The Atlantic Has Published the Attack Plans

Do Republican senators have spines? Nope. Do university presidents have spines? Nope. Do TV stations have spines? Nope. Do the biggest newspapers in the country have spines? Nope. Do billionaires who own massive companies have spines? Nope. Do big law firms have spines? Mostly no, but maybe one. OK, finally, what about lowly magazine editors? YES!

Yesterday, The Atlantic's editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, published (behind a paywall) what was said on the now-infamous SignalGate chat (except for parts that could compromise national security). But lots of (now only historical) information was released, including what kinds of planes took part in the attack on Yemen and which weapons were used on which targets. The discussion was not about the general theory of war. It was very specific about who was getting bombed and when. Interestingly enough, the one person you might think would be in the loop when you are starting a war, Admiral Christopher Grady, Acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, was not in on the chat.

Goldberg apparently figured that since the administration had announced that nothing classified was discussed in the chat, it would be much harder to convince a jury some day that he had knowingly released classified information. Still, he took a big risk because Donald Trump is not going to like this. If this story ends with the Secretary of Defense "resigning" or being fired, Goldberg might well rate a chapter in the next edition of Profiles in Courage.

Needless to say, with the publication, the story blew up yesterday. It was everywhere. Here is the AP story and here is Politico's, for example, but practically every major media outlet in the country had something on it. Even Fox covered it here. But Fox's take was that all those 17 hard-working defense people and one reporter worked together flawlessly with no backbiting to come to a worthy decision in an efficient manner, unlike the previous administration, where all they did was fight with each other.

On Monday, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said that no war plans were discussed. Here is part of a message he posted to the group chat hours before the strike:

• 1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)
  
  
• 1345: 'Trigger Based' F-18 1st Strike Window Starts (Target Terrorist is @ his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME—also, Strike Drones Launch (MQ-9s)
  
  
• 1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)
  
  
• 1415: Strike Drones on Target (THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP, pending earlier 'Trigger Based' targets)
  
  
• 1536: F-18 2nd Strike Starts—also, first sea-based Tomahawks launched.

We are not military strategists, but these sound like fairly specific war plans to us. If the message had fallen into the wrong hands, the safety of the pilots could have been compromised. God forbid that the Houthis knew all this in advance, shot down the planes, and killed the pilots or took them as hostages. At the very least, the Houthis could have made sure no one and nothing valuable was at the targeted sites.

On Tuesday, DNI Tulsi Gabbard testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee under oath that she could not recall whether specific timing or weapons systems were discussed on the chat. Either she has brain damage or she just committed perjury.

On Wednesday morning, NSA Mike Waltz tweeted: "No locations. No sources & methods. NO WAR PLANS." At least he didn't lie under oath.

Democrats are having a field day with this, as you might imagine. Former Navy pilot Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) has called for Hegseth to step down. He tweeted: "The Signal incident is what happens when you have the most unqualified Secretary of Defense we've ever seen. We're lucky it didn't cost any servicemembers their lives, but for the safety of our military and our country, Secretary Hegseth needs to resign." Other top Democrats who have called for Hegseth's head on a pike include Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chair Mark Warner (D-VA), Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), and House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-MA).

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who is already under fire from Democratic voters for being a milquetoast, made it worse by saying: "Many outstanding questions are simply not answered." He was lobbed a softball thrown underhand from 3 feet away and he dropped it. He should have thundered from the floor of the Senate that Hegseth is a danger to American security and if Trump had any guts, he would have fired Hegseth yesterday. He could have added that Trump loved to say "You're fired" on television, but in real life he is a coward. At the very least, Trump could have asked Elon Musk to fire Hegseth. Musk is not afraid to fire people. Even one Republican, Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE), a retired Air Force brigadier general, piped up, saying: "The White House is in denial that this was not classified or sensitive data."

One anonymous defense official said: "It is safe to say that anybody in uniform would be court martialed for this. We don't provide that level of information on unclassified systems, in order to protect the lives and safety of the servicemembers carrying out these strikes. If we did, it would be wholly irresponsible. My most junior analysts know not to do this."

