A wild story out of Nebraska has two Senate candidates — including a Democrat — accused of running sham campaigns so they can drop out and throw their support behind Dan Osborn, the "independent" some critics contend is actually a Democratic plant.
Think about that for a minute: A Democrat is accused of running a fake campaign they never intended to see through in an effort to boost an Independent that might be a closet Democrat.
What in the wide world of cornhusking is going on here?
New criminal complaints sent to Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers (R) allege that Democrat Cindy Burbank and Legal Marijuana NOW nominee Mike Marvin violated state law by swearing they would “serve if elected” when they had no actual intent to do so.
The complaints call for investigations into the duo for alleged election falsification, perjury (or encouraging perjury), and making false sworn statements—offenses that could carry up to 7 years in prison if convicted.
The complaint also alleges that Burbank isn’t a “good faith” candidate “under a requirement in state law that candidates who run actually seek the office sought,” according to the Nebraska Examiner.
Complaints about U.S. Senate candidates who hinted at helping Osborn sent to Nebraska AG https://t.co/pkI4CbR11T
— Rusty (@Rusty_Weiss) May 29, 2026
The Democrats' Sneaky New Trick – The Indy Imitation Game
The complaint against Burbank was filed by former Republican state Sen. Lydia Brasch. The one against Marvin came from Derek Schwartz, a La Vista police officer who ran for the Legislature earlier this year.
Now, I know readers are going to view the complaints with a healthy dose of skepticism that anything might come of this. But there is some merit to the argument. Follow the bouncing ball ...
- The complaints center on the official filing oath candidates must sign, affirming they will serve if elected. The words are right there: "I will serve if elected.”
- Burbank, though, never had a good-faith intention to serve and always planned to drop out after winning the Democratic primary to support Osborn, as evidenced by her own words. The Nebraska Examiner reported that Burbank "said on her campaign website that she would drop out if she won the nomination and support Osborn because she wants to give him a 'fair shot against [Senator Pete] Ricketts [(R-NE)].'"
- Burbank confirmed this strategy to the New York Times after the Democratic primary.
- The Nebraska Democrat Party and Osborn himself openly backed Burbank’s strategy and encouraged voters to support her in the primary. The party—which endorsed both Burbank and Osborn—spent at least $136,000 boosting the former's campaign.
- Democrats even went so far as to bring in Osborn’s lawyer, Marc Elias, who has yet to find a hoax he doesn't like to promote, to sue Nebraska and successfully get Burbank back on the primary ballot after she was briefly removed.
While some legal minds will question whether the complaints will hold up in court, the filings are further evidence of coordinated gamesmanship in the Senate race against Ricketts.
The Attorney General’s office has the complaints but has not yet commented on the matter. But Nebraska voters deserve straight answers on whether these candidates treated the ballot like a prop in a political shell game.
Despite his carefully crafted “independent” and “working class” image, Osborn is a Democrat Trojan horse through and through. He is a client of the far-left Fight Agency, the same radical strategists behind socialist Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral campaign and hard-left Senate candidates like Graham Platner (D-ME) and Abdul El-Sayed (D-MI).
Osborn has been backed and funded by Elizabeth Warren, Jamie Raskin, Chuck Schumer, and National Democrats, and he is actively using ActBlue to raise money thanks to a rule change that benefits fake independents.
Again, a Democrat runs to win a primary, fully plans to drop out if they win, and supports another Democrat who seems to be pretending they are an independent. Is anything real on the left in the Nebraska Senate race?