Friday, May 8, 2026
Home Blog Page 292

Special Counsel Jack Smith to take a break from prosecution of Trump — for now

Federal prosecutors in the Department of Justice on Friday want more time to decide whether to continue prosecuting President-elect Donald Trump.

Special Counsel Jack Smith said Trump’s sweeping victory on Tuesday over Vice President Kamala Harris means his team needs to regroup and come up with a plan of attack.

“The Government respectfully requests that the Court vacate the remaining deadlines in the pretrial schedule to afford the Government time to assess this unprecedented circumstance and determine the appropriate course going forward consistent with Department of Justice policy,” prosecutors wrote in a motion before the court. Judge Tanya Chutkan granted the motion and ordered Smith to send her a status report by Dec. 2 regarding his plans to attack Trump for what he has called a criminal scheme to overturn the 2020 election of Joe Biden.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges and the U.S. Supreme Court found that he had presidential immunity for the actions he took while in office while executing his core constitutional duties and that he had limited immunity on other matters. Unofficial acts are not protected.

Rep. Allard asks Division of Elections to explain why so many rural precincts went silent, didn’t report

Rep. Jamie Allard of Eagle River put in a public records request with the Division of Elections on Thursday to get answers about why the ballots from rural Alaska were so delayed in being reported back to the division.

In a letter to Division Director Carol Beecher, Allard has asked for copies of all communications to and from, specifically, the 13 rural precincts that had not yet reported their results. At this writing, nine of those had finally reported back to the division, but had not done so by Thursday morning, two days after the election.

Allard is asking for all memos, text messages, emails, Microsoft Teams messages, and letters to and from the precincts and the Region IV office based in Nome, and headquarters.

After the election was over on Tuesday, there were 25 precincts that had delayed their reporting, and the division was, according to its sparse communication with the public, trying to reach them.

The division was successful resolving 15 of those precincts, but another 13 remained incommunicado, and little information has been released to the public about what is going on with missing ballots.

“The purpose of this records request is simple. It is now almost 48 hours since our state’s polls have closed, and we are no closer to having solid, reputable vote totals shared with the public,” Allard wrote. “While I fully recognize some of the unique aspects of our state in terms of size and geography, there is simply no excuse for the DOE to have yet to fully count our state’s vote and share those results with the public in a transparent manner.”

With Election Day now past, it has become increasingly clear that Alaska’s Division of Elections is still not fully up to the job, Allard said, adding, “Alaskans deserve transparency and expediency in their election results.”

In an addendum to her first request, Allard asked the Division to explain what happen to wasted ballots in those rural areas. Wasted ballots occur when people make mistakes and turn them in to get a new ballot. With ranked-choice voting, there is a greater tendency to make mistakes. What is unclear in these rural areas is if people were given new ballots, were the old ones destroyed, or mixed in and counted with the others?

Allard says the public deserves an answer because it’s the kind of condition that can lead to fraud.

Listicle: Which deeply rural Alaska precincts voted mostly for Trump — from South Tongass to Utqiagvik

Some Alaskans may believe the rural areas of the state are uniformly Democrat, but a look at the precinct results from rural Alaska shows a strong preference in many places for Donald Trump, the New York businessman over Kamala Harris, the San Francisco lawyer for president.

Rural Alaska is not monolithic in its voting, as this list of Trump-favorable precincts shows. Is your community on the list?

Here’s a list of how some rural Alaska precincts voted. (List is not comprehensive. Showing vote totals from Nov. 5, unofficial totals):

