Rep. Jim Himes Says No Adversary Hacked Vote Systems, Warns Trump May Falsely Blame Iran for a Loss

Connecticut Democrat Jim Himes, who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, told Margaret Brennan on CBS's Face the Nation on Sunday, September 27, that the U.S. intelligence community assessed no foreign adversary interfered with election infrastructure or vote counting. That's roughly 37 days before Election Day, November 3.

Himes said he released a public statement about that assessment for a specific reason: he expects President Trump to reject the midterm results if Republicans suffer what Himes called "a very substantial loss." Himes pointed to 2016, when Trump won the presidency but still claimed, without evidence, that millions of illegal votes cost him the popular vote.

"We know that he's going to deny its legitimacy," Himes said. "And I say we know it because he always does that when an election goes against him."

That's Himes' prediction, attributed to Himes. Trump has not, as of this reporting, made any claim about the 2026 midterms being rigged by a foreign power. Himes is describing what he expects, based on the president's past statements, not something that has occurred.

The specific scenario Himes is worried about

Himes told Brennan he thinks Trump could specifically claim Iran, Russia or China "took control of the voting machinery" in swing states like Florida or North Carolina. He said Trump previewed this kind of rhetoric in a July address. Himes said he's been assured by U.S. officials that he'll get real-time intelligence if Trump makes such a claim on election night, so he can immediately confirm or debunk it. He added a caveat: "Do I believe it? ... They only partly make me comfortable," citing what he described as a pattern in the administration of firing officials who contradict the president.

No named official has been fired for contradicting Trump on election security specifically, and Himes did not name one in the portion of the transcript reviewed.

A separate quote about Iran and gas prices

Separately, CBS News and Forever Delmarva both ran headlines quoting Himes saying "the Iranians now, in some sense, control what happens on Election Day." Alongside the fuller transcript, that line appears tied to a different point: Trump's rejection of Iran's latest proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and restart talks, and the gas-price fallout that could follow. Himes was discussing economic leverage tied to the Strait, not vote-counting machinery. The standalone headline, without that context, could easily be read as Himes accusing Iran of hacking the election itself.

The Iran backdrop VDH lays out

Daily Signal contributor Victor Davis Hanson, writing days after a 38-day U.S. military campaign against Iran, argued Tehran is negotiating from weakness, not strength. Hanson pointed to Iran's own complaints about the U.S. striking "dual-use" infrastructure, like power grids and bridges, as evidence of Iranian desperation, since Iran has historically targeted civilians in Israel with drones and missiles. Hanson also cited Trump's repeated claim that Iran has "never been calling for talks more eagerly." Hanson's framing and Himes' framing aren't in conflict. Both describe an Iranian government pushing to reopen the Strait and restart negotiations, with Trump so far saying no.

An unresolved aside

On the same segment, Himes referenced Louisiana Republican Sen. John Kennedy, saying Kennedy had broken with Trump "in pretty substantial ways" and worried he might "end up with a picture with a sombrero on his head," an apparent reference to some unspecified political risk. The full context of that remark wasn't included in the available transcript, and it remains unclear what specific issue Kennedy broke with Trump on.

What to actually watch for

Himes' warning is speculative by his own admission, a prediction about what Trump might say if Republicans lose on November 3, not a report of something that has happened. The genuine, checkable question is whether Trump or his administration makes any specific, evidence-free claim about foreign control of vote machinery on or after Election Day, and whether the real-time intelligence briefings Himes says he was promised actually materialize. Voters concerned about election security more broadly, mail-ballot procedures, signature verification, and late counting remain a separate and legitimate issue from the foreign-interference scenario Himes described, and nothing in this reporting suggests those two concerns should be treated as the same thing.