Senator McCormick Responds! TWICE!!

Let me clarify - I got the same email response twice.  One about 2 minutes after the other.

So it's just one response, sent twice.

Just to clarify. 

He starts:

Thank you for sharing your concerns regarding the United States military strikes on Iran and the ongoing conflict in the region. Your feedback is essential as we work together to shape policies that benefit Pennsylvania and our country, and I recognize that many Pennsylvanians hold strong and differing views on this issue. 

Ok, so it's about Iran. 

I've already asked the senator about Iranian school destroyed by a US Tomahawk cruise missile and here is his response. 

And here's how he characterizes our current situation in Iran:

After giving the Iranian regime until off ramps through peace negotiations, on February 28, 2026, the United States, in coordination with Israel, conducted a series of precision military strikes targeting elements of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, military assets, and senior regime leadership. These strikes resulted in the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several senior IRGC officials. The Administration has stated that these operations were conducted in response to Iran’s continued advancement of its nuclear and missile programs and its longstanding support for terrorist proxy forces that threaten the United States, Israel, and partners throughout the Middle East.

My heart goes out to the families of the American servicemembers who have lost their lives. Their courage and sacrifice in defense of our nation will never be forgotten, and we must remain steadfast in supporting those who serve in uniform.

Of course this is the case. However let's remember that more than 100 children were killed by a US Tomahawk missile. 

[As I was writing this blogpost, I received from the senator's office a response to that bombing - so we'll note that and move on. I'll address this latest letter letter.]

The senator continued: 

I believe the President acted within his constitutional authority, consistent with the War Powers Resolution of 1973, and following precedents set by administrations of both parties. The President has a responsibility to protect American national security interests, defend our allies, and respond to direct threats when necessary. Members of Congress were briefed in advance of these operations as well as after they commenced, in compliance with US law, and I expect the Administration to continue providing regular updates so Congress can fulfill its oversight responsibilities.

Let's put some context into the whole "Members of Congress were briefed..." part as it requires a lot of context.

From Time: 

The White House said that the so-called Gang of Eight, the bipartisan group of top House and Senate leaders and intelligence committee chairs who are briefed on the nation’s most sensitive security matters, were notified by Secretary of State Marco Rubio shortly before the strikes began. Administration officials had also briefed congressional leadership and intelligence committee heads earlier in the week on escalating tensions with Iran. But those notifications fell short of formal authorization from Congress, which the Constitution assigns the power to declare war under Article 1.

And: 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer added in a statement that the Trump Administration had not provided “critical details about the scope and immediacy of the threat,” urging Congress to reconvene quickly to reassert its constitutional role.

Many rank-and-file lawmakers from both parties echoed that message and told TIME this week that they had received little information about the Administration’s objectives or legal rationale before the strikes were carried out, reinforcing complaints that Congress was again being asked to respond to military action after the fact rather than debate it beforehand.

So if, when the senator wrote "Members of Congress were briefed in advance..." you thought (as I suppose the senator wanted you to think) that all members of Congress were fully briefed, you'd be wrong.

Imagine how would it have looked had Pennsylvania Senator Dave McCormick instead written:

Only some members of Congress were briefed but with incomplete information. 

Which one is closer to the truth?  And which one did my senator go with ?

See my point? 

Then there's this: 

I support President Trump’s efforts to hold Iran accountable, eliminate the growing threat it poses, and commend the close coordination with Israel and regional partners. The Iranian regime has the blood of Americans, our allies, and its own people on its hands. For decades, the ayatollahs have threatened our destruction and funded global terror. In my view, these strikes represent a necessary response to a regime that has continued to advance its nuclear ambitions and support violent proxy forces. President Trump’s maximum pressure campaign is hitting hard and the regime is crumbling: its economy is in ruins, its military decimated, and its people are rising up. The United States and our allies must continue to squeeze.

There is no doubt about the crimes committed by the Iranian regime (on its own people, on others). They are not guiltless.  But this does not excuse any misdeeds by the United States.

For example, I asked both Pennsylvania Senators about Trump's threatened war crimes and have yet to receive a response. Is the threat of wiping out a whole civilization just simply a "maximum pressure campaign" as the senator characterizes it? 

But isn't genocide a war crime, Senator? That's what he threatened. 

You never seem to answer that question, sir.  Why not?

