President Trump’s State of the Union address this week.

The Virginia Supreme Court has already had one chance to stop the gerrymandering by upholding a judge’s ruling that Democrats cut legal corners to get the measure on the ballot. The justices, however, inexplicably chose to wait until the vote happens.

I filed another lawsuit to bring new challenges, along with my colleague, Rep. Morgan Griffith (VA-9), and the RNC and NRCC. We won in circuit court, blocking the referendum again, so our Supreme Court will have another chance to do the right thing.

As we wait for a ruling, it’s important that people have the facts.

Spanberger masqueraded as a moderate in her campaign and won ceaseless praise from the media for her focus on “affordability.” But she dropped that as soon as she was sworn in and went right back to what she truly believes.

She returned Virginia to the multi-state, radical environmental scheme that artificially raises electricity rates by $500 million every year. She’s currently considering a variety of tax increases proposed by Democrats in the Virginia legislature, including bumps in the sales and income tax, as well as taxes on everyday services like dog walking and gym memberships. She has yet to rule out raising taxes on anything.

All of this is the opposite of what she ran on.

Now Gov. Spanberger and her Democrats have turned to stealing congressional seats.

And naturally, they’re lying about that as well.

It’s nothing complicated. They’re taking Virginia’s current congressional district map, which produced six Democrats and five Republican members, and redrawing the lines to twist it into a 10-to-1 map in favor of Democrats.

Kamala Harris won here in the 2024 presidential race with less than 52% of the vote, but this map would award her party 91% of our congressional seats. 

They’re assigning new federal representation to Virginians who didn’t ask for it, and there’s every likelihood that some of the lines were drawn to benefit specific Democrat politicians. One thing that’s certain is that no one was thinking of the well-being of voters when they hatched this plot.

As an example, take Fairfax County, vote-rich and dominated by Democrats in Northern Virginia outside Washington, D.C.

The new map carves Fairfax into five pieces and attaches them to districts that reach deep into Virginia’s rural regions. Picture the county as an octopus that has tentacles running throughout the state, and you’ll have an idea.

The configuration ensures that most rural voters will be represented by people who live in Fairfax and were elected by voters in the D.C. suburbs. It’s difficult to imagine what these groups might have in common geographically, culturally, or economically.

To top it off, just a few days ago, Democrats in the General Assembly decided that they hadn’t cheated enough and twisted the screws even more to guarantee total victory in 10 of the 11 districts.

States usually redistrict following a census, but Democrats claim they must act now to balance Republican activities in other states. This excuse falls apart because most observers agree that Virginia’s new map is a particularly egregious example of partisan gerrymandering.

And Democrats lie when they talk about it.

The party that told us that Joe Biden was mentally sharp now wants us to think a 10-to-1 congressional map promotes “fair elections,” as their advertising claims.

They were even dishonest in the ballot question they wrote, which says it will temporarily “restore fairness” – without explanation or context – to elections in Virginia until the regular redistricting occurs in 2030.

We shouldn’t let politicians select their own voters, and Virginians were wise enough to see this coming.

Just six years ago, a whopping 66% of voters approved a constitutional amendment creating an independent redistricting commission to remove map-drawing from partisans. Unable to resist the lure of unchecked power, Virginia Democrats are trying to trick voters into undoing that so they can burgle those congressional seats.

National Democrats are paying attention.

House Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) has already sent $5 million to the campaign to support the new map and pledged to spend “whatever it takes” on top of that.

Democrats hilariously claim to be restoring fairness.

But a party powerful enough to ram this down everyone’s throat isn’t the victim of unfairness. It’s the cause of it.

Rep. Ben Cline, a Republican, represents Virginia’s 6th District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 10:35

Jack Smith's Secret Orders Targeting Patel And Wiles Should Alarm Us All

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Former Special Counsel Jack Smith has long operated under Oscar Wilde’s rule that “the only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it.” 

Over the last few months, the public has learned of a wide array of secret orders targeting members of Congress, Trump allies, and others.

Now, the Administration has learned that FBI Director Kash Patel and White House Susie Wiles were also targeted by Smith in 2022 and 2023 when they were private citizens.

Smith was a controversial choice as Special Counsel because of his history of excessive legal arguments and tactics, including his unanimous loss before the Supreme Court in tossing out the conviction of former Virginia Governor Robert McDonnell.

His tendency to stretch the law to the breaking point also did not play well with juries in high-profile cases, as in his case against John Edwards, which ended in acquittal.

Despite such criticisms, Smith immediately returned to his past pattern of tossing aside any restraint or caution. Even Democrats this year expressed objections to his targeting of Republican members of Congress, including former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

Smith told carriers not to tell members of Congress that their calls were being seized. Not only did such records reveal potentially confidential sources, ranging from journalists to whistleblowers, but Smith’s gag order prevented Congress from responding to check the abusive demand.

Now, the Administration is alleging that Smith and the prior Administration effectively buried the targeting of Patel and Wiles. It took a year into the new Administration for these orders to be uncovered.

The early accounts of the orders contained equally disturbed elements. Reuters reported that “in 2023, the FBI recorded a phone call between Wiles and her attorney, according to two FBI officials. Wiles’ attorney was aware that the call was being recorded, and consented to it, but Susie Wiles was not.”

It is astonishing to hear of a lawyer agreeing to the FBI recording of an attorney-client meeting as a general matter.

However, to do so without informing your counsel would be a breathtaking invasion of such protected communications.

There is much we still do not know.

On its face, these orders appear consistent with the earlier abusive demands. Smith had virtually no basis for targeting Republican members and Trump allies. It was a fishing expedition in which Smith simply compiled lists of every well-known ally of President Trump.

There are also concerns over the response to this controversy. There are reports of 10 FBI employees being fired. Agents often carry out the orders of superiors in such investigations. The Administration should assure the public that these agents were afforded due process before being ousted due to their work on orders.

The recently disclosed files from these investigations are an indictment of Smith himself. He was given a historic mandate to investigate a former president. Rather than exercise a modicum of restraint to show the public that this was not a partisan effort, Smith yielded to his worst temptations in targeting a long list of Republicans.

In his prior testimony, Smith offered little to justify these orders beyond a shrug that such secret orders routinely occur. However, he was targeting a “who’s who” listing of top political opponents to President Biden and the Democrats.

To make matters worse, Smith struggled to release damaging information (and even schedule a trial) on the very eve of the 2024 presidential election. Every action that Smith took only magnified his agenda to influence the election. He became a prosecutor consumed by his antagonism toward Trump and his unchecked power.

Nothing was sacred for Smith. His demands in the investigation from the courts included a wholesale attack on free speech values.

Ultimately, these files are not only an indictment of Jack Smith but also of former Attorney General Merrick Garland, who failed to exercise his authority to oversee Smith and protect core constitutional values.

It is essential that Congress and the Administration fully investigate Smith’s surveillance demands.  Smith has long demanded accountability for others while evading such accountability for his own actions.

If past orders are any indication, the Patel and Wiles orders were likely based on sweeping generalities and demands for absolute secrecy. That is the signature of Jack Smith. Indeed, Smith appears to have replicated his increasingly infamous record with the collapse of two high-profile cases and lingering questions over his judgment and actions.

He has again yielded to his temptations, and the public has paid the price.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the New York Times bestselling “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 09:40