SLF PAC file 2045498 only; office-state subtotals of disbursements/obligations dated October 27–31. Support and opposition combined. Vendor states, repeated year-to-date fields and other filings excluded. Spending is not votes or race odds.
Read the values and scale as a table
Common zero; maximum magnitude 669037.68 U.S. dollars. One November 1, 2026 F24; dissemination October 31.
Ohio and Iowa account for the largest reported amounts in this packet; this is a disclosure comparison, not an election forecast.
One national outside committee’s November1 Senate disclosure across eight office states; readers can trace messages without mistaking them for candidate income or electoral support.
Archive: U.S. Capitol; source metadata dates January 3, 2023. U.S. House of Representatives photograph.Institutional context only. The metadata date is retained; the exact shutter date is not independently established. Not a 2026 event, advertisement, PAC office or evidence of an expenditure. Full original JPEG unchanged.Photo: U.S. House of Representatives / Office of Congressman Robert Garcia / Wikimedia Commons · Original source ↗ · Public domain ↗Original file unchanged; displayed at responsive sizes.
SLF PAC’s November 1 filing reports $1,703,190.63 in 21 Senate messaging entries. Ohio and Iowa have the largest subtotals in this packet. These are one filer’s reported spending or obligations, not candidate receipts, total race money or votes. [2][5][6]
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:03:23.677Z · Federal Election Commission
Administrative disclosure metadata, not independent verification of expenditures. Receipt dates are agency calendar labels; no event time zone is inferred from midnight timestamps. This query is not all campaign finance.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:43.752Z · SLF PAC, C00571703, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit. Reports disbursements or obligations, not candidate receipts, reach, persuasion or votes. Independence is the filer’s certification, not an investigation of coordination.
2.Claim 2Attributed
The eleven-page SLF PAC filing reports $1,703,190.63 across 21 Senate general-election entries, all with October 31 dissemination dates and October 27–31 disbursement/obligation dates.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
All eleven rendered pages inspected; SE.1–SE.21; page11 total $1,703,190.63.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Filer-reported spending/obligations, not proven transfers, candidate receipts, people reached or votes. Repeated calendar-year-to-date fields are excluded from the sum.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:43.752Z · SLF PAC, C00571703, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit. Reports disbursements or obligations, not candidate receipts, reach, persuasion or votes. Independence is the filer’s certification, not an investigation of coordination.
3.Claim 3Supported
An independent expenditure is a communication advocating a candidate’s election or defeat that is not coordinated as defined by FEC rules.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Making independent expenditures, definition and clearly identified candidate sections.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Definition and filer certification do not establish compliance in a particular case.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:43.752Z · SLF PAC, C00571703, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit. Reports disbursements or obligations, not candidate receipts, reach, persuasion or votes. Independence is the filer’s certification, not an investigation of coordination.
6.This filing’s entries with Iowa as the candidate-office state sum to $558,779.76.Attributed
This filing’s entries with Iowa as the candidate-office state sum to $558,779.76.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Pages 2–3 and 8–9: SE.4, SE.5, SE.6, SE.7, SE.8. Amount fields added once in cents; state is office sought, not vendor location.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
This one filing only, mixing reported support and opposition. Not total race spending or a ranking of competitiveness.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:43.752Z · SLF PAC, C00571703, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit. Reports disbursements or obligations, not candidate receipts, reach, persuasion or votes. Independence is the filer’s certification, not an investigation of coordination.
7.Claim 7Attributed
This filing’s entries with South Carolina as the candidate-office state sum to $265,125.00.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Pages 4–5: SE.19, SE.20, SE.21. Amount fields added once in cents; state is office sought, not vendor location.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
This one filing only, mixing reported support and opposition. Not total race spending or a ranking of competitiveness.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:43.752Z · SLF PAC, C00571703, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit. Reports disbursements or obligations, not candidate receipts, reach, persuasion or votes. Independence is the filer’s certification, not an investigation of coordination.