South Tongass: 378 Trump to 212-Harris

North Tongass No. 2: 505 Trump to 198 Harris

Thorne Bay: 155 Trump to 28 Harris

Wrangell: 451 Trump to 200 Harris

Klawock: 197 Trump to 134 Harris

Petersburg: 498 Trump to 277 Harris

Sitka No. 1: 466 Trump to 434 Harris

Pelican-Elfin Cove: 24 Trump to 15 Harris

Hoonah: 129 Trump to 108 Harris

Haines No. 1: 316 Trump to 283 Harris

Haines No. 2: 55 Trump to 46 Harris

Kodiak South: 8 Trump to 7 Harris

Port Lions: 51 Trump to 12 Harris

Kodiak Flats: 373 Trump to 169 Harris

Kodiak Mission Road: 854 Trump to 490 Harris

Kodiak Chiniak: 20 Trump to 21 Harris

Egegik: 10 Trump to 0 Harris

Sand Point: 83 Trump to 33 Harris

King Cove: 77 Trump to 21 Harris

Cold Bay: 13 Trump to 6 Harris

Akutan: 24 Trump to 24 Harris

Aleutians No. 2: 288 Trump to 226 Harris

King Salmon: 81 Trump to 40 Harris

Naknek: 88 Trump to 47 Harris

Ekwok: 23 Trump to 8 Harris

Lake Iliamna No. 2: 34 Trump to 23 Harris

Lake Iliamna No. 1: 74 Trump to 28 Harris

Pedro Bay: 8 Trump to 3 Harris

Togiak: 76 Trump to 48 Harris

Manokotak: 70 Trump to 23 Harris

Koliganek: 38 Trump to 31 Harris

Aleknagik: 43 Trump to 18 Harris

Akiak: 36 Trump to 34 Harris

Nightmute: 14 Trump to 11 Harris

Newtok: 12 Trump to 9 Harris

Russian Mission: 25 Trump to 3 Harris

St. Michael: 30 Trump to 22 Harris

Stebbins: 34 Trump to 30 Harris

Gambell: 67 Trump to 59 Harris

Shaktoolik: 33 Trump to 19 Harris

Koyuk: 56 Trump to 34 Harris

Selznick: 44 Trump to 19 Harris

Noorvik: 58 Trump to 27 Harris

Kiana: 28 Trump to 24 Harris

Noatak: 67 Trump to 19 Harris

Kivalina: 25 Trump to 17 Harris

Point Lay: 15 Trump to 9 Harris

Utqiagvik (Barrow): 125 Trump to 109 Harris

Browerville: 331 Trump to 278 Harris

Anuktuvuk Pass: 26 Trump to 26 Harris

Kaktovik: 57 Trump to 12 Harris

Central: 32 Trump to 7 Harris

Eagle: 26 Trump to 19 Harris

McGrath: 63 Trump to 23 Harris

Nenana: 195 Trump to 98 Harris

Dot Lake: 45 Trump to 4 Harris

Gakona: 81 Trump to 20 Harris

Tok: 401 Trump to 89 Harris

Tetlin: 16 Trump to 12 Harris

Northway: 43 Trump to 22 Harris

Chistochina: 55 Trump to 12 Harris

Kenny Lake: 132 Trump to 42 Harris

Win Gruening: Let’s consider tightening cell phone restrictions in schools

By WIN GRUENING

A recent uptick in student fights on and off campus in Juneau schools has administration officials looking for answers. It also has raised the issue of cell phone use in schools.

While the two issues are not directly linked, some parents and school officials feel that cell phone use can contribute to and facilitate the conditions leading up to fights between students. National data has shown the negative effects of cellphone use in schools on learningmental healthcyberbullying, and teacher morale.

According to a 2023 Common Sense Media survey, 97% of 11- to 17-year-olds reported using their phones in some capacity during school hours and handling their phones around 13 times during the average school day. Those students used their phones for a median of 43 minutes (ranging from less than one minute to six and a half hours). The median number of pickups was 13 per school day, ranging from less than one to 229. The apps most used were social media (32% of smartphone use during school hours), gaming (17%), and YouTube (26%).

Currently in the U.S., 76% of public schools prohibit non-academic use of cell phones or smartphones during school hours. But that allows for a wide latitude in policy from schools that strictly prohibit these devices in classrooms to schools that allow them, but don’t permit their “inappropriate” use.

The Juneau School District policy is more closely aligned with the latter.

It states, in part: “The School Board recognizes that many students possess and use cell phones and other portable electronic devices. These devices serve an important purpose in facilitating communication between the student and his or her family, as well as serving as tools to access electronic information. In the school setting, portable electronic devices are permitted so long as their use is consistent with this policy and does not interfere with the educational process or with safety and security.”