The letter:

 

Reaching Out To Pennsylvania Senators (Again)

This time, it's about this:

The New York Times points out:

Under the Geneva Conventions, striking power plants and bridges that are used primarily by civilians is off limits; they are not considered military targets. Administration officials are already beginning to make the argument that hitting them would not be a war crime because they are also crucial to the missile and nuclear programs. But that loophole could apply to almost any piece of civilian infrastructure, even water supplies.

The Protocol I, Article 54 (of the Geneva Convention) states:

It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance value to the civilian population or to the adverse Party, whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any other motive.\

So let me ask a straightforward question, Senator.

Do you think what President Donald Trump threatened constitutes a war crime?

If so, why?

If not, why not? 

Contact Senator Dave McCormick

Contact Senator John Fetterman 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Senator McCormick Responds!

Yes, I got an email response from Pennsylvania Senator Dave McCormick.

I'm just unsure as to what he's responding.

Let's take a look at what he wrote (full image of his text will be posted at the bottom of this page).

After a few paragraphs of introduction, the senator wrote:

At the Pentagon, Secretary Hegseth has prioritized restoring the warrior ethos, rebuilding our military, and reestablishing deterrence. I share these goals and intend to do my part as a U.S. Senator to further them.

Our military faces its most precarious moment since the Cold War. The United States and our unmatched network of allies and partners are confronting a new axis of authoritarian aggressors. It is critical to shift our focus away from previously proposed inflation-adjusting budget cuts, DEI initiatives, and climate change programs, and instead prioritize lethality and deterrence in the next generation of warfare. Our adversaries have a clear plan to reshape the U.S.-led international order and are rapidly advancing critical military technologies. Our response must be equally focused and resolute.  

Now, let's go see to what this is a response. 

There's this letter from December 8, 2025, wherein I asked:

I'll point out again that you took an oath when you became Senator to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic" and, as you know, that's basically the same oath all officers in the United States Army take.

I'll make this week's questions simple.

Did Secretary Hegseth (or anyone under his command) commit war crimes by ordering the destruction of any of those alleged cartel boats in the Caribbean? This would include the story as reported in the media of the killing the two people clinging to the already destroyed boat.

That seems a little both a little too long ago (almost 4 months!) and a bit too specific for a general defense of Hegseth response.

Maybe it's this from March 15, 2026 (only 20 days ago), wherein I asked: 

In a discussion about Trump's war on Iran, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said (among many other things) this:

With every passing hour, we know and we know [Iran knows], that the military capabilities of their evil regime are crumbling. They can barely communicate, let alone coordinate; they're confused and we know it.

Our response? We will keep pressing. We will keep pushing, keep advancing, no quarter, no mercy for our enemies. 

It's that "no quarter" that's troubling. 

And I go on to point out the potential war crime that might be threatening.

That seems closer.

SecDef/War Hegseth is mentioned more or less in passing in this blogpost from March 12, 2026. That blogpost was more about a letter signed by most of the Democrats in the Senate (though not Senator Fetterman) demanding an investigation into destruction of a elementary school in Iran by a US Tomahawk missile.

So it's probably not that one, either.  But it's probably the one in the middle.

So think of that - when asked about Hegseth's threatened possible war crimes, Pennsylvania Senator Dave McCormick defends him by pointing out how he (Hegseth) "has prioritized restoring the warrior ethos."

Adding:

I share these goals and intend to do my part as a U.S. Senator to further them.

And:

It is critical to...prioritize lethality and deterrence in the next generation of warfare.

But not adherence to the Constitution or international law, apparently. 

BTW, this would also apply to either of the other two examples.  Ask about the destruction (without due process) in international waters of boats by Hegseth's DoD/W?  

He's "prioritized restoring the warrior ethos" and I support him. - Dave McCormick.

Ask about the killing of school children by Hegseth's DoD/W?

He's "prioritized restoring the warrior ethos" and I support him. - Dave McCormick.

Thanks, Dave.  Thanks for letting us know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This Weekend, In Case You Missed it.

