Politics
Trump sues Des Moines Register, top pollster for 'brazen election interference,' fraud over Harris poll
FIRST ON FOX: President-elect Donald Trump is suing the Des Moines Register and its top pollster J. Ann Selzer for “brazen election interference” and fraud over its final 2024 presidential poll showing Vice President Kamala Harris leading him in Iowa, despite his ultimate victory in the state by more than 13 percentage points, Fox News Digital has learned.
The lawsuit was filed Monday night in Polk County, Iowa under the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act and related provisions. It says it seeks “accountability for brazen election interference committed by” the Des Moines Register (DMR) and Selzer “in favor of now-defeated former Democrat candidate Kamala Harris through use of a leaked and manipulated Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll conducted by Selzer and S&C and published by DMR and Gannett in the Des Moines Register on Nov. 2, 2024.” The lawsuit is also against the parent company of the Des Moines Register, Gannett, which also owns other publications, including USA Today.
FIRST ON FOX: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS AND ABC APOLOGIZE TO TRUMP, ARE FORCED TO PAY $15 MILLION TO SETTLE DEFAMATION SUIT
“Contrary to reality and defying credulity, defendants’ Harris Poll was published three days before Election Day and purported to show Harris leading President Trump in Iowa by three points; President Trump ultimately won Iowa by over thirteen points,” the lawsuit states.
Selzer released her final Des Moines Register-sponsored poll of Iowa just three days before the election, on Nov. 2, showing Vice President Kamala Harris leading Trump by three points. That shock poll showed a seven-point shift from Trump to Harris from September, when he had a four-point lead over the vice president in the same poll.
Pollster J. Ann Selzer announced she was ending her career of election polling after President-elect Donald Trump’s win. (Getty Images/ The Bulwark Podcast via YouTube screenshot)
But Trump ultimately beat Harris in Iowa by more than 13 percentage points.
Selzer’s poll, though, had been hyped up by the media ahead of the elections, as her polling predictions in previous elections had been historically accurate.
Trump attorneys said Selzer’s prediction of Harris’ three point lead in “deep-red Iowa was not reality, it was election-interfering fiction.”
Trump attorneys said Selzer had “prided herself on a mainstream reputation for accuracy despite several far less publicized egregious polling misses in favor of Democrats” and said she “would have the public believe it was merely a coincidence that one of the worst polling misses of her career came just days before the most consequential election in memory, was leaked and happened to go against the Republican candidate.”
SHOCK POLL HAS HARRIS LEADING TRUMP IN IOWA WITH 3-POINT SHIFT TOWARD VICE PRESIDENT IN RED STATE
“The Harris Poll was no ‘miss’ but rather an attempt to influence the outcome of the 2024 Presidential Election,” the lawsuit states, adding that “defendants and their cohorts in the Democrat Party hoped that the Harris Poll would create a false narrative of inevitability for Harris in the final week of the 2024 Presidential Election.”
“Instead, the November 5 election was a monumental victory for President Trump in both the Electoral College and the Popular Vote, an overwhelming mandate for his America First principles, and the consignment of the radical socialist agenda to the dustbin of history.”
The lawsuit notes that Selzer, after more than 35 years in the industry, “retired in disgrace from polling less than two weeks after this embarrassing rout.”
Trump lawyers argued that “left-wing pollsters have attempted to influence electoral outcomes through manipulated polls that have unacceptable error rates and are not grounded in widely accepted polling methodologies.”
FORMER POLLSTER ANN SELZER HITS BACK AT CRITICISMS OVER IOWA POLL: ‘THEY ARE ACCUSING ME OF A CRIME’
“While Selzer is not the only pollster to engage in this corrupt practice, she had a huge platform and following and, thus, a significant and impactful opportunity to deceive voters,” the lawsuit states. “As Selzer knows, this type of manipulation creates a narrative of inevitability for Democrat candidates, increases enthusiasm among Democrats, compels Republicans to divert campaign time and money to areas in which they are ahead, and deceives the public into believing that Democrat candidates are performing better than they really are.”
The lawsuit states that Democrats’ “need for fake polling was even more acute than usual in the 2024 Election, given Harris’s many fatal weaknesses as a candidate and lack of appeal to critical swaths of the traditional Democrat base.”
President-elect Donald Trump speaks during a news conference at Mar-a-Lago, on Monday, Dec. 16, 2024, in Palm Beach, Fla. (AP/Evan Vucci)
Trump attorneys are suing under the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act, alleging that defendants “engaged in an ‘unfair act or practice’ because the publication and release of the Harris Poll ‘caused substantial, unavoidable injury to consumers that was not outweighed by any consumer or competitive benefits which the practice produced.’”