If the Democrats are smart, some member of the House should formally introduce a resolution to impeach Hegseth for endangering the lives of U.S. servicemembers. Mike Johnson will never even let the resolution go to committee, so the member should seek maximum publicity. Talk to every media outlet out there. Hey, members, we'd do an exclusive interview. Get the public all riled up about Hegseth not caring about the safety of our men and women in uniform. That is something people can understand and will put pressure on Trump to fire him.

This week the media has had more scoops than a Baskin-Robbins ice cream store. Wired Magazine also had one. It seems that Mike Waltz is really careless. He has a Venmo account. In case you are not familiar with it, Venmo is sort of PayPal Jr., intended for people to make small payments to their friends and make the payments viewable by friends, for example, splitting the check for a group dinner. Until late yesterday, Waltz' list of Venmo friends was public. Anyone could see who his friends, acquaintances, and professional colleagues are until Wired found the list and wrote it up. There were 328 friends, journalists, military officers, lobbyists, and others. A foreign intelligence service would give big bucks, euros, rubles, renminbis, or in a pinch, rials, to have a list of people who know Waltz well. Some of them could potentially be blackmailed into trying to pry valuable information from Waltz and deliver it to their handler. In the security business, you gotta be real careful. Waltz worked in the George W. Bush administration as defense policy director at the pentagon. He's supposed to know this stuff. Between the invitation to Goldberg and the public list of friends, that's two strikes against him. How many strikes does he get? In bowling, the maximum number of strikes is 12.

The Hill has a list of the players most affected by SignalGate:

• Mike Waltz: He is the probably the most guilty person on the list. He (or some subordinate) invited a reporter to join the chat. Not a smart idea when planning a war unless the idea was to cleverly leak the plans for some strategic reason. Then on top of SignalGate he also has VenmoGate on his resume. He probably won't be fired because that would require Trump to de facto admit that he make a bad choice here. However, Trump did refer to the SignalGate incident as a "glitch."
  
  
• Pete Hegseth: He has three problems: First, he was the one who posted sensitive information on a channel he was not allowed to use for that. It might be a violation of the Espionage Act. Second, this validates all the critics who see him as an incompetent lightweight who has no business being within a mile of the Pentagon and who has no relevant managerial experience at all. Third, he has been the most aggressive in pushing back against Goldberg's reporting. This has ruffled even some Republicans, like Fox's chief political analyst Brit Hume, who tweeted: "Oh for God's sake, the administration has already confirmed the authenticity of the message."
  
  
• Donald Trump: At least he wasn't in on the chat. He blasted Goldberg as a sleazebag and said he made up a lot of stories (although the administration later confirmed that Hegseth's message was authentic). Will this hurt Trump with his supporters? Maybe a bit with defense hawks who care about this stuff.
  
  
• J.D. Vance: Vance showed skepticism about the strike. He said Europe had more to gain from the strike than America, so why do Europe's dirty work? He posted: "If you think we should do it let's go. I just hate bailing Europe out again." It is a small crack in the administration, but it is a crack.
  
  
• Jeffrey Goldberg: No one has seriously disputed the facts that Goldberg published. While Republicans will continue yelling at him for days, it is all peripheral. He got the scoop of the year. He even got some praise from Republicans for not publishing some details that could harm American sources and assets.
  

Yesterday afternoon, Trump was still trying to downplay the whole thing to reporters in the Oval Office. He used one of his favorite terms. He called it a "witch hunt." He also said no harm was done because the attack was successful. He also blamed the Signal app, saying it might be defective. However, hours earlier, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said that Signal was an approved app used by several intelligence agencies due to its good security. On the other hand, Secretary of State Marco Rubio was on the chat and yesterday he said inviting Goldberg was a "big mistake."

