National ‘Ruthless’ podcast asks who paid for Alaska’s ‘Decoy Dan’ operation

By SUZANNE DOWNING

Oct. 29, 2026 — Who paid for the plane tickets, the recruiting trips, the website and the lawyers for the Peltola campaign election fraud caper?

That was one of the central questions raised Thursday on the national conservative Ruthless podcast, which devoted more than 40 minutes to the allegations surrounding Mary Peltola’s campaign and efforts to reshape Alaska’s US Senate ballot.

Hosts Josh Holmes, Comfortably Smug (Shashank Tripathi), Michael Duncan, and John Ashbrook revisited the New York Times investigation that linked Peltola’s campaign team and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee officials to an effort to recruit candidates who could draw votes from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan.

The Alaska Story has already covered the basic recruitment allegations, the candidates approached, the campaign’s denials and the investigations that followed.

Thursday’s discussion highlighted additional financial questions and details of the alleged operation that merit closer examination.

Breaking: House Oversight Committee opens investigation into Peltola ‘Decoy Dan’ allegations

The Times broke the underlying investigation. Ruthless brought its findings to a national audience and challenged the suggestion that the entire controversy could be dismissed as ordinary political maneuvering.

Who covered the recruiting expenses?

The podcast’s most consequential additional question concerned the cost of the work itself.

The hosts described an operative traveling in Alaska, meeting prospective candidates and discussing outside support. They asked where the expenses associated with those activities appeared in campaign-finance disclosures.

“That’s not free,” one host said during the discussion.

The question extends beyond whether a campaign paid a recruiter directly. Who purchased the airline tickets? Who covered meals and other expenses? Which organization commissioned the work, and how was its purpose described?

The hosts could not establish a complete accounting of those expenses, but rather the discussion identified a trail for investigators and reporters to examine.

The Alaska Story previously reported questions about money flowing to a Washington, DC law firm. Ruthless broadened that discussion to the costs of recruiting candidates and the financing of services provided to the Petersburg Sullivan.

Breaking: New York Times investigation ties Mary Peltola to Decoy Dan recruitment

Website work and separate legal bills

The hosts also revisited the creation of the second Sullivan’s (Decoy Dan’s) campaign website, describing an approximately $4,200 invoice and questioning the timing of its payment and disclosure.

They argued that the website’s resemblance to the incumbent senator’s branding deserved scrutiny alongside the recruitment allegations.

Their discussion raised another question: Did the legal payments visible in the candidate’s disclosures account for all the lawyers who worked to keep him on the ballot?

The hosts said the Washington firm appearing in the financial records was different from the firm that handled the Alaska ballot litigation.

Those assertions require comparison with the underlying invoices, disclosure amendments and court appearances before any conclusion can be drawn about an unreported contribution or expense. The rough transcript also contains an unclear reference to the website payment date, so that chronology remains unresolved.

The Alaska Story’s initial account mentioned discussions about creating a right-wing party. Ruthless drew attention to the specific branding contemplated: a MAGA Party for Alaska. It would be a way to drain support from the Republican Party.

According to the Times reporting, Peltola aide Anton McParland raised the proposal with DSCC officials, and subsequent communications concerned follow-up with an Elias Law Group attorney. That law firm is representing Mary Peltola.

The idea would have placed a Trump-aligned label into the political field against Sullivan, a fake group to his right politically.

The Times reported that the proposal fizzled in May.

The governor’s race enters the account

Another detail highlighted by the podcast suggests the recruiting effort reached beyond the lesser-known candidates already identified.

According to the Times account, the operative named Jarid Kurtz, using the fake name “Zane,” told prospective Senate candidate Matthew Salisbury that he had approached higher-profile possibilities, including people running for governor. The approaches were unsuccessful.

That leaves a specific unanswered question: Which candidates were contacted, and what were they offered or told?

Focus-group participants as potential targets

The hosts also emphasized reported internal messages about voters watching a focus group.

The Times described advisers discussing whether participants would be receptive to the ballot strategy. That detail concerns how the Democrats expected the plan to work: by exploiting voters’ susceptibility to a spoiler candidacy.

Peltola’s campaign and the DSCC have denied recruiting candidates. The Petersburg Decoy Dan has maintained that he entered independently.

Thursday’s podcast added pressure for a fuller explanation of the money behind the alleged operation.

Listen to the podcast here or wherever you pick up podcasts: Ruthless podcast, Oct. 29 episode.

Breaking: Dunleavy orders state investigation into ‘Decoy Dan’ election scheme

Peltola attacks New York Times over ‘Decoy Dan’ investigation, calls it a subscription ploy

Murkowski’s sudden change of heart: After defending Decoy Dan ballot, senator now demands answers from Peltola

Trump calls on Peltola to drop out of race