Unfortunately, this policy often puts teachers in the unfair position of monitoring and enforcing a rather vague guideline when they believe that a student’s use of a cell phone is “interfering with the educational process.” This can lead to a policy on phone use that varies from school to school—sometimes even from classroom to classroom—and isn’t always enforced.

My granddaughter attends a public school in the Seattle area and her school district just introduced a Phone-Free School policy in all school buildings. She can keep her phone with her but is required to place it in Do Not Disturb mode (along with her smartwatch and earbuds) in a magnetically-locked Yondr pouch during the school day. The pouch can be unlocked by tapping it on an unlocking device whenever she leaves the “phone-free zone” at the school. That means she can use her phone at the end of the school day or anytime outside but cannot access it anywhere inside the school building during the class day without permission from a school official.

Yondr pouches are just but one of the many ways that middle and high school administrators are dealing with cell phone use. However, there are a wide variety of nuanced approaches that can be implemented depending on student grade level, budgetary limitations, and parent buy-in.

The ideal solution would be one that is acceptable to administrators, teachers, parents, and students. But that just isn’t realistic. Some school districts have found that the greatest pushback on phone restrictions comes from parents who believe that communication with their child should be available at all times. Certainly, exceptions can be made for students who have a documented need for an electronic device, whether for medical reasons or otherwise. But most students don’t require immediate access to phones all day while in school.

The Alaska State Board of Education recently adopted a resolution charging the Department of Education and Early Development with the advancement of a model policy limiting the use of cellular phones and other electronic communication devices during class hours in Alaska’s schools.

The Juneau School Board has signaled their intent to develop and implement such a policy. Other school districts in Alaska should consider following suit.

The sooner the better.

After retiring as the senior vice president in charge of business banking for Key Bank in Alaska, Win Gruening became a regular opinion page columnist for the Juneau Empire. He was born and raised in Juneau and graduated from the U.S. Air Force Academy in 1970. He is involved in various local and statewide organizations.

Rick Whitbeck: Biden extends middle finger to Alaska over ANWR leases on his way out the door

By RICK WHITBECK

On Wednesday, the Biden Administration Bureau of Land Management announced the terms of its upcoming lease sale in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge’s Coastal Plain.

And, in what should be seen by Alaskans as one last middle finger on their way out of Washington, D.C., the administration’s attack on our state’s resource development community was furthered by the release.

Let’s step back in time and remember what happened following the previous lease sale from late 2019.  Nine total tracts were bid on, and fully-executed, legally-binding contracts completed. But, when the Biden administration came in, they paused any activities related to ANWR development. 

After three years of delay, they ended up canceling the leases altogether, citing “deficiencies” in the process. And, while those actions are currently being litigated by the leaseholders of seven of the nine tracts, the other two just gave up and remanded their contracts. That was a win for the environmental lobby, which has fought against ANWR development for decades.

Earlier this year, the Biden Administration noted it was obligated to hold the second lease, as part of Congress’ 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act passage. With yesterday’s announcement, the BLM made clear it is doing so under terms designed to minimize — if not eliminate — interest by potential bidders. 

The final order from BLM will offer leases for the bare minimum number of acres authorized by Congress — 400,000 — and includes additional limiting stipulations related to surface disturbance, seismic exploration and infrastructure footprint size.

None of these requirements should be a surprise to Alaskans, who have endured a whopping 68 attacks from Team Biden on the resource opportunities that drive our state’s economy. But the tenor of yesterday’s announcement, its limitations and, most importantly, the brazen exaggerations and outright lies included in the release,should infuriate each of us.

The exaggerations include the note of over 100,000 comments being made during the public comment periods, and how those helped influence the final scope and requirements. Let’s not think for a minute that 90% of those weren’t form letters, auto-generated by environmental groups and their surrogates, and not comments based by people who would actually be affected by ongoing exploration and development activities in the Arctic. 

Another exaggeration? That industry doesn’t want to invest in developing the Coastal Plain. At the time of the previous lease sale, with Trump leaving and Biden arriving, industry knew the new administration was going to do its best to stifle ANWR development. Industry then knew that their efforts to bid and be awarded leases were likely to be embroiled in controversy and litigation, and chose – understandably – to sit that one out as a result.  