8.This filing’s entries with Nebraska as the candidate-office state sum to $133,743.40.Attributed
This filing’s entries with Nebraska as the candidate-office state sum to $133,743.40.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Pages 5–6: SE.13, SE.14. Amount fields added once in cents; state is office sought, not vendor location.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
This one filing only, mixing reported support and opposition. Not total race spending or a ranking of competitiveness.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:43.752Z · SLF PAC, C00571703, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit. Reports disbursements or obligations, not candidate receipts, reach, persuasion or votes. Independence is the filer’s certification, not an investigation of coordination.
9.This filing’s entries with Kansas as the candidate-office state sum to $27,111.00.Attributed
This filing’s entries with Kansas as the candidate-office state sum to $27,111.00.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Page 9: SE.9. Amount fields added once in cents; state is office sought, not vendor location.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
This one filing only, mixing reported support and opposition. Not total race spending or a ranking of competitiveness.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:43.752Z · SLF PAC, C00571703, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit. Reports disbursements or obligations, not candidate receipts, reach, persuasion or votes. Independence is the filer’s certification, not an investigation of coordination.
10.This filing’s entries with Alaska as the candidate-office state sum to $24,023.89.Attributed
This filing’s entries with Alaska as the candidate-office state sum to $24,023.89.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Pages 1–2: SE.1, SE.2, SE.3. Amount fields added once in cents; state is office sought, not vendor location.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
This one filing only, mixing reported support and opposition. Not total race spending or a ranking of competitiveness.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:43.752Z · SLF PAC, C00571703, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit. Reports disbursements or obligations, not candidate receipts, reach, persuasion or votes. Independence is the filer’s certification, not an investigation of coordination.
11.This filing’s entries with Maine as the candidate-office state sum to $16,942.70.Attributed
This filing’s entries with Maine as the candidate-office state sum to $16,942.70.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Pages 10–11: SE.11, SE.12. Amount fields added once in cents; state is office sought, not vendor location.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
This one filing only, mixing reported support and opposition. Not total race spending or a ranking of competitiveness.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:43.752Z · SLF PAC, C00571703, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit. Reports disbursements or obligations, not candidate receipts, reach, persuasion or votes. Independence is the filer’s certification, not an investigation of coordination.
12.This filing’s entries with Louisiana as the candidate-office state sum to $8,427.20.Attributed
This filing’s entries with Louisiana as the candidate-office state sum to $8,427.20.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Page 10: SE.10. Amount fields added once in cents; state is office sought, not vendor location.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
This one filing only, mixing reported support and opposition. Not total race spending or a ranking of competitiveness.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:43.752Z · SLF PAC, C00571703, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit. Reports disbursements or obligations, not candidate receipts, reach, persuasion or votes. Independence is the filer’s certification, not an investigation of coordination.
Still open: Only this one filing is totaled; no claim about all committees, donor influence, delivery, reach or electoral effect.
What remains unresolved
Only this one filing is totaled; no claim about all committees, donor influence, delivery, reach or electoral effect.
No candidate names or eligibility claims are made in this geographic summary; it is not a voter-guide slate.
The filer’s independence certification is not independently investigated.
A corrected original, amended filing, current contrary candidate answer, changed official roster or operative order would require a new retained version and complete exact-source review.
Remainder of stated cumulative figure6802973.45 U.S. dollars [3]
Two nonoverlapping parts of $7,809,533.45. New item is explicitly estimated; remainder is subtraction, not an audit of prior entries. One committee, not total IA-03 money, candidate receipts, verified airtime or votes.
Read the values and scale as a table
Common zero; maximum magnitude 6802973.45 U.S. dollars. Parts of the filer’s stated 2026 cumulative figure, disclosed November 1.
The $1,006,560 estimate sits inside the stated cumulative figure; two message purposes do not make two buys.
Iowa House District 3 as designated in one Everytown Victory Fund November 1 disclosure; a TV-buy estimate, not a ballot guide, actual ad delivery or total race spending.
Archive photograph · 2011-08-15 · Brisbane Ekka, Australia
Archive: television studio camera displayed at Brisbane’s Ekka, Australia, August 15, 2011.Television-medium context only. Not Iowa, this ad, the payee’s equipment or proof of production, placement or delivery; unchanged full frame.Photo: NJM2010 / Wikimedia Commons · Original source ↗ · CC BY-SA 3.0 ↗Original file unchanged; displayed at responsive sizes.
