November 6 is the date a House committee chose for Jerid Kurtz to sit for questioning about Alaska’s U.S. Senate race, a contest that put two men named Dan Sullivan on the same ballot.
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., made the request in an October 29 letter. He asked Kurtz to appear in person for a transcribed interview.
The letter points to allegations that operatives tied to Democratic nominee Mary Peltola’s campaign recruited candidates with similar names. Comer says the aim was to confuse voters.
“As a Democrat operative who was allegedly tasked with assisting in this effort, you have information that will assist the Committee’s investigation,” Comer wrote.
He then spelled out what a no-show would trigger. “If you do not voluntarily appear for the interview, we will be forced to evaluate the use of compulsory process,” he warned.
Four candidates appeared on Alaska’s ballot: Peltola, incumbent Republican Sen. Dan S. Sullivan, Republican Gerald Heikes and retired Petersburg teacher Dan J. Sullivan.
Nobody has proven that the second Sullivan drew votes from the senator or changed the result.
The New York Times first spotlighted the alleged plan after former Peltola campaign staffers described what they knew.
According to that reporting, the effort aimed to fill the field with additional “Dan Sullivans” and siphon support from the incumbent.
Congressional documents list Kurtz as a co-owner of Wingspan Strategies.
Fox News Digital contacted the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Peltola’s campaign and Wingspan Strategies for comment.
Kurtz also surfaces in the account of a Republican who says he met him months ago.
David Eastman, a former state representative from the Matanuska-Susitna Valley, says an FBI agent has interviewed him about the encounter. He described it to Fox News Digital by phone from Wasilla.
A constituent arranged the introduction, Eastman said. “He approached me through a constituent. I sat down with him in April here in Wasilla,” Eastman said.
Eastman says the man presented himself as a scout for conservative donors who wanted to find candidates for federal office.
“He pretended to represent conservative donors and was looking for conservative candidates to run for federal office; none of which was true,” Eastman added.
Eastman identified the man as Kurtz in a blog post, and he alleges Kurtz gave a false name during the meeting.
The visitor never mentioned either Sullivan, Eastman said, and never hinted at a plan to confuse voters.
Mail soon reached Eastman’s own mailbox as well. He received several “fake mailers” that suggested “Decoy Dan” Sullivan was the real or only Sullivan running.
Fox News Digital reviewed the pieces, which use a “meet the candidates” layout and leave out Senator Sullivan.
Attorney Will Chamberlain of the Article III Project says the facts, if proven, could carry federal criminal weight.
He cites 18 U.S.C. § 241, the conspiracy-against-rights statute, and argues that a coordinated effort to deceive voters about a candidate’s identity could fall under it.
“The basic concept is you’re not allowed to conspire to injure or harm people’s constitutional rights. And one of those rights is to vote for the candidate of your choice,” Chamberlain said.
Chamberlain says earlier ballot-manipulation cases give prosecutors a path.
“There’s a lot of good precedent on this that suggests that’s a crime and a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison,” he alleged.
He also conceded that no court has handled this exact fact pattern.
“Nothing exactly like this has happened before in the sense of recruiting a same-name candidate to trick people in the ballot box,” he said.
Chamberlain separates ordinary political spin from what he describes as criminal conduct. Misleading campaign messaging, in his view, usually stays outside the statute.
His concern centers on a conspiracy to “put two people with the exact same name on the ballot” so that voters pick the wrong one.
Federal investigators are now looking into whether Democratic operatives improperly recruited Dan J. Sullivan to confuse supporters of the incumbent.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Dan J. Sullivan “vanished” once investigators started knocking on doors in his remote community.
