A new Justice Department court filing clarifies which federal law-enforcement agencies will participate in election monitoring on November 3.
Confirmed facts
According to Reuters, reporting at 12:11 a.m. Eastern on October 29, DOJ stated in federal court that:
FBI and ICE personnel will not serve as DOJ election monitors.
Personnel from the Bureau of Prisons, ATF and DEA will participate as election monitors.
Monitors are instructed to observe and take notes, remain unarmed, avoid interfering with voting and follow applicable state and local rules.
This is a verified statement in litigation, not a new court order authorizing federal control of elections.
Confirmed facts
According to Reuters, reporting at 12:11 a.m. Eastern on October 29, DOJ stated in federal court that:
FBI and ICE personnel will not serve as DOJ election monitors.
Personnel from the Bureau of Prisons, ATF and DEA will participate as election monitors.
Monitors are instructed to observe and take notes, remain unarmed, avoid interfering with voting and follow applicable state and local rules.
This is a verified statement in litigation, not a new court order authorizing federal control of elections.
The disclosure establishes that employees of federal law-enforcement agencies may serve in an election-observation capacity. It does not give them authority to administer elections, handle ballots or override state election officials.
It also does not establish that those personnel will be assigned to North Carolina.
It also does not establish that those personnel will be assigned to North Carolina.
The NAACP is challenging DOJ’s use of federal law-enforcement personnel as election monitors, arguing that their presence could intimidate voters. DOJ maintains its monitors will not interfere with voting. The legal dispute remains unresolved.
Alexander County- several folks have reached out tonight about an incident at the Oxford Dam. First responders are confirming there was a fall at the dam involving a worker. Catawba county says Duke Energy has been working on the spillway since last summer and that project is suppose to be finished by December of 2027. No word yet on any possible injuries. Watch Channel 9 eyewitness news for updates.
Dave Faherty
Dave Faherty
A federal election-related cyberattack has been contained sufficiently to restore filing services, a major Homeland Security data leak is under investigation, and a nuclear-site emergency in South Carolina ended overnight.
FEC cyberattack — systems restored. The Federal Election Commission restored electronic campaign-finance filing Wednesday night after approximately 41 hours offline. The disruption delayed mandatory disclosures of political spending immediately before November 3. Investigators have not publicly established the attacker’s identity or motivation
Federal voter investigations expand.
Reuters documented more than 100 federal subpoenas across at least 13 states seeking voter records in investigations of suspected noncitizen voting. The administration says it is enforcing citizenship requirements; election officials and civil-rights advocates dispute the reliability and breadth of some investigations.
Reuters documented more than 100 federal subpoenas across at least 13 states seeking voter records in investigations of suspected noncitizen voting. The administration says it is enforcing citizenship requirements; election officials and civil-rights advocates dispute the reliability and breadth of some investigations.
October 29, 2026 — Washington State ballot dispute
A significant federal-state election dispute has been verified ahead of the November 3 election.
Confirmed facts: On October 26, the U.S. Department of Justice asked Washington election officials to segregate ballots associated with more than 400 registered voters it identified as potentially ineligible noncitizens.
Federal prosecutors warned that emergency court action could follow if the state did not comply.
On October 28, Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs formally rejected withholding ballots based solely on the federal list, stating that a preliminary review identified U.S. citizens among those flagged.
Disputed claims: DOJ maintains that its investigation identified potentially unlawful registrations and voting.
Washington officials challenge the reliability of the data and argue that withholding ballots without individualized evidence could violate voting protections.
Neither side’s broader claims should be treated as judicial findings.
Legal significance: The dispute could lead to emergency litigation affecting ballot processing in Washington. No resulting emergency court order was verified in this review.
A significant federal-state election dispute has been verified ahead of the November 3 election.
Confirmed facts: On October 26, the U.S. Department of Justice asked Washington election officials to segregate ballots associated with more than 400 registered voters it identified as potentially ineligible noncitizens.
Federal prosecutors warned that emergency court action could follow if the state did not comply.
On October 28, Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs formally rejected withholding ballots based solely on the federal list, stating that a preliminary review identified U.S. citizens among those flagged.
Disputed claims: DOJ maintains that its investigation identified potentially unlawful registrations and voting.
Washington officials challenge the reliability of the data and argue that withholding ballots without individualized evidence could violate voting protections.
Neither side’s broader claims should be treated as judicial findings.
Legal significance: The dispute could lead to emergency litigation affecting ballot processing in Washington. No resulting emergency court order was verified in this review.