The lyrics:

Through the winter's ice and cold, down Nicollet Avenue
A city aflame fought fire and ice 'neath an occupier's boots
King Trump's private army from the DHS, guns belted to their coats
Came to Minneapolis to enforce the law or so their story goes

Against smoke and rubber bullets, in the dawn's early light
Citizens stood for justice, their voices ringing through the night
And there were bloody footprints where mercy should have stood
And two dead left to die on snow-filled streets, Alex Pretti and Renee Good

Oh our Minneapolis, I hear your voice singing through the bloody mist
We'll take our stand for this land and the stranger in our midst
Here in our home they killed and roamed in the winter of '26
We'll remember the names of those who died on the streets of Minneapolis

Trump's federal thugs beat up on his face and his chest
Then we heard the gunshots and Alex Pretti lay in the snow dead
Their claim was self-defense, sir, just don't believe your eyes
It's our blood and bones and these whistles and phones against Miller and Noem's dirty lies

Oh our Minneapolis, I hear your voice crying through the bloody mist
We'll remember the names of those who died on the streets of Minneapolis

Now they say they're here to uphold the law but they trample on our rights
If your skin is black or brown my friend you can be questioned or deported on sight
In our chants of "ICE out now!" our city's heart and soul persists
Through broken glass and bloody tears on the streets of Minneapolis

Oh our Minneapolis, I hear your voice singing through the bloody mist
Here in our home they killed and roamed in the winter of '26
We'll take our stand for this land and the stranger in our midst
We'll remember the names of those who died on the streets of Minneapolis
We'll remember the names of those who died on the streets of Minneapolis 

Another Question For Senator Dave McCormick

Today, MAGA-Republican President Donald J Trump posted this on Truth Social:

 (Note that this is after dropping untold tons of bombs onto Iran.)

Time will tell if Iran has, indeed, been dealt a death blow but for the sake of this discussion, let's assume that The Donald is correct - I am sure he certainly believes that he is. So let's go with that.

Now he's declared his political opponents to be the next great enemy to the United States.

Do you, Senator McCormick, agree with Donald Trump on this?  A simple yes or no will suffice.

You once wrote to me:

I also believe that we must all work to lower the temperature of our public discourse. 

Adding that "inflammatory rhetoric" puts others at risk. In that example you were discussing law enforcement officials. I am wondering if you'll be denouncing Donald Trump's "inflammatory rhetoric" regarding the Democratic Party any time soon.

In that same email you wrote:

While strong disagreements are a part of our democratic system and should be debated vigorously...

It seems that the leader of your party doesn't hold that same position when it comes to the opposing political party.

He just bombed Iran for no obvious reason (indeed the reasons keep shifting). Will you agree that declaring the Democratic Party as the next great enemy of America to be "inflammatory rhetoric"?

Donald Trump Is A Wanker

Text (mostly from Psalm 10, or so I am told):

In his arrogance the wicked man hunts down the weak
who are caught in the schemes he thinks up.
For the sinner boasts of the desires of his soul
and the wicked blesses himself.
His mouth is full of foul language and bitterness and deceit,
under his tongue are mischief and pain.
He sits waiting to ambush with his wealth in secret
to murder the innocent.
His eyes watch in secret for the poor,
he lurks in cover, like a lion in his thicket.
He lurks to catch the poor,
to catch the poor and drag him in his net.
Trapped, the victim is crushed and collapses
as soon as he has him in his might.
For he says to himself:
"God has forgotten,
he turns away his face so that he never will see." 

The last line translates to:

Donald Trump is in the Epstein files.

Donald Trump is a wanker.

Reaching Out (Again) To Pennsylvania's Senators

So far nothing from this post.

Let's reach out again.

This time about this.

In a discussion about Trump's war on Iran, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said (among many other things) this:

With every passing hour, we know and we know [Iran knows], that the military capabilities of their evil regime are crumbling. They can barely communicate, let alone coordinate; they're confused and we know it.

Our response? We will keep pressing. We will keep pushing, keep advancing, no quarter, no mercy for our enemies. 

It's that "no quarter" that's troubling. 

In 1909, the US Senate ratified the Hague Conventions.  Article 23 of those conventions reads (in part): 

In addition to the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially forbidden...

To declare that no quarter will be given;

As this has been ratified, it's the law. The Contitution says so:

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; 

And what exactly does "no quarter" mean?

The International Committee of the Red Cross defines it this way:

This term is used in such expressions as “to give no quarter” or “cry quarter”; in regard to hostilities by land, sea or air, denial of quarter means refusing to spare the life of anybody, even of persons manifestly unable to defend themselves or who clearly express their intention to surrender. 

