Uncensored Free Speech Platform

This DHS Official Oversees the Security of Federal Elections. He Wants to Ban Voting Machines.
This feels like a quiet policy shift.

In his top post at the Department of Homeland Security, David Harvilicz sets policy on protecting the nation’s elections infrastructure, including voting machines.

He’s also the co-founder of a company with James Penrose, who helped hatch debunked conspiracy theories blaming hacked voting machines for Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 presidential election. Penrose assisted in a push to seize voting machines to overturn Trump’s defeat.

On social media, Harvilicz has called for doing away with voting machines, saying they are “eminently vulnerable to exploitation.” In a March post, he wrote that “DHS needs to ban voting machines for all federal elections. The time is now.” He also has repeatedly questioned the validity of Democratic electoral victories and pushed for Republicans to overhaul electoral systems to their advantage.

David Harvilicz in 2015 Sam Comen/The New York Times/Redux

Election experts as well as current and former DHS officials say Harvilicz’s central role in overseeing the security of electoral systems and voting machines is especially concerning at a time when the administration is taking unprecedented steps to relitigate Trump’s baseless claims that the 2020 election was stolen. That includes the FBI’s seizure of 2020 voting records from Fulton County, Georgia, and having a team working for Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, take custody of voting machines used in Puerto Rico in 2020.

“The security of our election infrastructure depends on leadership that is trusted, impartial and grounded in evidence — not individuals who have promoted conspiracy theories about the very systems they are now responsible for protecting,” said Danielle Lang, vice president for voting rights and the rule of law at the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan pro-democracy organization. “Placing someone with that background in charge of policies affecting election security can undermine public confidence in our elections at a time when trust is already fragile.”

DHS didn’t answer detailed questions about Harvilicz or his team, providing a more general statement about the work done by the agency. “DHS and its employees are focused on keeping our elections safe, secure, and free,” it said. “Every single day appointees at the Department of Homeland Security work to implement the President’s policies and keep our Homeland safe.”

Harvilicz didn’t respond to questions about his DHS role. Harvilicz’s X account notes his post as DHS’ assistant secretary for cyber, infrastructure, risk and resilience policy but says he’s been detailed to the Defense Department. (Such temporary assignments are typically done in 120-day increments.)

Get Involved

Do you have information you can share about David Harvilicz or other federal officials working on elections or any of the other individuals named in this article? Contact reporter Doug Bock Clark at or on Signal at 678-243-0784. If you’re concerned about confidentiality, check out our advice on the most secure ways to share tips.

Harvilicz was appointed to the DHS job around July, taking on a role that in the past has largely focused on shaping policy to protect …

Tennessee’s FAIR Rx Act (SB 2040 / HB 1959): Reform or Risk for Pharmacy Access?
This isn't complicated—it's willpower.

In early 2026, the Tennessee State Capitol has become the front line of a fierce battle over the future of how people get their medicine. At the center are Senator Bobby Harshbarger and Representative Rick Scarbrough, the primary sponsors of the FAIR Rx Act (SB 2040 / HB 1959).
The bill essentially tells large healthcare corporations:
You can be the insurance middleman, or you can be the pharmacy, but you can’t be both.
The legislation targets pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) that also own retail pharmacies. Under the proposal, companies would be prohibited from owning both businesses at the same time in Tennessee, forcing them to separate those operations if the law passes.
But the political support behind the bill has also drawn attention. Several lawmakers backing the legislation have backgrounds in pharmacy or ties to the pharmacy industry, and pharmacy advocacy groups have been actively pushing for the reform. Their position is that PBM-owned pharmacies create an uneven playing field that harms independent pharmacies.
Critics, however, warn the legislation could create new problems instead of solving existing ones. Business groups such as the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce have argued that the bill interferes with free-market practices and could increase costs or reduce pharmacy access.
There is also concern about how companies might respond. Some industry voices have warned that major chains could restructure or even shut down stores in the state rather than separate their business units, potentially affecting jobs and patient access to medications.
As the debate continues, the future of SB 2040 / HB 1959 remains uncertain. What is clear is that the bill has become a flashpoint in a much larger national debate about pharmacy regulation, PBMs, drug pricing, and the structure of the healthcare industry.
If the bill passes, it could significantly reshape Tennessee’s pharmacy landscape — raising a big question for patients and workers alike:
Will this create a fairer pharmacy market, or will it unintentionally reduce access to care?

Making News: Podcasts and Videos Now On-Line on Iran War Fallout — & More!
Who's accountable for the results?

I’m pleased to post the videos and podcasts of three media appearances over the past few days concerning the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran and other issues.