What could happen next?
Emergency court action
DOJ warned it could seek a court order requiring Washington to set aside disputed ballots. A judge would then examine the legal authority and evidence.
Emergency court action
DOJ warned it could seek a court order requiring Washington to set aside disputed ballots. A judge would then examine the legal authority and evidence.
Voting proceeds while disputes continue
Litigation could affect how particular ballots are handled without changing the election date. The comparable California dispute has already produced emergency court proceedings.
Litigation could affect how particular ballots are handled without changing the election date. The comparable California dispute has already produced emergency court proceedings.
Could this lead to November 3 being canceled?
There is a crucial distinction between a legal challenge involving certain ballots and the legal authority to postpone a nationwide federal election.
Congress sets the federal election schedule by law. A DOJ investigation, an emergency lawsuit in Washington, or a dispute over voter eligibility does not independently change that schedule.
North Carolina’s emergency-election provisions address qualifying disruptions under state law; they are not a general mechanism for canceling federal elections nationwide.
There is a crucial distinction between a legal challenge involving certain ballots and the legal authority to postpone a nationwide federal election.
Congress sets the federal election schedule by law. A DOJ investigation, an emergency lawsuit in Washington, or a dispute over voter eligibility does not independently change that schedule.
North Carolina’s emergency-election provisions address qualifying disruptions under state law; they are not a general mechanism for canceling federal elections nationwide.
What I would watch most closely
The developments that would materially change this situation are a binding emergency court order affecting ballot processing, an official change to election procedures, or a new federal or state directive with immediate operational consequences.
The developments that would materially change this situation are a binding emergency court order affecting ballot processing, an official change to election procedures, or a new federal or state directive with immediate operational consequences.
Not every headline is a fulfilled prophecy, and not every prediction should be dismissed without examination.
I’m continuing to watch Julie Green’s prophecies alongside current events, comparing the original dates, exact words, and documented developments.
Faith calls us to pray. Wisdom calls us to discern. 🤍
Watch. Pray. Discern.
I’m continuing to watch Julie Green’s prophecies alongside current events, comparing the original dates, exact words, and documented developments.
Faith calls us to pray. Wisdom calls us to discern. 🤍
Watch. Pray. Discern.
On October 29, DOJ announced charges against 18 additional people for alleged unlawful voting in North Carolina’s 2024 election, bringing its announced 2026 statewide indictment total to 30. These are criminal allegations, not convictions, and the announcement does not itself change procedures for the November 3, 2026 election. It therefore does not meet the specified emergency-operations alert threshold. Primary source: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-charges-18-more-north-carolina-illegally-voting-2024-election
Department of Justice
Justice Department Charges 18 More in North Carolina with Illegally Voting in 2024 Election
Today, the Justice Department announced that 18 aliens, including an illegal alien, in North Carolina have been indicted for illegally voting. Nine were charged in the Eastern District of North Carolina, five were charged in the Middle District of North Carolina…
There is a documented pattern of the Department of Justice accelerating election-related prosecutions and legal actions across multiple states, particularly during October 2026. And the timing, just days before the November 3 election, is worth paying attention to.
The Associated Press also reported that DOJ said it had charged 113 people in 20 states over seven weeks with illegal voting or registration offenses.
What makes this particularly significant?
There are two simultaneous developments:
Criminal prosecutions: DOJ is pursuing individual allegations involving illegal voting, citizenship claims, and voter registration.
Federal-state legal disputes: DOJ is also challenging states over voter records and ballot-handling procedures, including in California and Washington.
Those are different legal processes, but together they demonstrate a coordinated federal enforcement emphasis.
There are two simultaneous developments:
Criminal prosecutions: DOJ is pursuing individual allegations involving illegal voting, citizenship claims, and voter registration.
Federal-state legal disputes: DOJ is also challenging states over voter records and ballot-handling procedures, including in California and Washington.
Those are different legal processes, but together they demonstrate a coordinated federal enforcement emphasis.
The development I’d watch most closely now is whether these investigations lead to binding court orders that change how ballots are processed before November 3. That would be a more consequential operational change than another announcement of criminal charges.
The immediate development to watch is whether the Ninth Circuit issues an emergency ruling that changes California’s ballot-processing procedures before November 3.
👀1
MAKE A PLAN. GO VOTE TOMORROW IN NORTH CAROLINA. IT IS THE LAST DAY OF EARLY VOTING.
POLLS CLOSE AT 3 PM.
POLLS CLOSE AT 3 PM.