International humanitarian law prohibits the use of this procedure, that is, ordering that there shall be no survivors, threatening the adversary therewith, or conducting hostilities on this basis. 

And that's clearly what Secretary Hegseth did. 

Senators, your august legislative body ratified that treaty more than a century ago. And it's been the supreme law of the land ever since.

Any comment on Secretary Hegseth's threatened war crime?

Reaching Out To Pennylvania's Senators

About this:

The Feb. 28 strike on the Shajarah Tayyebeh elementary school building was the result of a targeting mistake by the U.S. military, which was conducting strikes on an adjacent Iranian base of which the school building was formerly a part, the preliminary investigation found. Officers at U.S. Central Command created the target coordinates for the strike using outdated data provided by the Defense Intelligence Agency, people briefed on the investigation said.

Officials emphasized that the findings are preliminary and that there are important unanswered questions about why the outdated information had not been double checked.

And:

Striking a school full of children is sure to be recorded as one of the most devastating single military errors in recent decades. Iranian officials have said the death toll was at least 175 people, most of them children.

But didn't President Trump, early on, raise the possibility that the Iranians did this themselves?

Yes, he did.

On the other hand:

U.S. Senator Dave McCormick (R-Pa.) says he supports President Donald Trump’s decision to attack Iran, saying Iran is the “most significant state sponsor of terror in the world,” which has killed thousands of Americans.

And on the other, larger, balder, more tattooed hand: 

Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania said Wednesday he believes the U.S.-Israel war with Iran has been "effective" and is moving toward an "appropriate outcome." 

"I think, overall, what's accomplished is remarkable," Fetterman told CBS News chief White House correspondent Major Garrett in an interview Wednesday.

Does that include killing 175 people at a school - most of them children? 

And let's not forget:

An effort to constrain President Donald Trump’s power to continue the war in Iran failed Wednesday in the U.S. Senate.

U.S. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., joined U.S. Sen. Dave McCormick, R-Pa., and other Republicans in voting against advancing the war powers resolution, allowing the conflict to continue. 

Yay. Bipartisanship.

And then there's this:

A group of 46 mostly Democratic senators on Wednesday sent a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth seeking answers on the bombing of a school in Iran.

An Iranian school for girls near a naval base in Minab was hit on Feb. 28 in the first wave of U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran. More than 100 children were killed in the strike, which U.S. officials say they are investigating. 

And:

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), who has been largely supportive of the operation against Iran, did not sign the letter.

Of course not.

Maybe we can get a comment out of our pair of Pennsylvania Senate bipartisans on how, during Donald Trump's war on Iran, a school filled with school children was demolished by a US Tomahawk missile.

Have at it.

Contact Senator Fetterman.

Contact Senator McCormick.

This Happened To Sundas Naqvi, US Citizen - Born In Illinois

Let's start here first:

No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

That's the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution. It applies to everyone. 

And yet, it didn't apply to this US Citizen - born in Evanston, Illinois.

From WGN in Chicago: 

Outside the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in suburban Broadview on Sunday, Sarah Afzal spoke on behalf of her 28-year-old sister, Sundas Naqvi, who goes by Sunny.

Elected officials, family members and Sunny’s attorney stood alongside her, sharing their accounts of what they say happened after Sunny returned to Chicago.

Afzal says Sunny, a U.S. citizen born in Evanston, was detained by U.S. Customs and Border Patrol at Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport while returning from Turkey on Thursday.

“Detained with no cause. All she was told was that there was curious travel history,” said Cook County Commissioner Kevin Morrison.

US Citizen, detained with no cause. 

But wait. There's more.

Family members say that after more than a day of detention at O’Hare, Sunny’s phone signal was tracked to the ICE facility in Broadview. That led to a protest outside the facility, where family members, community activists and elected officials gathered demanding answers.

But the family says federal authorities insisted Sunny was not there, despite her phone’s location.

Hours later, around 2 a.m. Saturday, they say her phone turned back on and pinged from an ICE facility in Wisconsin. Once again, her family says federal authorities there denied she was being held.

“We know she was there because it kept showing her location right in the middle of the facility, and they were like, ‘We don’t know what to tell you,'” Afzal said. “Then we got a phone call while standing in the place.”