Everytown Victory Fund’s November 1 filing reports a $1,006,560 estimated TV buy for Iowa’s 3rd House district. One expense references both support and opposition; it is not two separate million-dollar buys, campaign income or proof that viewers saw an ad. [1][2]
EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY VICTORY FUND (EVERYTOWN VICTORY FUND) filed with the Federal Election Commission
Federal Election Commission
USAGov
How we know5 scoped claims · 3 source recordsView evidence +
Each claim keeps its full assertion, date, source passage and limits. Source counts describe records, not independent corroboration.
1.Claim 1Attributed
Everytown Victory Fund’s new November 1 report lists transaction 500005156, an estimated $1,006,560 TV ad buy payable to Waterfront Strategies Inc., with October 30 disbursement/obligation and October 31 dissemination dates.
Scope
Iowa House District 3 as designated in one Everytown Victory Fund November 1 disclosure; a TV-buy estimate, not a ballot guide, actual ad delivery or total race spending.
Evidence passage
Page 1: payee, amount, purpose, transaction ID and both date fields.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
The source explicitly calls this an estimated cost; payment, placement and delivery have not been independently verified.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T10:44:32.261Z · EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY VICTORY FUND (EVERYTOWN VICTORY FUND) filed with the Federal Election Commission
Disclosure is neither campaign income nor a census of race spending; no candidate qualification inferred.
2.Claim 2Attributed
The one item is marked support, House, Iowa district 03 and 2026 general; its purpose also references opposition to the other side. The report total is $1,006,560, not twice that amount.
Scope
Iowa House District 3 as designated in one Everytown Victory Fund November 1 disclosure; a TV-buy estimate, not a ballot guide, actual ad delivery or total race spending.
Evidence passage
Page 1: support/office/election checkboxes; purpose includes “Also Opposing”; single item, subtotal and total.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
This describes the filing’s classifications, not verified ad content, a cost allocation between candidates or ballot qualification.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T10:44:32.261Z · EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY VICTORY FUND (EVERYTOWN VICTORY FUND) filed with the Federal Election Commission
Disclosure is neither campaign income nor a census of race spending; no candidate qualification inferred.
3.Claim 3Supported
The stated $7,809,533.45 cumulative figure less the new $1,006,560 item equals $6,802,973.45; those two parts sum back to the stated cumulative figure.
Scope
Iowa House District 3 as designated in one Everytown Victory Fund November 1 disclosure; a TV-buy estimate, not a ballot guide, actual ad delivery or total race spending.
Evidence passage
Page 1: Calendar Year-To-Date Per Election field and the current item; arithmetic 7,809,533.45 − 1,006,560.00 = 6,802,973.45.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Subtraction only. Prior entries and the cumulative classification have not been independently audited; this is not total IA-03 race spending.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T10:44:32.261Z · EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY VICTORY FUND (EVERYTOWN VICTORY FUND) filed with the Federal Election Commission
Disclosure is neither campaign income nor a census of race spending; no candidate qualification inferred.
4.Claim 4Supported
The current FEC query identifies file 2045506 as a November 1 new F24, most_recent=true and is_amended=false.
Scope
Iowa House District 3 as designated in one Everytown Victory Fund November 1 disclosure; a TV-buy estimate, not a ballot guide, actual ad delivery or total race spending.
Evidence passage
Index results: file_number 2045506, committee_id C00688655, receipt_date, amendment_indicator, most_recent and is_amended fields.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Agency metadata at retrieval; a later amendment can change it. No timezone inferred from midnight API labels.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T10:43:45.312Z · Federal Election Commission
Disclosure is neither campaign income nor a census of race spending; no candidate qualification inferred.
5.Claim 5Supported
The House is part of Congress, which participates in federal lawmaking; the president can veto legislation.
Scope
Iowa House District 3 as designated in one Everytown Victory Fund November 1 disclosure; a TV-buy estimate, not a ballot guide, actual ad delivery or total race spending.