They also said consumers were “badly deceived and misled as to the actual position of the respective candidates in the Iowa Presidential race.”
“Moreover, President Trump, the Trump 2024 Campaign, and other Republicans were forced to divert enormous campaign and financial resources to Iowa based on the deceptive Harris Poll,” the lawsuit states, adding that consumers of the Des Moines Register and Iowans who contributed to Trump’s 2024 campaign were “similarly deceived.”
Trump is demanding actual damages upon trial of the case; statutory damages three times the actual damages suffered; an order enjoining defendants’ “ongoing deceptive and misleading acts and practices relating to the Harris Poll and compelling defendants to disclose all information upon which they relied to engage in the deceptive and misleading acts relating to the Harris Poll; attorneys’ fees and costs associated with the case; and any other relief as deemed just and proper by the court.
The lawsuit Monday night comes just hours after the president-elect said during a press conference at Mar-a-Lago that he planned to sue the Des Moines Register and Selzer.
The lawsuit comes days after ABC News and its top anchor George Stephanopoulos reached a settlement with Trump in his defamation suit, resulting in the network paying the president-elect $15 million.
The settlement was publicly filed on Saturday, revealing the agreement to avoid a costly trial. According to the settlement, ABC News will pay $15 million as a charitable contribution to a “Presidential foundation and museum to be established by or for Plaintiff, as Presidents of the United States of America have established in the past.”
Additionally, the network will pay $1 million in Trump’s attorney fees.
Stephanopoulos and ABC News also had to issue statements of “regret” as an editor’s note at the bottom of a March 10, 2024, online article, about comments made earlier this year that prompted Trump to file the defamation lawsuit. The note reads, “ABC News and George Stephanopoulos regret statements regarding President Donald J. Trump made during an interview by George Stephanopoulos with Rep. Nancy Mace on ABC’s This Week on March 10, 2024.”
George Stephanopoulos speaks during ABC’s “This Week.” (ABC/Paula Lobo via Getty Images)
ABC News said the network was “pleased” to have concluded the case.
“We are pleased that the parties have reached an agreement to dismiss the lawsuit on the terms in the court filing,” an ABC News spokesperson told Fox News Digital.
The Des Moines Register lawsuit and the ABC News settlement come after a string of legal victories for Trump and his legal team, coordinated by senior legal adviser Boris Epshteyn.
Federal Judge Tanya Chutkan recently granted Special Counsel Jack Smith’s recent request to dismiss his case against Trump related to the 2020 election. Smith also tossed his appeal in the classified records case on Monday after a federal judge dismissed the charges altogether in July, ruling that he was unlawfully appointed as special counsel.
In New York v. Trump, Judge Juan Merchan granted Trump’s request to file a motion to dismiss the charges stemming from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case and removed the sentencing date for the president-elect from the schedule.
Merchan on Monday night rejected Trump’s July request to overturn the guilty verdict based on presidential immunity. Merchan has not yet ruled on Trump’s official motion to dismiss the charges altogether.
Trump is also suing CBS News for $10 billion in damages, stating the network practiced “deceptive conduct” for the purpose of election interference in its interview in October with Vice President Kamala Harris.
Politics
Trump signs order to protect Venezuela oil revenue held in US accounts
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
President Donald Trump has signed an executive order blocking U.S. courts from seizing Venezuelan oil revenues held in American Treasury accounts.
The order states that court action against the funds would undermine U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
President Donald Trump is pictured signing two executive orders on Sept. 19, 2025, establishing the “Trump Gold Card” and introducing a $100,000 fee for H-1B visas. He signed another executive order recently protecting oil revenue. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
Trump signed the order on Friday, the same day that he met with nearly two dozen top oil and gas executives at the White House.
The president said American energy companies will invest $100 billion to rebuild Venezuela’s “rotting” oil infrastructure and push production to record levels following the capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.
The U.S. has moved aggressively to take control of Venezuela’s oil future following the collapse of the Maduro regime.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Politics
Column: Some leaders will do anything to cling to positions of power
One of the most important political stories in American history — one that is particularly germane to our current, tumultuous time — unfolded in Los Angeles some 65 years ago.
Sen. John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, had just received his party’s nomination for president and in turn he shunned the desires of his most liberal supporters by choosing a conservative out of Texas as his running mate. He did so in large part to address concerns that his faith would somehow usurp his oath to uphold the Constitution. The last time the Democrats nominated a Catholic — New York Gov. Al Smith in 1928 — he lost in a landslide, so folks were more than a little jittery about Kennedy’s chances.