It was Sunny on the other end of the line. Afzal says Sunny told her she had been released and walked from the ICE facility to a nearby gas station around 5 a.m.

From there, Afzal says a stranger offered Sunny a ride and took her to a hotel, where her family was finally able to reunite with her.

Wait. What? 

How is any of this OK? 

 

 

As Expected, Sen Fetterman [Fill In The Blank]

From WHYY:

An effort to constrain President Donald Trump’s power to continue the war in Iran failed Wednesday in the U.S. Senate.

U.S. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., joined U.S. Sen. Dave McCormick, R-Pa., and other Republicans in voting against advancing the war powers resolution, allowing the conflict to continue. 

Best buds. 

Some background on Fetterman's "reasoning":

Every member in the U.S. Senate agrees we cannot allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon.

I’m baffled why so many are unwilling to support the only action to achieve that.

Empty sloganeering vs. commitment to global security — which is it?

— U.S. Senator John Fetterman (@SenFettermanPA) March 2, 2026

But what about this, Senator?

From a White House statement dated June 25, 2025 (posted with a headline that reads):

Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Have Been Obliterated — and Suggestions Otherwise are Fake News

Donald Trump said:

Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term!

So was it or wasn't it obliterated less than one year ago, Senator? 

Let me remind you, Senator, of something that happened during the conflict that you're supporting.

At least 175 people, most of them likely children, were killed in a strike on a girls’ elementary school in southern Iran on Saturday, health officials and Iranian state media said.

And:

Several videos and images verified by The New York Times showed that at least half of the two-story school was destroyed in the explosion. Emergency workers with the Red Crescent could be seen alongside families desperately combing through the rubble, which was littered with schoolbooks and book bags covered in blood and ashes. Portions of the building jutted out from the rubble, with bits of colorful murals visible on what were once the walls of the school. Desks were piled with debris.

Donald J Trump's war - and now yours. 

This is the Trump train you're on now, Senator:

Intentionally attacking a school, hospital or other civilian structure is a war crime, and indiscriminate strikes also violate the law. Even if schools are used for military purposes, the law requires armed parties to avoid or minimize harm to civilians and civilian infrastructure, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Any comment, Senator?  Anyone else, feel free to send this to Senator John Fetterman.

I am pretty sure a group of your constituents will be at your office in Pittsburgh tomorrow. Maybe you want to justify the slaughter of 175 schoolgirls to them?

 

 

 

Another Question for Sen McCormick

While the rest of the world is focused on Iran, I wanted to run this one by Pennsylvania Senator Dave McCormick.

It's about this:

Watch the whole thing, if you can.

And now we turn to Dave. 

On a number of topics (most notably, on the killings of Renee Goode and Alex Pretti), Sen McCormick has warned against "irresponsible rhetoric" leading to violence.

But he's very careful not to point in any one political direction. Readers can read into that what they wish - both in what how he avoids specificity and how I described it.

On the other hand, here's a few examples from last night, posted by CBS:

Our reporting found hundreds of threats were left on judges voicemails. This one after a judge ruled the president had violated the First Amendment:

Recording of threat: I hope your whole family and everybody you love is raped in front of you and has their heads cut off.

That president being Donald J Trump, of course.

And before anyone "both sides" this:

Judge Jones: The national rhetoric from both sides has probably gotten worse over time. However I would not concede that the Democratic party or or that Democratic office holders have conducted themselves in any way that's similar to what this is administration is doing with respect to the federal judiciary. There's simply no evidence of that.

Judge Jones (a retired federal judge from Pennsylvania and a George W. Bush appointee) also said: 

In very plain English: if we're not careful we're gonna get a judge killed. It's just that stark.

So if Senator McCormick was sitting across from me right now, I'd ask him, plainly and starkly, if he'll denounce the irresponsible rhetoric coming out of the White House, rhetoric that is an obvious threat to the nation's judicial system.

What say you, Senator?

I'll be contacting the Senator's office with this in a minute or two. 

If you feel so compelled, perhaps you can, too.

Watch This

I found this on FB.

Science

We'll start with the anti-science from RFK Jr (as reported by the Beeb): 

The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) plans to cancel $500m (£376m) in funding for mRNA vaccines being developed to counter viruses that cause diseases such as the flu and Covid-19.

That will impact 22 projects being led by major pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer and Moderna, for vaccines against bird flu and other viruses, HHS said.

Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, a vaccine sceptic, announced he was pulling the funding over claims that "mRNA technology poses more risks than benefits for these respiratory viruses".

This was published August 5, 2025. 

And now the science from a few months later (as published by JAMA): 

In this national cohort study of 28 million individuals, the results found no increased risk of 4-year all-cause mortality in individuals aged 18 to 59 years vaccinated against COVID-19, further supporting the safety of the mRNA vaccines that are widely used worldwide.

Specifically, the study was to answer this question:

Are COVID-19 mRNA vaccines associated with the long-term risk of all-cause mortality?

So it seems that science has an answer and, simply put, that answer is "No."   

Science. 

 

ICE Mistreats Women

Pennsylvania Senator Dave McCormick is on the record regarding ICE, saying:

I support ICE officers and other federal law enforcement personnel who risk their lives daily to protect our communities and uphold the rule of law.   

I'm wondering if this "devoted husband and father of six bright young women" is fully aware of what ICE officers are doing to some women in this country - particularly in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

From The Minneapolis Star Tribune: 

The young Muslim woman was shackled at the ankles. For 24 hours, she was locked inside a bathroom with three men at the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building, she said. They were given no bedding or pillows. Meals consisted of one sandwich a day.

The sink faucet did not work, but the single toilet did. When the men pulled down their pants to use it, the woman hid her face.

For context, this unnamed woman is a legal refugee waiting on a green card.

There's more:

After the young Muslim woman spent nearly 24 hours locked in the bathroom with the three men, agents moved her to a different locked bathroom in the building’s basement, she said.

When she had her period, agents told her to use toilet paper. When she felt dizzy and vomited twice, agents did not grant her request for medical care. When they gave her a sandwich, she didn’t eat it, fearing it contained pork.

And then after all that, this is what happened:

On the fifth day, agents drove her and two other recently released detainees to a light-rail station near Whipple. They took off her handcuffs and told her to call an Uber, even though she didn’t have a phone. She borrowed one from another detainee.

As they released her into the cold, she recalls their simple words: “You are good to go.”

The Star Tribune also reports about two other women:

The lead plaintiff in an ACLU lawsuit said she was knocked into a snowbank by ICE in December while observing ICE arrests from a sidewalk in her neighborhood. The woman, Susan Tincher, a longtime resident of Minneapolis’ Near North neighborhood, was detained at Whipple, where she said federal agents cut off her wedding ring and parts of her clothes. She believes her treatment was retaliation for protesting ICE activity.

She was released without charges.

One detainee described to the Star Tribune seeing a Somali grandmother be denied access to her diabetes medication. A 24-year-old Somali American woman, a U.S. citizen born in Hennepin County who asked her name not be used, described agents ignoring requests for medical help from a fellow detainee with a broken finger.

The Fifth Amendment states:

No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

I'll note (again) that it does not say "no citizen." It says "no person." 

Senator McCormick, explain to me how any of this falls under an appropriate definition of "due process." 

And more importantly, Senator, how can you possibly be OK with any of this?

 

 

 

ICE OUT

From Huffpost:

 

Some text:

Italian street artist Laika has taken aim at the presence of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement staffers at the 2026 Milan Cortina Winter Olympics with a new artwork in the host country's capital, Rome.

The Cover-up Continues - More Details Emerge

I am not sure if yinz missed it (what with all the Epstein file deflection and all) but The New York Times reported something quite chilling this weekend.

After point out that hours after the shooting of Renee Good, FBI agents sought a warrant as part of a "standard civil rights investigation" into the shooting, the paper reported this:

But later that week, as F.B.I. agents equipped with a signed warrant prepared to document blood spatter and bullet holes in Ms. Good’s S.U.V., they received orders to stop, according to several people with knowledge of the events who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

The orders, they said, came from senior officials, including Kash Patel, the F.B.I. director, several of whom worried that pursuing a civil rights investigation — by using a warrant obtained on that basis — would contradict President Trump’s claim that Ms. Good “violently, willfully, and viciously ran over the ICE Officer” who fired at her as she drove her vehicle.

So after they obtained a signed warrant to document blood spatter and bullet holes (did you catch that?) they were told to stand down. After they'd already obtained the warrant.