Evidence passage
USAGov Legislative branch and How each branch provides checks and balances.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Institutional context only; no prediction, majority arithmetic or legislative outcome.
General federal explanation. It establishes no election outcome, bill text, candidate commitment, local voting deadline or independent cost estimate.
Still open: A complete current IA-03 official ballot list was not verified for this expense report. It names no candidates and supplies no candidate-policy comparison.
What remains unresolved
A complete current IA-03 official ballot list was not verified for this expense report. It names no candidates and supplies no candidate-policy comparison.
Ad creative, invoices, actual payments, audience delivery, costs by message purpose and electoral effects are unverified.
Earlier entries behind the stated cumulative field are not audited.
A substantive amendment, corrected original record, or independently verified transaction/delivery evidence would reopen this report. No audience engagement or comprehension has been measured.
One fund, six items; support and opposition combined within each state. State is Senate office sought. Reported disbursements or obligations, not total race spending, delivered texts, public support or votes. Ohio is a special-general election.
Read the values and scale as a table
Common zero; maximum magnitude 309245.6 U.S. dollars. October 31, 2026 item dates; November 1 disclosure.
Texas has the largest reported cost in this one texting packet; the bars measure money, not audience or electoral effect.
One Digital Freedom Fund November 1 F24: six October 31 text-message items for Senate offices in Iowa, Ohio and Texas. Ohio is marked special-general; Iowa and Texas general. No complete spending census, candidate roster or message-delivery measure.
Archive photograph · 2015-10-22 · Location not established by inspected source metadata
Archive: a person uses WhatsApp on October 22, 2015.Context for phone messaging only. The pictured conversation is unrelated; no claim this fund used WhatsApp, this device or reached this person. Not a political message or a 2026 campaign scene; unchanged full frame.Photo: Helar Lukats / Wikimedia Commons · Original source ↗ · CC BY-SA 4.0 ↗Original file unchanged; displayed at responsive sizes.
Digital Freedom Fund’s November 1 filing reports $585,070.72 in six text-message items for Senate elections in Iowa, Ohio and Texas. Texas accounts for $309,245.60, Ohio $218,978.88 and Iowa $56,846.24. These are reported costs—not counts of texts, voters reached or votes won. [4][1][2][3]
DIGITAL FREEDOM FUND filed with the Federal Election Commission
Federal Election Commission
USAGov
How we know7 scoped claims · 3 source recordsView evidence +
Each claim keeps its full assertion, date, source passage and limits. Source counts describe records, not independent corroboration.
1.Claim 1Attributed
The filing’s two Iowa Senate text-message items are $39,969.74 and $16,876.50, totaling $56,846.24.
Scope
One Digital Freedom Fund November 1 F24: six October 31 text-message items for Senate offices in Iowa, Ohio and Texas. Ohio is marked special-general; Iowa and Texas general. No complete spending census, candidate roster or message-delivery measure.
Evidence passage
Page 1, SE.4367 and SE.4368, Senate/IA and general boxes, amount fields and page subtotal.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Committee-reported disbursements or obligations, not verified payments, number of messages, recipients or votes. State refers to the office sought, not the Florida vendor address.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T10:44:32.270Z · DIGITAL FREEDOM FUND filed with the Federal Election Commission
Disclosure is neither campaign income nor a census of race spending; no candidate qualification inferred.
2.Claim 2Attributed
The filing’s two Ohio Senate text-message items are $122,291.82 and $96,687.06, totaling $218,978.88, marked Special-General.
Scope
One Digital Freedom Fund November 1 F24: six October 31 text-message items for Senate offices in Iowa, Ohio and Texas. Ohio is marked special-general; Iowa and Texas general. No complete spending census, candidate roster or message-delivery measure.
Evidence passage
Page 2, SE.4369 and SE.4370, Senate/OH and Other: Special-General boxes, amount fields and subtotal.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Committee-reported disbursements or obligations, not verified payments, number of messages, recipients or votes. State refers to the office sought, not the Florida vendor address.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T10:44:32.270Z · DIGITAL FREEDOM FUND filed with the Federal Election Commission
Disclosure is neither campaign income nor a census of race spending; no candidate qualification inferred.