Our take: They are all floundering and hope it will soon pass with no consequences. Maybe they will be lucky, but remember, Republicans hammered on Hillary's e-mail server for years because there might have been an important classified message there that leaked out, although none was ever reported. If Democrats are smart, they will just pound on this as a sign that the administration is incompetent and doesn't care about national security. Frequent repetition of a line like, "Huh. How many American soldiers does Pete Hegseth have to kill with his carelessness before he gets fired?" might be advised. (V)

Trump Hits Another Law Firm

In his effort to silence his critics, Donald Trump is trying to take down all the major law firms, hoping that will mean that people like Jack Smith, Joe Biden, Liz Cheney, and other high-profile targets will have nowhere to go when he asks AG Pam Bondi to indict them for the crime of annoying him. So far, the reaction of the targeted law firms has been mixed. Covington & Burling, which has Jack Smith as a (pro bono) client, just accepted its punishment like a beaten dog. The second firm, Perkins & Coie, fought back by hiring another top law firm, Williams & Connolly, to sue the government. It even won the initial battle. The third firm, Paul, Weiss, capitulated totally, despite its reputation for being an exceptionally aggressive firm.

Next up is Jenner & Block, a top Chicago law firm who is in Trump's crosshairs because it previously employed Andrew Weissman, who worked on Robert Mueller's team that investigated the Russian interference in the 2016 election. Whatever else you might say about Trump, he has an excellent memory for people and events in the distant past that enraged him. In an XO signed Tuesday, Trump has ordered the government to revoke the security clearances of people who work there, terminate any government contracts they have, and ban the government from ever hiring anyone who once worked there. Just in case anyone misses the point, Weissman is specifically mentioned in the XO.

So far, Jenner hasn't decided if it is going to go for fight (like Perkins) or flight (like Paul). The big law firms don't seem to realize that each of them could be next if they ever employed anyone who either before, during, or after his or her employment offended Trump. And he has a wide range of things that offend him and a good memory for who the offenders were. What the firms obviously need to do is band together to work as an old-fashioned guild to defend the law and lawyers and make it impossible to pick them off one at a time. The problem is that the firms are somewhat in competition with one another and working together is difficult for them. There could possibly be some anti-trust issues here, although they would be working together to provide a collective defense, not fix prices. Also, some of the less scrupulous firms may see this as an opportunity to poach lawyers from firms under attack. What they don't seem to understand is that if the law doesn't matter anymore, there will be no need for lawyers, just corrupt fixers, which is not really their core business.

If Jenner sues and gets another judge to temporarily (and later permanently) undo most of the XO's damage, that could give other law firms more spine when it is their turn. If you want to watch conservative superlawyer George Conway rant about how Paul, Weiss' decision to cave is the most disgraceful action by a law firm ever, here is the link. (V)

Trump's Views on Judges and the Courts Are Tying Republicans in Congress in Knots

Most congressional Republicans know very well that Trump's attacking law firms and judges is illegal at best and unconstitutional at worst, but are scared to say anything out loud. They are especially wary of actions he wants them to take, like impeaching judges he doesn't like. In Trump v1.0, there were numerous generals and others who talked Trump out of some of his crazy ideas, so the problems never got to Congress. Those people are completely absent in Trump v2.0. In fact, his second administration is filled with people who actively want to push the law to the breaking point and then some... and then keep pushing, just to see if anyone stops them.

But congressional leaders know that while sometimes Trump forgets what he wants and moves on to the next thing, sometimes he doesn't move on. Impeaching judges he dislikes in order to intimidate other judges seems to be one of these cases. So they have to decide how to proceed. Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) is a conservative, but he is not crazy. He knows that it takes a two-thirds majority of the Senate to convict an impeached judge and that will never happen on account of a ruling that makes Trump cranky. Only eight judges have been convicted and removed from office in all of U.S. history, and those were for nonpartisan actual crimes like bribery, fraud, perjury, and tax evasion. Nevertheless, Grassley is preparing to hold Senate hearings on "judicial power." Grassley believes in the rule of law and will probably try to drag out the hearings until Trump has moved on and then issue a report saying that judges must follow the law, and not make new law (except, of course, the Supreme Court, which makes new law all the time).