This past Wednesday, I was interviewed on John Batchelor’s new podcast (with co-host Gordon G. Chang) on some economic impacts of the Persian Gulf conflict and on where U.S. efforts to stem the fentanyl crisis stand after the Supreme Court struck down Trump tariffs aimed at forcing greater foreign efforts to shut down this drug trade.  Here’s the link. 

Also on Wednesday, I appeared on the Al Jazeera news service as part of a wide-ranging panel discussion on the case for the strikes on Iran and on their economic repercussions.  You can watch it here and the actual discussion begins just after the four-minute mark.

Finally, yesterday, I was back on Al Jazeera to discuss how the fighting is going to be financed.  Here’s the link.  

And keep checking in with RealityChek for news of recent and upcoming media appearances and other developments.

Technocracy > Democracy? For corrupt systems, should experts replace politicians temporarily?
We're watching the same failure loop.

Democracy has obvious strengths like representation and accountability. But I keep wondering what happens when corruption and incompetence become deeply rooted in the system and elections don’t really fix anything. In that kind of situation, would a temporary technocratic government actually work better? By technocracy I mean letting experts run major ministries for a limited time, maybe around 3–5 years. Economists running finance, public health experts running health policy, engineers leading infrastructure, etc. The goal would be to stabilize institutions, push evidence based reforms, and clean up systemic corruption before returning fully to normal democratic politics. Supporters might argue that experts can focus on long term policy instead of short term election politics. Critics would probably say it weakens democratic legitimacy and risks creating an unaccountable elite. So I’m curious what people here think. Are there historical examples where technocratic governments actually helped fix a dysfunctional or corrupt system? Are there cases where this approach backfired or failed badly? And if something like this were ever attempted, what safeguards would be needed to make sure it stays temporary and doesn’t slide into authoritarian rule?

Soros Cash Fuels Foundation's New Reparations Raid in UK
Equal justice apparently isn't equal anymore.

The entire reparations argument is like the Energizer Bunny with a brain affliction: It just keeps getting dumber, and dumber, and dumber. In the latest round of dumb, a foundation affiliated with the notorious leftist shouter George Soros' family is supporting a campaign demanding that one nation pay reparations for its part in the 17th and 18th century African slave trade. Now, let's set aside just for the moment that there is nobody alive today who was a victim of this trade, and that there is nobody alive today who took part in this trade. No, that's not the dumbest part of this story; the really stupid part is that the reparations campaign is focused on the one nation of Europe that did more than any other to end the trans-Atlantic slave trade: Great Britain.

Soros Cash Fuels New Reparations Raid on UK Taxpayers
Law enforcement shouldn't be political.

The entire reparations argument is like the Energizer Bunny with a brain affliction: It just keeps getting dumber, and dumber, and dumber. In the latest round of dumb, a foundation affiliated with the notorious leftist shouter George Soros is supporting a campaign demanding that one nation pay reparations for its part in the 17th and 18th century African slave trade. Now, let's set aside just for the moment that there is nobody alive today who was a victim of this trade, and that there is nobody alive today who took part in this trade. No, that's not the dumbest part of this story; the really stupid part is that the reparations campaign is focused on the one nation of Europe that did more than any other to end the trans-Atlantic slave trade: Great Britain.

The Great Table Tennis Renaissance
Same show, different day.

Log In

Email *

Password *

Remember Me

Forgot Your Password?

Log In

New to The Nation? Subscribe
Print subscriber? Activate your online access

Skip to content Skip to footer

The Great Table Tennis Renaissance

Magazine

Newsletters

Subscribe

Log In

Search

Subscribe

Donate

Magazine

Latest

Archive

Podcasts

Newsletters

Sections

Politics

World

Economy

Culture

Books & the Arts

The Nation

About

Events

Contact Us

Advertise

Current Issue

The Weekend Read

/ March 14, 2026

The Great Table Tennis Renaissance

Josh Safdie’s latest movie Marty Supreme spurred a renewed national interest in ping-pong. I played my way through New York City to try to find out more.

Joshua Levkowitz

Share

Copy Link

Facebook

X (Twitter)

Bluesky Pocket

Email

Ad Policy

From the set of Marty Supreme.
(A24)

It’s 10:30 am on the first Sunday of the new year. I am standing at a ping-pong table, accessed through the parking garage of an unassuming office building in Midwood, Brooklyn. Across the table is Stephen, a lanky Russian-speaker from Sheepshead Bay, with a white tuft of hair and wearing black joggers. He told me he hasn’t played in 10 years. Still, he makes me pay when I hit to his forehand, bashing a winner to my back right corner. I zero in on the 3×3 hologram of the profile of a Bengal tiger behind him before my next serve to win the match.

I move to the next table to square off against Igor, a squat man in a tight blood-red athletic shirt. While we warm up, he inspects my borrowed paddle. During the first match, I successfully push the ball from side to side to win 11-6. Igor looks annoyed and protests that he cannot follow the orange ball. I shrug, unsure of how to answer his complaints about his own ball.

Around the room, there are eight tables with 20 men and two women jammed into the basement coming to blot the world out for a few hours and compete in the weekly tournament at Brooklyn Table Tennis Club. The owner, Nison Aronov, runs the tournament from a folding table in the front, shouting to players in Russian, Farsi, and English to direct them to their next match. The walls, ceiling, and floors are painted in various shades of blue, with lights overhead. “Today, a lot of players come,” he says, surprised at the number of bodies. “Not always like this.”

Between games, I look at the walls filled with photos and press clippings. Aranov points to a circled clue on a framed crossword puzzle from a July 2005 issue of USA Table Tennis Magazine: “Best Lobber in U.S.?” “That’s me,” he said, with his last name handwritten into the grid with a pencil.

I am playing in a table-tennis tournament this morning because, almost overnight, the sport seems to have reappeared in the American imagination, spurred, at least in part, by Josh Safdie’s manic film about a competitive player named Marty Mauser (Timothée Chalamet), loosely based on Lower East Side hustler and hardbat legend Marty Reisman. Set in the lean years after World War II, the film makes a long-dismissed basement pastime feel newly urgent, fast, and serious.

The hype began far before the film’s official release on Christmas Day. In New York City, select guests were invited …

News coverage ‘distorting’ Operation Epic Fury success: Guy Benson
What's the administration thinking here?

Washington Examiner senior columnist Guy Benson said the news coverage of the Iran war does not reflect the success of the operations. 

“We also heard from the president multiple points about how successful the mission has been in Iran, and based on a lot of the coverage you see, especially elsewhere, you would have no idea what a smashing success this has been for the United States and for Israel,” Benson said on Fox News’s Special Report with Bret Baier on Friday. 

Since the United States and Israel launched joint missile strikes against Iran on Feb. 26, President Donald Trump said Iran’s navy and missile defenses have been destroyed. 

Iran’s leadership was also severely affected, with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and others being killed in the airstrikes. 

Benson said the Iranian regime has been “absolutely obliterated,” listing the leadership as being “decapitated” and their capacity to respond “massively diminished.” 

Despite these successful military operations, Benson said there is still “negativity.”

“There has been this drumbeat of negativity in the coverage that I think is distorting the picture,” he said. “Yes, there are big challenges. Yes, we just had the tragic loss of life of more Americans. Yes, there is the issue about oil prices.” 

‘IRAN WANTS A DEAL’ BUT NOT GOOD ENOUGH, TRUMP SAYS

“Of course, these are things I’m sure the administration anticipated and game planned for, but you’ve got to zoom out and look at the bigger picture,” Benson added. 

Benson said, so far, the mission has been an “extraordinary historic success.”

Iran's Islamist Masters Announce They Will End the War on Their Terms
Confidence requires clarity.

It's been a week since President Trump presented Iran with what is known in the procurement world as his "best and final offer."  On March 6, President Trump posted on Truth Social: "There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER! After that, and the selection of a GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s), we, and many of our wonderful and very brave allies and partners, will work tirelessly to bring Iran back from the brink of destruction, making it economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before.” My colleague Rusty Weiss has that story at "Trump Outlines Iran’s Only Option to End the Relentless Onslaught: ‘Unconditional Surrender’ – RedState."

Coalition to send warships to Hormuz while US bombs ‘the hell out of the shoreline,’ Trump says
This deserves loud pushback.

President Donald Trump announced on Saturday that a multinational group is sending warships to defend the Strait of Hormuz from Iranian military forces blockading the oil shipping waterway.

Trump’s Saturday announcement comes less than a day after he told reporters that the U.S. Navy could start to escort oil tankers through the narrow strait “very soon.”

“Many Countries, especially those who are affected by Iran’s attempted closure of the Hormuz Strait, will be sending War Ships, in conjunction with the United States of America, to keep the Strait open and safe,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “We have already destroyed 100% of Iran’s Military capability, but it’s easy for them to send a drone or two, drop a mine, or deliver a close range missile somewhere along, or in, this Waterway, no matter how badly defeated they are.”

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps began to choke off the vital oil shipping waterway after the first U.S.-Israeli joint attacks of the war. There have been several reported Iranian attacks on ships in the strait since the start of the war.

Trump did not specify which countries would be sending ships to defend the Strait of Hormuz, but urged at least five other countries to join the effort, including China, France, Japan, South Korea, and the United Kingdom.

STRAIT OF HORMUZ TRAFFIC HAS GROUND TO A HALT. HERE’S WHY IT’S VITAL TO GET IT BACK UP AND RUNNING

“Hopefully China, France, Japan, South Korea, the UK, and others, that are affected by this artificial constraint, will send Ships to the area so that the Hormuz Strait will no longer be a threat by a Nation that has been totally decapitated,” Trump posted.