3.Claim 3Attributed
The filing’s two Texas Senate text-message items are $187,753.16 and $121,492.44, totaling $309,245.60.
Scope
One Digital Freedom Fund November 1 F24: six October 31 text-message items for Senate offices in Iowa, Ohio and Texas. Ohio is marked special-general; Iowa and Texas general. No complete spending census, candidate roster or message-delivery measure.
Evidence passage
Page 3, SE.4371 and SE.4372, Senate/TX and general boxes, amount fields and subtotal.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Committee-reported disbursements or obligations, not verified payments, number of messages, recipients or votes. State refers to the office sought, not the Florida vendor address.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T10:44:32.270Z · DIGITAL FREEDOM FUND filed with the Federal Election Commission
Disclosure is neither campaign income nor a census of race spending; no candidate qualification inferred.
4.Claim 4Supported
The six distinct text-message amounts sum to the filing’s $585,070.72 total; every row names Minute Mail Consulting Group LLC and dates dissemination and disbursement/obligation October 31.
Scope
One Digital Freedom Fund November 1 F24: six October 31 text-message items for Senate offices in Iowa, Ohio and Texas. Ohio is marked special-general; Iowa and Texas general. No complete spending census, candidate roster or message-delivery measure.
Evidence passage
Pages 1–3, SE.4367–SE.4372; final total. Sum 56,846.24 + 218,978.88 + 309,245.60 = 585,070.72.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Exact addition of reported item amounts only. Repeated cumulative fields are excluded; delivery, creative and underlying invoices are not inspected.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T10:44:32.270Z · DIGITAL FREEDOM FUND filed with the Federal Election Commission
Disclosure is neither campaign income nor a census of race spending; no candidate qualification inferred.
5.Claim 5Attributed
Each state pair contains one support and one opposition item; the committee certifies independence in its filing.
Scope
One Digital Freedom Fund November 1 F24: six October 31 text-message items for Senate offices in Iowa, Ohio and Texas. Ohio is marked special-general; Iowa and Texas general. No complete spending census, candidate roster or message-delivery measure.
Evidence passage
Pages 1–3: support/opposition boxes and perjury certification.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Classifications are the filer’s own. No independent coordination, ad-content or compliance investigation is established.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T10:44:32.270Z · DIGITAL FREEDOM FUND filed with the Federal Election Commission
Disclosure is neither campaign income nor a census of race spending; no candidate qualification inferred.
6.Claim 6Supported
The current FEC index lists file 2045547, committee C00911610, as a November 1 new F24, most_recent=true and is_amended=false.
Scope
One Digital Freedom Fund November 1 F24: six October 31 text-message items for Senate offices in Iowa, Ohio and Texas. Ohio is marked special-general; Iowa and Texas general. No complete spending census, candidate roster or message-delivery measure.
Evidence passage
Matching file_number 2045547 and committee_id C00911610; receipt_date, amendment_indicator, most_recent, is_amended.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Metadata at retrieval, not expense validation or a complete election-money census; no API timestamp timezone inferred.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T10:43:45.312Z · Federal Election Commission
Disclosure is neither campaign income nor a census of race spending; no candidate qualification inferred.
7.Claim 7Supported
The Senate participates in federal lawmaking and approves presidential Cabinet nominees, while a president can veto legislation.
Scope
One Digital Freedom Fund November 1 F24: six October 31 text-message items for Senate offices in Iowa, Ohio and Texas. Ohio is marked special-general; Iowa and Texas general. No complete spending census, candidate roster or message-delivery measure.
Evidence passage
USAGov Legislative branch, Executive branch Cabinet paragraph and checks and balances.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Institutional context, not a candidate forecast or assertion that one seat can enact a policy alone.
General federal explanation. It establishes no election outcome, bill text, candidate commitment, local voting deadline or independent cost estimate.
Still open: Complete official candidate lists and candidate-policy comparisons were not verified for this geographic expense summary; it names no candidates.
What remains unresolved
Complete official candidate lists and candidate-policy comparisons were not verified for this geographic expense summary; it names no candidates.