Over in the House, Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH), who unlike Grassley has a law degree (although he never took the bar exam), is also going to hold hearings. Also unlike Grassley, Jordan is a firebrand and grandstander, so his hearings are likely to be explosive, with the goal of making Trump want to watch them.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) want all this to go away. Thune has a good excuse: "Only the House can impeach someone." Johnson has a different excuse. He is trying to get a giant tax-immigration-energy-and-everything-else bill passed, which won't be easy with the tiny House margin. Nothing is likely to come of this unless Trump pushes very hard on it and Johnson can't talk him out of it, despite an impeachment delaying the bill Trump wants for weeks, if not longer. (V)

Trump Has Broken the Law a Dozen Times Since Being Inaugurated

There have been almost 200 lawsuits against Donald Trump or his administration since he was inaugurated, and numerous cases have come before a judge already. In over a dozen cases so far, a judge has ruled that Trump definitely or probably broke the law. That is an astounding record for someone who took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. Put in other terms, Trump has broken a law every 4 days. Here are some of the most flagrant examples:

• Deporting Immigrants: Trump ordered the deportation of immigrants from Venezuela whom he alleged are members of the Tren de Aragua gang, even though they haven't been charged with violating any U.S. laws. Trump cited the 1798 Alien Enemies Act as the basis for the deportation. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ordered Trump to stop the deportations because that law applies only to citizens of countries with which the U.S. is at war. The U.S. is not at war with Venezuela.
  
  
• Elon Musk: Trump has allowed Elon Musk to exercise the powers of an officer of the United States without having nominated him as one and without having the Senate confirm him. In a 68-page ruling U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang stated that Musk's closing USAID likely violated the U.S. Constitution in multiple ways because Trump has allowed a private citizen to exercise the powers of an officer of the United States, which he is not.
  
  
• USAID: In the same ruling, Chuang stated that another violation of the Constitution is allowing Trump and his co-president to dismantle USAID. He ruled that even an officer of the United States (which Musk is not) can't do that. Only Congress can create and terminate U.S. agencies. In an earlier ruling, a different federal judge, Amir Ali, said cutting funds to USAID violated the Administrative Procedure Act.
  
  
• Trans Soldiers: Trump has banned transgender soldiers from the military because he finds them disgusting. Or, at least, his base does. U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes disagreed, and said the ban violates the Fourteen Amendment's equal protection clause.
  
  
• Birthright Citizenship: U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, a Ronald Reagan appointee in Washington State, has ruled that denying citizenship to anyone born in the U.S., other than children of foreign diplomats, tramples on the Constitution. Judge Joseph Laplante in New Hampshire made exactly the same ruling.
  
  
• Refugees: Trump withheld funding from the U.S. Refugee Assistance Program because he doesn't want any refugees coming to the U.S. District Judge Jamal Whitehead eviscerated that decision because Trump has no authority to refuse to spend money Congress has appropriated. There is even a specific law, The Impoundment Control Act of 1974, that says that if the president doesn't want to spend money Congress has appropriated, he can ask Congress if it is OK to refrain from spending it, but Congress has the final say. Trump didn't even try to follow the law.
  
  
• Firing Federal Employees: Elon Musk, with Trump's blessing, has been firing federal employees right and left, despite the Pendleton Act, which specifies the procedures that must be followed for firing a civil servant for malfeasance. Some of them have gone to court to challenge their firings. Other federal employees are protected by other laws. When Trump fired Susan Tsui Grundmann from the Federal Labor Relations Board in violation of the law creating the agency, she sued. U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan ruled that Trump had unambiguously broken the law. In another case, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras ruled that Cathy Harris of the Merit Systems Protection Board could only be fired for malfeasance, and Trump didn't even allege that she had done anything wrong.
  
  
• Funding Freeze: Trump has repeatedly tried to impound funds for spending he didn't like. U.S. District Judge John McConnell ruled that Trump had no authority to do that. In another case, U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan made an identical ruling.
  
  
• DEI: In one of his XOs, Trump required federal contractors to certify that they do not have any DEI programs. U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson ruled that this violates the contractors' First Amendment rights. Worse yet, Trump banned DEI on all the contracts the contractor had, including those not related to the government in any way.
  