Let’s not forget this is the same industry, however, that had funded efforts with groups like Arctic Power for decades, hoping to open the Coastal Plain to development.  Make no mistake: the incoming Trump Administration will have not only their back, but also significant interest from industry in looking at ways to involve themselves in ANWR development.

Unfortunately, the poison pills that BLM announced yesterday might give the impression to industry that they should sit this next one out again, or at least wait until the Trump administration puts in place lease terms consistent with previous federal lease programs, and not designed to stifle investment and interest.

Therein lies the most egregious, foundational false-flagged argument in the announcement. In noting the final orders, BLM stated it had met with affected tribes and completed extensive consultations with them. However, their efforts have included only the Gwich’in people, who live hundreds of miles away from the Coastal Plain, and ignored the Iñupiat people most impacted by North Slope development.

North Slope Borough Mayor Josiah Patkotak, who has clashed with the administration’s assertions that they’ve met their goals around tribal consultation, recently penned an op-ed, noting the Gwich’in’s asserted rights to the Coastal Plain are questionable.  In it, he wrote: 

“Let me be clear: the land in question is not, and has never been, Gwich’in territory. If there is a claim that their ancestors are buried here, that is a result of territorial wars that occurred in a bygone era; and victors aren’t buried.”

The administration has ignored the Iñupiat because their insistence that responsible development can occur hand-in-hand with traditional Native lifestyles is incongruent with the eco-left-driven assertions that resource extraction in the Arctic has no benefits, and is only harmful to the planet and the Indigenous people living there.  One look no further than the tenfold increase in population of the Central Arctic caribou herd since oil began flowing in the 1970s. Their population has thrived, living amongst the development across the North Slope, and specifically in Prudhoe Bay.

With just over two months between now and the end of their reign of terror, we should expect nothing less than outright war from Team Biden on Alaska’s remaining resource projects. 

Thankfully, we have President Donald J. Trump returning to office, and if his first term is any indication, Alaska will be on the forefront of unleashing American energy independence, dominance, and helping Make America Great Again.

Rick Whitbeck is the Founder and Lead Consultant at Power Performance Strategies, after serving as the Alaska State Director for a national nonprofit focused on energy opportunities the past six years.  Contact him at [email protected].

Video: Could Dunleavy become Interior Secretary?

Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s name is being tossed around as a possible candidate for secretary of the U.S. Department of Interior under the incoming Trump Administration. That’s been known for months, although he has not indicated he is seriously interested in leaving the Governor’s Office. But a new name has also arisen — Gov. Doug Burgum of North Dakota.

Both governors have been strong supporters of Trump. Burgum is leaving office this year after serving as North Dakota governor since 2016. Dunleavy is midway through his second term. If he goes into the Administration, Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom becomes governor and Commissioner of the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs Maj. Gen. Torrence Saxe would become lieutenant governor.

President Donald Trump has been close to Dunleavy for years. He taped a video message for Dunleavy earlier this year, in which he promised to help Alaska return to its standing as an energy powerhouse, and he thanked Dunleavy for his support and said they would be working together to also strengthen national defense, with the growing threat of China in the Western Hemisphere.

But while there will be a turnover in Washington, D.C., many will be vying for Trump Administration posts after his historic, nearly landslide win on Nov 5.

One thing is almost certain: Secretary of Interior Deb Haaland and her anti-Alaska, eco-minions will be retired from that job by Jan. 20, Inauguration Day.

Division of Elections struggles to get precincts to report from rural Alaska

The Alaska Division of Elections on Wednesday was able to report 15 of the 28 rural precincts that had not phoned in their results from the Nov. 5 elections. But there are still 13 precincts that had not reported their results by Nov. 6, and the Division has provided no explanation to the public.

“Good afternoon, we are posting results today that will include 15 more precincts that did not initially report on election night. We continue to try and contact our workers to get results prior to shipping materials back to the division,” the Division reported on Wednesday afternoon.

The results that did come in gave Rep. Mary Peltola about 550 more votes, but she needs about 11,000 votes to close the gap and achieve the 50%+1 that is needed to win reelection. Nick Begich, her opponent, only needs about 1,186 votes to reach the winning number to unseat Peltola.