Message content, channel implementation, actual payments, delivery, unique recipients and effects are unverified. No inference that WhatsApp was used from contextual archive photography.
No independent donor, coordination or compliance investigation; committee filing is the originating expense source.
A substantive amendment, corrected original record, or independently verified transaction/delivery evidence would reopen this report. No audience engagement or comprehension has been measured.
Remainder of stated cumulative figure385771.68 U.S. dollars [3]
The two nonoverlapping parts sum to $498,771.68. Remainder is subtraction, not an audit of older entries. One committee and election only; not total VA-05 money, candidate income, people reached or votes.
Read the values and scale as a table
Common zero; maximum magnitude 385771.68 U.S. dollars. Parts of this filer’s stated 2026 cumulative figure, reported November 1.
The new $113,000 line is part of a cumulative figure; adding it again would double-count it.
Virginia’s 5th Congressional District voters; one outside committee’s reported message spending, distinct from the three printed candidate choices and from total race money.
Archive photograph · 2024-10-26 · Exact event location not established by inspected metadata; Virginia campaign context.
Archive: John McGuire (second from right) at a get-out-the-vote gathering with Glenn Youngkin and Jim Jordan, October 26, 2024.An older campaign identification scene, not the November 2026 texting effort or evidence of coordination. Source caption identifies the gathering; original frame unchanged.Photo: Glenn Youngkin / Spirit of Virginia / Wikimedia Commons · Original source ↗ · CC BY 2.0 ↗Original file unchanged; displayed at responsive sizes.
A new November 1 filing by Virginians for Conservative Leadership PAC reports $113,000 in texting supporting John McGuire. It is an outside committee’s stated disbursement or obligation, not money received by his campaign or evidence of votes. [1][5]
Virginians for Conservative Leadership PAC, C00960658
Federal Election Commission
Virginia Department of Elections
+1 more
How we know6 scoped claims · 5 source recordsView evidence +
Each claim keeps its full assertion, date, source passage and limits. Source counts describe records, not independent corroboration.
1.Claim 1Attributed
The November1 new F24 reports $113,000 for texting supporting John McGuire in Virginia’s 5th House district, payable to JLK Political Strategies; both listed transaction dates are November1.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Page1 SE.4175: new, 24-hour, support, House district05, VA and general-election checkboxes visually inspected; amount and both dates.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
A committee-reported disbursement or obligation, not a verified bank transfer, delivered-message count or candidate receipt.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:06:16.527Z · Virginians for Conservative Leadership PAC, C00960658, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit or proof of message delivery or electoral effect. Cumulative field is the filer’s own stated figure; underlying earlier filings are not audited here.
2.FEC metadata lists file2045471 as most recent and unamended at the November3 check.Supported
FEC metadata lists file2045471 as most recent and unamended at the November3 check.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
FEC query result file_number2045471; amendment_indicatorN, is_amendedfalse, most_recenttrue.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Later amendments could change the record; current query is not a full finance census.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:03:23.677Z · Federal Election Commission
Administrative disclosure metadata, not independent verification of expenditures. Receipt dates are agency calendar labels; no event time zone is inferred from midnight timestamps. This query is not all campaign finance.
3.Claim 3Attributed
The same filing states a $498,771.68 calendar-year-to-date figure for the election; subtracting its $113,000 item leaves a $385,771.68 remainder.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
A decomposition of the filer’s stated cumulative field, not an independent audit of the earlier component. The parts must not be added to the cumulative figure again.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:06:16.527Z · Virginians for Conservative Leadership PAC, C00960658, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit or proof of message delivery or electoral effect. Cumulative field is the filer’s own stated figure; underlying earlier filings are not audited here.
4.Claim 4Supported
Virginia’s official November3 federal table lists Tom S. P. Perriello, John J. McGuire III and Cooke C. Harvey for the 5th House district.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
2026 federal-offices table, all three 5th District rows: Democratic, Republican, Independent.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Printed choices only; no write-in completeness or candidate-policy positions inferred.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:06:16.527Z · Virginians for Conservative Leadership PAC, C00960658, filed with the FEC
Interested committee filing, not an audit or proof of message delivery or electoral effect. Cumulative field is the filer’s own stated figure; underlying earlier filings are not audited here.