  
• Websites: Trump ordered all federal agencies to scrub their websites of all mentions of gender identity. A group of doctors sued, saying they relied on some of those websites for giving patients information and for research purposes. Judge John Bates ruled that the order was illegal because it violated the Administrative Procedures Act.
  
  
• Transgender Prisoners: Yet another XO required moving three male-to-female transgender prisoners from female to male prisons. They sued. U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth ruled that Trump exceeded his authority on that and didn't follow required procedures.
  
  
• Research Grants: All federal research grants and contracts provide overhead expenses for the hosting institution. For example, all grantees require office/lab space, computers, HR personnel to manage hires, accountants to verify expenses, and much more. The overhead is to cover these indirect costs not covered in the grants themselves. Trump does not like scientific research at all, so he unilaterally ignored all the previously signed contracts and decimated the overhead. There were lawsuits, naturally, and U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley wrote a 76-page opinion stating that no, the president cannot simply invalidate contracts the government has signed because he doesn't like them.

In short, multiple district judges have found Trump in violation of the law. All of these decisions will be appealed, of course, and many will eventually hit the Supreme Court. That's when we find out if the rule of law is still applicable in the U.S. In any event, if the Democrats capture the House in 2026, impeachment proceedings will probably start on Jan. 3, 2027, with some of these items being mentioned. (V)

Vance Will Not Go Where No Vice President Has Ever Gone Before

J.D. Vance and his wife are planning to go to Greenland to scope it out and see if the natives are friendly, sort of a modern-day Lewis and Clark expedition. The natives got wind of the trip and made it clear that: (1) they are not friendly and (2) the Vances are not welcome. In particular, they have no interest whatsoever of being sold to the U.S.

Vance was planning to visit Nuuk, the capital of Greenland, which has a population of about 20,000. In case you thought Nuuk was all igloos and polar bears, it's not. People there speak Greenlandic, which is an Eskimo-Aleut language related to the Inuktitut spoken in Canada. So, if Greenland and Canada both become U.S. states, they will be able to talk to each other. Here is a photo of the Nuussuaq district of Nuuk:

After the disinvitation, the Vances' plans had to change, in part to avoid protests and demonstrations against them and the U.S. But to avoid losing face, the VP couldn't cancel the trip to Greenland altogether, so he is going to make a pointless visit to the U.S. Space Force base at Pittufik instead. Vance said of his new destination: "We want to reinvigorate the security of Greenland because we think it's important to protecting the security of the entire world." He will take NSA Mike Waltz with him. Waltz is taking a lot of flak for SignalGate, so hiding at a military base in Greenland makes a lot of sense.

Greenland does have some valuable minerals, but there is no need for the U.S. to own Greenland to get them. Any U.S. mining company that is interested in them is free to make a deal with the government of Denmark, which Greenland is a part of, to extract them and pay some royalty. U.S. oil and mining companies operate all over the world under similar conditions. (V)

Noem Wants to Eliminate FEMA

Sec. of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said she was going to eliminate FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency. She did not explain why, but Donald Trump cheered her on saying "That's great." In January, Trump said: "I think, frankly, FEMA's not good."

South Dakota does not have a lot of natural disasters, so the secretary may not be aware that they occur all over the country, such as tornados in the Midwest and hurricanes in Texas, Florida, and all over the South. Maybe she is thinking only about wildfires in California and has no problem letting the state burn. It is also possible that Noem and Trump see getting rid of FEMA as a way to push costs off the federal budget and onto the budget of the states, so as to make bigger tax cuts possible. For a rich state like California, fending for itself might be doable, but hurricanes also hit Alabama and Mississippi regularly and they are ill-equipped to deal with them alone. Climate change is making disasters more common, but the strategy here may be to simply deny that disasters exist. Of course, Trump is taking a gamble here. If a major disaster occurs in a red state after FEMA has been eliminated or eviscerated, a lot of folks there won't be so happy.

Noem is probably unaware that FEMA not only helps people after a disaster, but also helps people in disaster-prone areas to plan for them in advance in an attempt to mitigate the worst outcomes. That also happens in red states. This goes to show that Noem and Trump have no empathy at all even for their own voters.