It’s unclear when the Division will count more of the ballots they have in hand or even how many ballots they have that were not counted on Nov. 5 or 6. Those would include early votes cast from last Thursday through Monday, Nov, 4. About 3,700 ballots remain to be counted for the Senate Seat P (Fairbanks) seat, now being won by Sen. Scott Kawasaki. They include about 2,000 questioned ballots, 1,000 early votes, and 700 absentee ballots by mail.

Communication from the Division about the process has been subpar. There may be more ballots counted Thursday, Nov. 7, but there appears to be no guarantee.

The Division has decided to not release the raw data on any of the ballots that would give those candidates in ranked-choice races the opportunity to do they own analysis about where their race stands. This information is public information but is being withheld from the public by the Division for unknown reasons. The Division also withheld that information in 2022, the first year that ranked-choice voting was operating in Alaska elections.

Status quo: Alaska Senate, with mostly same members, to keep bipartisan coalition

The Alaska Senate will look a lot like it did during the past four years: Republicans Sen. Gary Stevens of Kodiak will remain Senate president, and Sen. Cathy Giessel of Anchorage will again be majority leader. Both are foes of Gov. Mike Dunleavy, a Republican. Democrat Sen. Bill Wielechowski will hold the gavel in the Rules Committee, which decides what legislation may advance.

The Senate majority organization is a mix of Democrats and Republicans. Three Republicans are not in the coalition government, which is dominated by Democrats. They are Sen. Shelley Hughes and Sen. Mike Shower of Wasilla and the MatSu, and Sen. Robert Myers of Fairbanks. It’s unclear if they will be invited to join this time.

It’s also unclear if newly elected Republican members will be invited or will join. Rep. Mike Cronk of Tok is joining the Senate, replacing Sen. Click Bishop, who was a member of the coalition. Rob Yundt of Wasilla will replace Sen. David Wilson, a Republican who also joined the Democrat-dominated coalition.

Other members of the coalition are Democrat Sens. Lyman Hoffman and Donny Olson, and Republican Sen. Bert Stedman, who all will continue as a trio to co-chair the Senate Finance Committee. Hoffman will manage the operating budget this time, Stedman will manage the capital budget, and Olson will be in charge of various legislation.

The group has not made committee assignments as some races are not decided. In Fairbanks Senate Seat P, another 3,700 votes still need to be counted, deciding whether Sen. Scott Kawasaki will retain his seat; he was challenged by Leslie Hajdukovich and that race is close, with Kawasaki in the lead.

Marc Bond: The meaning of the 2024 election

By MARC BOND

The dust is settling on the 2024 election cycle in the United States. There will be many interpretations of the outcome, and a lot of shuffling in the world of statistics.

Before I dive into my thoughts, let me concede that imposing a mindset on 140 million voters is a fool’s errand. People vote the way they vote for many reasons. Some have one dominant and excusive issue; abortion for instance. Despite the secrecy of the voting booth, others feel pressure from family, friends, or co-workers. Some vote for a candidate, and others vote against a candidate. For most people, there is a combination of factors which include issues, personalities, and personal experience.

When I comment on the meaning of the 2024 election, I am looking at macro trends which become apparent (at least to me) from the way large numbers of people voted.

Many are calling this a “Red Wave” election. It is important to define that term before discussing it. A Red Wave or a Blue Wave means an election which because of the size and depth of a shift from one party to the other is a real inflection point. The outcome doesn’t mean merely that one of the major parties has been installed in power in a convincing way. The election outcome is a portent of future elections for, say, the next decade. It is a shift in attitudes that goes beyond the current candidates and current issues.

I don’t think the 2024 election was a Red Wave in the sense that the Republicans have cemented tenure of the White House and a majority in Congress for the next decade. The Trump personality phenomenon will pass in a little over four years, and, at 78 years old, Trump himself will pass through the veil in the not-too-distant future. Other Republicans will follow Trump, and their success will depend upon their personalities, the issues then current, and what the Democrats have to offer at the time.