“I am fully aware of the fact that the Democratic Party, by nominating someone of my faith, has taken on what many regard as a new and hazardous risk,” Kennedy told the crowd at the Memorial Coliseum. “But I look at it this way: The Democratic Party has once again placed its confidence in the American people, and in their ability to render a free, fair judgment.”
The most important part of the story is what happened before Kennedy gave that acceptance speech.
While his faith made party leaders nervous, they were downright afraid of the impact a civil rights protest during the Democratic National Convention could have on November’s election. This was 1960. The year began with Black college students challenging segregation with lunch counter sit-ins across the Deep South, and by spring the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee had formed. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was not the organizer of the protest at the convention, but he planned to be there, guaranteeing media attention. To try to prevent this whole scene, the most powerful Black man in Congress was sent to stop him.
The Rev. Adam Clayton Powell Jr. was also a warrior for civil rights, but the House representative preferred the legislative approach, where backroom deals were quietly made and his power most concentrated. He and King wanted the same things for Black people. But Powell — who was first elected to Congress in 1944, the same year King enrolled at Morehouse College at the age of 15 — was threatened by the younger man’s growing influence. He was also concerned that his inability to stop the protest at the convention would harm his chance to become chairman of a House committee.
And so Powell — the son of a preacher, and himself a Baptist preacher in Harlem — told King that if he didn’t cancel, Powell would tell journalists a lie that King was having a homosexual affair with his mentor, Bayard Rustin. King stuck to his plan and led a protest — even though such a rumor would not only have harmed King, but also would have undermined the credibility of the entire civil rights movement. Remember, this was 1960. Before the March on Washington, before passage of the Voting Rights Act, before the dismantling of the very Jim Crow laws Powell had vowed to dismantle when first running for office.
That threat, my friends, is the most important part of the story.
It’s not that Powell didn’t want the best for the country. It’s just that he wanted to be seen as the one doing it and was willing to derail the good stemming from the civil rights movement to secure his own place in power. There have always been people willing to make such trade-offs. Sometimes they dress up their intentions with scriptures to make it more palatable; other times they play on our darkest fears. They do not care how many people get hurt in the process, even if it’s the same people they profess to care for.
That was true in Los Angeles in 1960.
That was true in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021.
That is true in the streets of America today.
Whether we are talking about an older pastor who is threatened by the growing influence of a younger voice or a president clinging to office after losing an election: To remain king, some men are willing to burn the entire kingdom down.
YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow
Politics
Federal judge blocks Trump from cutting childcare funds to Democratic states over fraud concerns
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A federal judge Friday temporarily blocked the Trump administration from stopping subsidies on childcare programs in five states, including Minnesota, amid allegations of fraud.
U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, a Biden appointee, didn’t rule on the legality of the funding freeze, but said the states had met the legal threshold to maintain the “status quo” on funding for at least two weeks while arguments continue.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said it would withhold funds for programs in five Democratic states over fraud concerns.
The programs include the Child Care and Development Fund, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, and the Social Services Block Grant, all of which help needy families.
USDA IMMEDIATELY SUSPENDS ALL FEDERAL FUNDING TO MINNESOTA AMID FRAUD INVESTIGATION
On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said it would withhold funds for programs in five Democratic states over fraud concerns. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)
“Families who rely on childcare and family assistance programs deserve confidence that these resources are used lawfully and for their intended purpose,” HHS Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill said in a statement on Tuesday.
The states, which include California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York, argued in court filings that the federal government didn’t have the legal right to end the funds and that the new policy is creating “operational chaos” in the states.
U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian at his nomination hearing in 2022. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
In total, the states said they receive more than $10 billion in federal funding for the programs.
HHS said it had “reason to believe” that the programs were offering funds to people in the country illegally.
‘TIP OF THE ICEBERG’: SENATE REPUBLICANS PRESS GOV WALZ OVER MINNESOTA FRAUD SCANDAL
The table above shows the five states and their social safety net funding for various programs which are being withheld by the Trump administration over allegations of fraud. (AP Digital Embed)
New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the lawsuit, called the ruling a “critical victory for families whose lives have been upended by this administration’s cruelty.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the lawsuit, called the ruling a “critical victory for families whose lives have been upended by this administration’s cruelty.” (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Fox News Digital has reached out to HHS for comment.
-
Detroit, MI7 days ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology4 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX5 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Dallas, TX2 days agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis
-
Iowa4 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Delaware2 days agoMERR responds to dead humpback whale washed up near Bethany Beach
-
Health6 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Nebraska4 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska