On Wednesday, October 7, 2026, on MS NOW’s Deadline: White House, Nicolle Wallace and her guest, Democratic election lawyer and Democracy Docket founder Marc Elias, turned a discussion of election security into a partisan attack and smear against President Trump, Tina Peters, Cleta Mitchell, Ed Martin, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and “the pillow guy.”
At the center of the segment was an explosive allegation: Trump allies wanted the commerce secretary to seize voting machines.
Wallace read from Democracy Docket:
“Anti-voting lawyer Cleta Mitchell and convicted election denier Tina Peters are pushing a scheme to have Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick seize voting machines as part of a broader effort for the Trump administration to interfere with the midterm vote.
The scheme has been circulating among election deniers since late last year, but Tina Peters has led the effort to bring it to President Trump’s attention since last August. On Monday, Tina Peters reportedly met with Trump in the Oval Office to discuss election security issues, according to former U.S. Department of Justice pardon attorney Ed Martin.”
“Anti-voting lawyer.” “Convicted election denier.” “Pushing a scheme.” “Seize voting machines.” In this exchange, Wallace delivers loaded labels and an explosive allegation without explaining the regulatory proposal Mitchell and Peters advocated. She presents it as an effort to interfere with the vote. Because election security is “interference” with voting to Democrats and the fake news.
The specific claim about seizing voting machines now carries a correction.
Democracy Docket’s editor’s note states:
“Editor’s Note: This story has been corrected from an earlier version which reported that Mitchell and Peters have urged the commerce secretary to seize voting machines. We regret the error.”
It also changed its headline.
Original headline:
Updated headline:
The revised article now says Mitchell and Peters want Lutnick to exercise regulatory authority over states’ use of voting machines. That replaces the original allegation that they wanted him to seize the equipment.
“Seize” and “regulate” are different claims. The original described taking possession of voting machines. The revised report describes asserting regulatory authority over their use.
Democracy Docket corrected its claim that Mitchell and Peters wanted Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to seize voting machines—the allegation Wallace read to her viewers.
Wallace’s contempt for the people advocating election security was unmistakable:
“In no other planet, in no other timeline, in no other world, are Ed Martin, Tina Peters, Cleta Mitchell and Howard Lutnick close enough to any president to get within 100 feet of, um, let alone inside the Oval Office.”
She then invited Elias to join in:
“Just talk about this gang of misfits.”
Lutnick is the commerce secretary. His access to the president is hardly a scandal. And Trump does not need Wallace’s permission to hear from Peters, Mitchell or Martin.
Calling them “misfits” does nothing to establish that their proposals amount to election interference. Unless, of course, Wallace and Elias think election security is interference. I argue that is exactly what they mean.
Elias embraced Wallace’s insult while recalling a December 2020 White House meeting:
“Donald Trump again invited into the oval office a bunch of, as you say, misfits, uh, including, um, Sidney Powell, as I recall, and maybe the guy from Overstock. I can’t remember whether he was in that meeting or other meeting.”
The exchange then turned to Mike Lindell.
Wallace said:
“The pillow guy.”
Elias got excited and replied:
“Yeah, the pillow guy, right, exactly.”
Elias was unsure who attended which meeting, but that uncertainty did not stop the panel from mocking the people involved.
Elias continued:
“It was also a time in which Donald Trump was being urged to do crazy things. In that case, seize voting equipment in Georgia, seize ballots, right?”
Describing the response from White House staff, counsel and the Justice Department, Elias put it this way:
“These people are nuts. We need to get them out of the White House, like we need to get them out of the Oval Office and tell Donald Trump, like, ‘No, you can’t do these things.’”
Elias then moved from recollection to imagination:
“And yet now you have to imagine that it’s like the people at the, in the White House are like, ‘Yes, please come on in, Tina Peters,’ you know, ‘Come on in um, uh, you know all of you people.’”
He continued:
“And so it just goes to show how far we have come since that time to a world right now in which it is the people inside the house who are, who are urging the stuff, not the people that Donald Trump is trying to sneak in, you know, through the fire escape, right?”
Elias imagines a White House conversation, then condemns Trump for the scene he just invented. Fake news indeed.
Wallace then returned to the seizure claim:
“But what they, they throw out and, and push back on. It’s just that seizing voting machines, what we’re now, we’re now post Trump’s 2020 defeat strategy sessions. And they’re already public. What should we be prepared for in four weeks?”
Perhaps Wallace can apologize for repeating the inaccurate allegation and read it again, replacing “seize” with “regulate.”
With that one-word substitution, Wallace should say:
“Anti-voting lawyer Cleta Mitchell and convicted election denier Tina Peters are pushing a scheme to have Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick regulate voting machines as part of a broader effort for the Trump administration to interfere with the midterm vote.”
Even with “seize” corrected, the partisan insults remain.
But does it still sound like the looming catastrophe she wants viewers to prepare for?
The Tina Peters Plan, published on her website, proposes:
- Hand-marked paper ballots where legally and operationally feasible, retaining accessible equipment for voters who need it.
- Accounting for ballots issued, cast, spoiled, provisional and unused.
- Independent hand counts where feasible, or statistical audits before certification.
- Paper backups for voter check-in.
- Restricting remote access and preserving electronic logs.
- A parallel Commerce Department review of technology with foreign-adversary connections.
The plan expressly states:
“It is not a claim that every system is compromised.”
It also says it is not claiming that a past U.S. election result was electronically altered.
Wallace and Elias could have explained and debated the actual proposal. Instead, they built their attack around an inaccurate seizure allegation, labeled Mitchell “anti-voting” and Peters a “convicted election denier,” and called Trump’s allies a “gang of misfits.” Elias described the 2020 proposals as “crazy things” and characterized officials’ response as “These people are nuts” and “We need to get them out of the White House,” followed by telling Trump, “No, you can’t do these things.” He then imagined conversations inside the current White House while admitting uncertainty about who attended which 2020 meeting. Apparently, remembering who was there and calling “the pillow guy” by his name was too much to ask.
Watch on YouTube