General federal explanation. It establishes no election outcome, bill text, candidate commitment, local voting deadline or independent cost estimate.
Still open: No delivered-text count, reach, persuasion estimate, donor tracing or independent coordination investigation.
What remains unresolved
No delivered-text count, reach, persuasion estimate, donor tracing or independent coordination investigation.
Earlier components of the stated cumulative figure not independently audited.
Printed roster verified; qualified write-ins and candidate-policy comparison are outside this bounded money report.
A corrected original, amended filing, current contrary candidate answer, changed official roster or operative order would require a new retained version and complete exact-source review.
● = the county named above; House = House minority caucus. Arrows connect an institution to a county named in its announced plan; ? = not specified in this account, not absent. MPR’s November 2 account; as of November 3. Plans and named counties only, not attendance, current indoor-access permission, complete staffing or legal powers. Missing counties mean not specified here, not no observers.
Read the records as a table
Documented records; no implied sequence or shared numerical scale.
The announced House and DOJ footprints overlap in Hennepin but are not the same list.
Voters in Hennepin, Olmsted and Ramsey counties who need to distinguish announced observer roles from observed attendance, election authority or results.
Archive: Hennepin County Government Center, Minneapolis, May 20, 2018.County-government context only, not an Election Day polling scene, announced deployment site or evidence that any observer attended. Full original JPEG unchanged.Photo: McGhiever / Wikimedia Commons · Original source ↗ · CC BY-SA 4.0 ↗Original file unchanged; displayed at responsive sizes.
MPR’s November 2 report says state officials announced one House minority-caucus observer each for Hennepin and Olmsted counties, alongside separate DOJ monitoring plans naming Hennepin and Ramsey. These are attributed plans. Attendance and current permission to enter polling places have not been verified. [1][2]
One originating newsroom account of state officials. No direct House deployment notice, independent attendance check or new governing legal order captured. No finding of wrongdoing follows from observer plans.
2.Claim 2Attributed
MPR’s November 2 report attributes separate DOJ monitoring plans naming Hennepin and Ramsey counties to state election officials.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Opening paragraph distinguishing DOJ monitors from House minority-caucus observers.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Attributed plans only; no independently verified attendance, current indoor-access permission or new legal authority. October22 background cannot establish November3 permission.
One originating newsroom account of state officials. No direct House deployment notice, independent attendance check or new governing legal order captured. No finding of wrongdoing follows from observer plans.
3.MPR reported Simon said the House majority caucus had so far declined to send observers.Attributed
MPR reported Simon said the House majority caucus had so far declined to send observers.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Second paragraph, Simon’s publication-time statement about the majority caucus.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Attributed November2 status, not an independently confirmed current refusal, or evidence about the election’s integrity.
One originating newsroom account of state officials. No direct House deployment notice, independent attendance check or new governing legal order captured. No finding of wrongdoing follows from observer plans.
4.August indoor-access limits do not establish November permissionAttributed
In MPR’s October 22 interview, Simon said Hennepin and Ramsey had vetoed federal monitors’ entry inside polling places for August; he said he did not know whether they had decided for November.
Scope
October22 account of August and then-unknown November decisions, not present legal advice.
Evidence passage
October22 Q&A: What happened when federal observers were here for the August primary?; the answer distinguishes county veto of indoor presence from outside monitoring and explicitly says November decision unknown.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Older attributed context; not a current county access rule or confirmation of deployment.
Describes August and October22 understanding, not November3 access permission.
Still open: MPR is the originating interview report; no direct House deployment notice or separate DOJ notice captured.
What remains unresolved
MPR is the originating interview report; no direct House deployment notice or separate DOJ notice captured.
Actual attendance, full staffing, legal powers and Election Day outcomes not verified.
Reader-help page checked by unauthenticated HTTPS, but no voter identifier or personal data entered.
Current county-specific permission to enter polling places remains unverified. The October22 MPR interview describes August and is not today’s rule.
A corrected original, amended filing, current contrary candidate answer, changed official roster or operative order would require a new retained version and complete exact-source review.