If 2024 constitutes a Red Wave, I think it is as a revolt against the wonky ideas that pass for currency among the political elite, such as:

We can be nice to terrorist countries and they will be nice to us; We can spend the federal fisc like drunken sailors and it will result in general affluence, the federal debt will not be a problem, and any inflation will be “transitory;” we can transition the entire world economy from petroleum-based energy to wind and solar-based energy in 10 years with no depletion of essential resources and without any impact on the standard of living; your daughter can become boy and enjoy a sterile life without any ongoing medical, emotional, or psychological problems; your son can become a girl and play in girls’ sports with no effect on the fairness and safety of the game; we can admit men to women’s bathrooms and locker rooms without any increase in sexual assault; we can let tens of millions of illegal immigrants into our country and it will have no impact on our safety, security, and economy; we can threaten the SCOTUS with court packing and investigations, and it will result in beneficial court rulings; we can enjoy all manner of drugs recreationally without any influence on depression, suicides, and personal productivity; we can impeach, sue, and try our political opponents and deny we are acting like a banana republic; and we can discriminate based on race and pretend it will heal our country.

When one examines many of the issues listed above, one realizes that they do not draw lines on sex, racial, ethnic, or nationality bases. They cut across those lines. It turns out no man or woman wants a boy in the locker room of their daughter’s athletic team.

Amazing though it may sound, legal immigrants from Latin America do not want illegal immigration from Latin America. Blacks and whites alike want economic opportunity in obtaining employment and operating small businesses.

Although befuddling, people generally like to awaken in a heated or cooled homes, take hot showers, eat foods that have been gathered from around the world, put on petroleum-based clothing, drive cars that don’t cost an arm and a leg, and enjoy the company of family and friends. Hispanic, Native, Black or White, people see the inherent unfairness in lawfare as a weapon of political influence and determination.

Almost all people realize at bottom that the way to stop discrimination based on race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race. It is our elites who are out of step.

How else can you account for Trump’s amazing increase in voting share in Blacks, Hispanics and Asians? These folks are people first, sentient people with hearts and brains that can think for themselves. They can see the impact of a lousy economy in their lives. They know that humans come in two forms, male and female. They understand human nature and incentives and disincentives. They put the information available in this election in their calculator and concluded that more of the same from the Democrats was not going to help them and their families.

The ”Wave” … the movement of perception and perspective … is fragile at this point. The worst thing that could happen is for the Republicans to fail to understand what got them back in power. At that point, the newly interested voters would conclude that their 2024 vote was wasted.

There are two things that need to happen quickly to reinforce our constitutional system and general civility. First, the president and the Republican Congress need to deliver on the economy, crime, immigration, DEI, and transgenderism. They need to do so expeditiously but in a magnanimous, honest, open and constitutionally correct manner, with full transparency. They need to drastically cut the size and omnipresence of government in the lives of Americans.

Second, the Democrats need to forego the surface arguments like Biden would have been a better candidate, the minority voters were temporarily insane, the country is so misogynistic and racist that it can’t vote for a minority woman for president, etc. They desperately need to take a serious inward look about why the American people dumped them. In chief, they need to ignore the fringe elements that currently dictate the party agenda, and reconnect with the everyday folks they now only pretend to represent.

One more thing: America and Americans need to regain the moral basis for our constitutional republic.

We are currently driven by “expressive individualism,” a term coined by Robert Bellah. Expressive individualism holds that human beings are defined by their individual psychological core beliefs. Happiness and human flourishing are solely driven by each individual’s inner sense of psychological well-being or peace. Anything that challenges it is deemed oppressive. There is no such thing as a common human nature which ties us together and limits our activities to those which conform to and promote that human nature.

It turns out that this is a wholly dysfunctional basis for an operating society. People have obligations to each other in addition to the right to exercise freedoms. These obligations and rights come from something bigger than individuals or a collective. They come from a Creator, and they cannot be ignored with the hope that a free society can be maintained.

John Adams said, “We have no Government armed with Power capable of contending with human Passions unbridled by morality and Religion. Avarice, Ambition, Revenge or Gallantry, would break the strongest Cords of our Constitution as a Whale goes through a Net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

We have spent the last half century undercutting the moral basis of public life. The foundation is now a shell, and yet we think we can keep the building intact. Rebuilding that foundation is more important than any other work on the building.

Marc Bond is a retired Anchorage attorney.