David Sirota, founder and editor-in-chief of LeverNews, publicly accused the group Majority Democrats on November 6 of denying press credentials to his outlet’s reporters for an upcoming conference in Denver. The event, titled “What’s Next,” is scheduled for November 12-14 and is expected to draw a range of prominent Democratic elected officials and strategists.
Sirota says the blackout is payback for reporting his outlet published earlier this year. Those stories dug into Majority Democrats and a connected group called the Bench. They showed how the network pulled in big money from donors like hedge fund manager Stephen Mandel and others tied to names such as Reid Hoffman. The groups used a web of PACs, nonprofits, and shared consultants to back certain candidates in Democratic primaries.
The coverage raised eyebrows about how closely the outside groups seemed to work with campaigns. Some campaign finance watchers wondered whether the setup tested the limits of coordination rules. Majority Democrats has pushed back, saying everything they do follows the law and is aimed at helping elect people who can actually win.
The Denver conference is presented by Majority Democrats as an independent gathering rather than an official Democratic Party event. Organizers want it to be a place where Democrats talk strategy and figure out the path forward after the 2026 midterms. Names expected to show up include Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker, Raphael Warnock, Elissa Slotkin, Ruben Gallego, and Rep. Jake Auchincloss, who’s linked to the group’s leadership. They picked Denver partly because of how Colorado has shifted politically over the years.
📽️ Credit: The Lever
Sirota pointed out that other news outlets, even smaller ones, got credentials while LeverNews did not. Still, he said his team is going anyway. The reporters plan to ask why leading Democrats are sitting down with a heavily billionaire-funded group right after an election that leaned hard into anti-corruption messages, and what kinds of deals or arrangements might be taking shape at the event itself.
This raises questions about consistency in how politicians treat critical press coverage. When groups close the door on reporters who ask tough questions, it sparks the same free-press worries that get raised no matter which side of the aisle is doing it. Both parties have talked a lot about protecting open scrutiny when it suits them. Moments like this test whether that principle holds when the spotlight is on their own allies and donors. Whether Democrat or Republican, they employ the same tactics.
Democrats are acting just like Trumpcans, denying press credentials to those media outlets deemed "not friendly". Is this how the Democrats are going to act going forward, replicating practices of their former overlords?
Thank you for exposing the paymasters behind the politicians who we mistakenly believe are working for us.