Email → remote login OR email + gate ID → in person
Arrows show the announced access routes, not elapsed time or completed events. Media: email in advance; in-person entry also requires valid state-issued ID at the gate. North Carolina, November 3; scheduled 11 a.m. and 4 p.m. Eastern (10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Central). November2 notice. No event outcome, live-playback guarantee, results feed or local deadline established.
Read the records as a table
Documented records; no implied sequence or shared numerical scale.
Email → remote login OR email + gate ID → in person [2]
Watching the announced public briefings does not require joining the credentialed-media participation route.
North Carolina residents seeking the official public information route; event access is separate from local voter rules, media participation and election results.
Archive photograph · 2004-02-27 · Raleigh, North Carolina
Archive: North Carolina Emergency Operations Center briefing, Raleigh, February 27, 2004; Mark Wolfe / FEMA.Historical scene from a different 2004 event. Do not use it to identify today’s election officials, current room or staffing, or as evidence a scheduled event occurred. Original JPEG unchanged.Photo: Mark Wolfe / FEMA / Wikimedia Commons · Original source ↗ · Public domain ↗Original file unchanged; displayed at responsive sizes.
North Carolina’s election board announced November 3 briefings at 11 a.m. and 4 p.m. Eastern, with a public stream. Watching is separate from credentialed-media participation. These remain scheduled events; no briefing outcome or live result is established here. [1][2]
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:44.032Z · North Carolina State Board of Elections
Official event announcement; an interested administrative account, not proof either event occurred, a current stream is playing, or a rule or count changed.
2.Claim 2Supported
The notice distinguishes public viewing from participation reserved for credentialed media, which requires advance arrangements.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
What and Important sections and final public-stream paragraph.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
No credentials, email or account requested by this worker. This is an access distinction, not a guarantee playback will work or that an event occurred.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:44.032Z · North Carolina State Board of Elections
Official event announcement; an interested administrative account, not proof either event occurred, a current stream is playing, or a rule or count changed.
3.Claim 3Supported
The announcement describes information briefings; it supplies no new voting rule, ballot count or election outcome.
Scope
The named original records and dates only; no measured audience or election outcome.
Evidence passage
Notice in full, including event purpose and dates.
As of
2026-11-03
Limit
Record-content boundary only. Local deadlines and individual ballot questions require the responsible election office.
Retrieved 2026-11-03T09:01:44.032Z · North Carolina State Board of Elections
Official event announcement; an interested administrative account, not proof either event occurred, a current stream is playing, or a rule or count changed.
Still open: No current event photograph with established reuse rights found; selected historical briefing scene is explicitly contextual.
What remains unresolved
No current event photograph with established reuse rights found; selected historical briefing scene is explicitly contextual.
Public streaming landing page opened; actual live playback and the scheduled outcomes remain unverified.
No new local voting instruction, count, result or continuous-coverage promise is made.
A corrected original, amended filing, current contrary candidate answer, changed official roster or operative order would require a new retained version and complete exact-source review.
This edition stays in the library.
Codex research assistant retained and rechecked the supported current-date evidence from the previous attempt, corrected Minnesota access framing with dated contrary context, and replaced both visually rejected health comparisons with two distinct newly captured November1 FEC originals. Six complete stories meet the minimum; the eight-story target is not claimed achieved. The rejected policy comparisons, ten native policy gaps, source and results holds remain unchanged. The package is for a new complete exact-source review and publisher browser/mobile/help/photo/evidence gates, not publication or inherited approval. Audience engagement and comprehension remain unmeasured.
Material evidence changes produce dated revisions. Earlier editions and their release records remain available.
Publication & revision receipt
Six fresh election-only reports: national Senate money, an Iowa House TV estimate, three-state Senate texting, VA-05 texting, Minnesota observer plans and North Carolina public briefing access. Four substantive national campaign-finance reports and two separate service/administration reports. Existing policy-comparison and results holds remain.
Released November 3, 2026 at 7:00 AM Central · Revision 1 · Updated November 3, 2026 at 7:00 AM Central
Published automatically under the editor’s standing direction. Individual human review is not implied. Educational examples are labeled; claims retain their source limits.