Sen. Peter Welch (D-VT) thinks eliminating FEMA is a terrible idea. He wrote: "The Trump Administration's grand plan for victims of natural disasters is to abandon them—and it's a complete non-starter." (V)

Democrats Got Their Senate Candidate in New Hampshire

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) has had a long and honorable career, starting as a high school teacher in Mississippi and working her way up to being a three-term governor of New Hampshire and then a three-term senator. She decided to call it a day at 78 and won't run for reelection next year. This left Democrats with a problem: an open seat in a swing(ish) state. Their first choice was Rep. Chris Pappas (D-NH), who represents the eastern and most populous part of the state. Pappas is now telling his friends that he will announce his Senate run probably next week. The other representative, Maggie Goodlander, might also run, but she has only been in the House for 2 months, so that seems a bit ambitious.

The Republicans have a number of potential candidates, including current governor Kelly Ayotte, former governor Chris Sununu, and former Massachusetts senator and Cosmo model Scott Brown, who seems to be geographically challenged. Pappas' entry may discourage Ayotte, who would be the underdog in a Senate race but the overdog in a gubernatorial reelection race. It could also discourage Sununu, who has his eye on the big chair in D.C. Maybe Brown would jump at the chance, but Pappas, whose family goes back four generations in New Hampshire to his great grandfather's ice cream shop, founded in Manchester in 1917, would yell CARPETBAGGER CARPETBAGGER CARPETBAGGER all year long at Brown. (V)

Nonbinary People Are Having Problems with International Travel

For years, nonbinary people have lobbied for the elimination of the male/female choice on passports, driver's licenses, insurance policies, and many website forms. They want to choose "none of the above." Now that is problematic as people whose passports are marked something other than male or female are being stopped at U.S. immigration. This is causing problems when they try to enter the country due to a recent XO that states that there are only two genders, male and female. If someone doesn't fit into one of those bins, immigration officials don't know what to do with them.

Several countries, including Germany and the U.K., are warning their citizens that having a U.S. visa or ESTA authorization does not guarantee entry into the U.S. Some European travelers have been arrested or detained, despite having all the correct paperwork. The final decision about admission rests with immigration officers. Denmark and Finland have specifically issued travel advisories for transgender and nonbinary travelers, warning them that an "X" marker for sex in their passports or a mismatch between the sex in the passport and their appearance may be cause for entry to be denied. Now Canada has also updated its travel advisory for travel to the U.S. This is huge because Canadians make more than 20 million visits to the U.S. each year, much more than Germans or Brits.

Some trans Americans feel they are stuck in the country because if they leave, they may be refused readmission when they come home. Federal law requires that all U.S. citizens bearing a valid U.S. passport be admitted to the country after traveling abroad, but what happens if some immigration officer simply says "No," in defiance of the law? Also, green card holders have no such guarantee.

The Trump administration is also getting some negative feedback from the judiciary on this subject. U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick held a hearing this week in Boston in a case brought by seven trans and nonbinary plaintiffs who are suing to get an X marker on their passports. Kobick appeared open to their arguments but hasn't made a ruling yet. The XO that said there were only two sexes also said that the passport marker had to accurately reflect the holder's sex. What does that mean? Are we talking hardware or software here? When the judge rules, we will find out. (V)

Tesla Sales Are Nosediving in Europe

The electric car market is growing rapidly in Europe, but Tesla's share has dropped 49% in the past two months. It is down from 37,311 units in Jan-Feb. 2024 to 19,046 units this year. Undoubtedly, the slump is at least partly due to all the news about Elon Musk. His endorsement of the neo-Nazi AfD Party in Germany was widely condemned in Europe, with many people telling him to butt out.

Musk has chosen a poor time to get involved in politics, as competition from other electric cars is ramping up, so people who want to buy an electric car have more choices and don't have to buy a Tesla. And some of the new entrants are better than Teslas. For example, the Chinese company BYD has a new charging system that is almost as fast as filling a gas tank. Tesla has nothing like that and with nobody minding the store at Tesla, it is only going to fall further behind competitors. (V)

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger