BOne week out from Alaska's Senate vote, there's a second Dan Sullivan on the ballot.
BA second Dan Sullivan? That is not an accident.
BFox News posted on X that Peltola's team is under scrutiny for recruiting him.
BTheir exact words: "recruited to run as a spoiler and siphon votes away."
BDaniel J. Sullivan is a retired teacher. The sitting senator is Republican Dan Sullivan.
BSo a voter could think they're voting for the incumbent and get the other guy.
BThat's the whole point. And it may be working.
BThe Guardian and Axios both report her aides helped recruit him.
BPeltola says she didn't know. Of course she says that.
BHold on. Her knowing is the difference between a dirty trick and a crime.
BA candidate owns her staff. You don't get to say "not my problem."
BI'm not saying not her problem. I'm saying don't convict her before the investigation ends.
BState and federal authorities are investigating. That alone tells you it's serious.
BSerious enough. But the Fox post says "possible involvement." Possible.
BThe Guardian says her aides did it. That's not possible, that's reported.
BAides, not the candidate. That's exactly my point.
BIf the culture came from her campaign, the candidate still answers for it.
BThat's a fair political standard. But it's not the same as her ordering it.
BFine. But a voter who picks the wrong Sullivan won't care about that distinction.
BNo, they won't. And that's why this is so damaging.
BLook at you, agreeing with me.
BDon't get used to it.
BMeanwhile, the BRICS parliamentary forum is reportedly underway in New Delhi.
BAT World News says leaders from Brazil, China, and Russia are there.
BThat's the bloc often described as wanting to chip at the dollar and Western institutions.
BIndia's hosting, but New Delhi still keeps one foot in the Western camp.
BExactly. Reportedly, they're talking trade corridors while buying Russian oil.
BAnd China's there, which some will read as an anti-U.S. club.
BThe report isn't independently confirmed, but the meeting fits the direction.
BMore on that if official schedules line up.
BDifferent world entirely: Xi Jinping is reportedly demanding loyalty as party purges trim the elite.
BThe Wall Street Journal report is making the rounds on X.
BThe account basically says China has 1.4 billion people, only 100 million in the party.
BThat's one in every fourteen people under party discipline.
BAnd the account says most know it's been capitalist currencies for half a century.
BI think the poster's arguing the party is a money machine, not an ideology.
BThat's lazy. The party uses markets; it is still a police state.
BBut the purge point matters more. Xi is tightening loyalty inside the elite.
BThat tells me he's nervous. Purges at that level usually mean succession anxiety.
BOr he's clearing out anyone who questioned his economic course.
BCould be both. We'll see how much of the Journal's reporting holds up.
BThe pattern is familiar enough: loyalty oaths, removals, silence.
BIf Xi needs loyalty oaths, he doesn't have the loyalty.
BAnd the world's second-largest economy still runs on that fear.
BThat's the line from Beijing.