“In the meantime, the United States will be bombing the hell out of the shoreline, and continually shooting Iranian Boats and Ships out of the water. One way or the other, we will soon get the Hormuz Strait OPEN, SAFE, and FREE!”

This is a breaking news story and will be updated.

Old Dominion University shooter should have been denaturalized: Guy Benson
Ask who never gets charged.

Washington Examiner senior columnist Guy Benson argued the shooter at Old Dominion University should have lost his citizenship after he tried to join ISIS. 

Authorities identified Mohamed Bailor Jalloh as the suspect in the shooting at Old Dominion University that left one victim dead and two injured on Thursday. Jalloh was also killed.

“What on Earth are we doing in this country?” Benson said on Fox News’ America’s Newsroom on Friday. “I feel like, yes, he became a citizen; what is the argument? I’m genuinely curious, what is the argument against denaturalizing someone who was welcomed into this country, then chose to go to try to join ISIS?”

TRUMP ENDORSEMENT TRACKER: HERE’S WHO THE PRESIDENT HAS PICKED IN GOP MIDTERM ELECTION PRIMARIES

“Why was he still here?” Benson asked.

Jalloh, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Sierra Leone who spent six years in the Virginia National Guard, pleaded guilty in 2017 for attempting to provide material support to a terrorist organization. 

He was sentenced to 11 years in prison and five years of supervised release. Jalloh was released in 2024.

Benson said Jalloh “forfeited his right” to his citizenship after he tried to join ISIS.

“If this person is guilty of trying to join ISIS, why don’t we put him in prison for as long as humanely possible and as soon as we know that prison sentence is expiring, we get him on the first plane out back to wherever he came from,” he said. “Whatever country that might be.”

FBI Director Kash Patel said the shooting at Old Dominion University is being investigated as an act of terrorism. 

Benson said Jalloh’s citizenship should not have been an “open-ended right.”

TERRORIST ATTACKS FUEL GOP PUSH TO CRACK DOWN ON LEGAL IMMIGRATION

“That person should have absolutely forfeited his right to remain an American citizen,” he said. “This is not some open-ended right that he has forever, or at least it should not be.”

“I genuinely do not understand what is the argument against denaturalizing someone like that,” Benson added.

2028 Dem veteran? Uncle Sam wants you.
What's the administration thinking here?

In the 15 days since President Donald Trump launched Operation Epic Fury on Iran, Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) is approaching nearly a dozen media appearances, offering his often visceral reaction to the conflict.

Gallego, a 46-year-old combat veteran who deployed to Iraq as an infantryman in 2005, has emerged as a blunt, clear voice for the Democratic Party on foreign policy, speaking as someone whose own generation experienced the forever wars.

There he was on CNN’s “The Source with Kaitlin Collins” saying Secretary of State Marco Rubio was doing “CYA” and noting that the “MAGA base is pissed.” There he was sitting down with the AP speaking “as someone who lives with PTSD,” adding “it’s not been an easy week.” And there he was on Derek Thompson’s podcast, speaking about “going town to town searching for insurgents” 21 years ago, “but there was no clear direction of what victory looked like, what the end goal was, what was going to be the after-action report on Iraq.”

Gallego isn’t alone. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), a Navy captain who flew combat missions during Operation Desert Storm in 1990, has also racked up a run of high-profile media appearances, as has former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, a U.S. Navy Reserve intelligence officer who deployed to Afghanistan. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, who served in Afghanistan in the Army’s 82nd Airborne, went on local radio this week to link Americans’ affordability woes to the war.

In a year after many Democrats pined for a metaphorical fighter, the party is now having a conversation with itself about whether it needs a literal fighter — a veteran who can speak with credibility on issues of war and national security.

In an interview with POLITICO, Gallego spoke of “dodging bullets, IEDs, RPGs, clearing towns and then coming back to the same towns with insurgents” and of “losing friends and still not understanding what the end goal was the whole time.”

“It leaves a mark on you, and you start seeing it happening again, you know, you don't really think about the politics,” Gallego said. “You think about the people who are going to be potentially dying. And that’s why I think I was not hesitant to speak my mind on that.”

Later this month in San Antonio, Texas, Gallego will join VoteVets Action for its third town hall featuring potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidates, promising “fresh voices to the national conversation — those who have worn the uniform and served alongside us, who connect with everyday Americans others can’t,” according to a promotional video. (They’ve also done town halls with Buttigieg and Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin.)

“On foreign policy, the Dems need a candidate who is seen as strong/tough — not in rhetoric or bravado political platitudes but who conveys a sense …