Renee Good was killed on January 7, 2026 - which was a Wednesday. ABC has the time at about 9:37am (local time). So that's 10:37am Eastern. Trump set the limits for the investigation about 3:30pm (Eastern) that day with this. That's only about 5 hours later.

The Times noted that the investigators were told to stop "later that week."

Good to surmise that that's sometime before the following Monday, January 12. 

The Times also reported that, after investigators were ordered to stand down, DOJ  "officials presented alternative approaches" including:

• Getting a new warrant for the vehicle - as part of a criminal investigation into Renee Good and whether her killer was assaulted by her, and then
• Opening an investigation into Becca Good, Renee's partner, about their confrontation with ICE agents that day.

On the 10th, The Times reported:

The Trump administration blocked Minnesota officials from investigating the death of the woman shot on Wednesday by a federal agent, then quietly offered this explanation: Local investigators simply could not be trusted to conduct a fair inquiry.

The investigation into the killing of Renee Nicole Good, 37, federal officials said, would be the exclusive province of the F.B.I., which is overseen by a director, Kash Patel, who has described President Trump as an unerring boss, and even a king.

On January 13, Pennsylvania Senator Dave McCormick has emailed me that while he supports ICE he's also believed that the "tragic events in Minnesota are deeply concerning and warrant a full and transparent investigation to ensure the facts are clearly established and public confidence is maintained."

Considering what we've just learned, it's seems highly unlikely that there's a "full and transparent investigation" into Good's killing.

I'm wondering if Dave still thinks so. 

Feel free to contact Senator McCormick's office and ask him.

I know I will. 

 

Senator McCormick Responds!

He's responding (I am guessing) to this blog post from late January.

In that post, I reposted how The New York Times described the killing of Alex Pretti. At the bottom, I asked:

Have our two US Senators (Senator John Fetterman and Senator Dave McCormick) denounced the government's killing of Alex Pretti yet? 

Ask them if they will be making such a statement and if they won't, ask them why not. 

I sent the link to that blog post to both senators for their comments.

Nothing yet from Senator Fetterman.

This is how Senator McCormick responded:

As you know, on January 24, 2026, Mr. Pretti was fatally shot by U.S. federal agents during an immigration operation in Minneapolis. The incident is currently under investigation by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), a division of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). According to preliminary reports, two federal agents discharged their weapons, and both have been placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation. Additionally, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) opened a civil rights investigation into Pretti’s death.  
 
I stand with the ICE and Border Patrol officers who risk their lives daily to protect our communities and uphold the rule of law. Law enforcement officers face extraordinary challenges, which are often compounded by inflammatory rhetoric in this case by Minnesota’s elected officials that escalates tensions and endangers both officers and the public, as we have seen in the aftermath of the fatal shooting of Mr. Pretti. 
 
With regard to the Alex Pretti shooting, I have called for a full and transparent investigation into these tragic events to ensure facts are uncovered and made public. It is essential that these operations are conducted in a way that protects public safety and maintains trust and that we learn and get better from such tragic events. I also agree with the National Rifle Association (NRA) that simply exercising one’s Second Amendment rights does not in itself justify the shooting.  

Take a look at that second paragraph - how it's the "inflammatory rhetoric" that "escalates tensions and endangers" both the officers and the public.

But (as is obvious to anyone who watched the killing of Alex Pretti) that it's the ICE/DHS officers who have actually killed US citizens.  To divert any of the blame to "Minnesota's elected officials" is simply irresponsible.  

He's posted this before: 

As I have often said, I support the Border Patrol, ICE, and the critical work they do to enforce our laws. Irresponsible rhetoric and a lack of cooperation from Minnesota’s politicians are fueling a dangerous situation.

I also agree with the NRA and others — we need a full…

— Senator Dave McCormick (@SenMcCormickPA) January 25, 2026

But there are also issues with the investigation that the senator omits.

He states that the killing is "currently under investigation" by DHS (so in this instance DHS is investigating itself - a huge conflict of interest) and that "the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) [has] opened a civil rights investigation" as well.

And let's remember what the Trump administration has done to that division of DOJ:

Since President Trump was inaugurated, the Justice Department has driven out approximately 75% of attorneys from the Civil Rights Division. It’s also radically scaled back enforcement of the nation’s civil rights laws and constitutional protections.

 So, there's that...

The Senator's email to me:

 

In Case You Missed It

I saw this on FB.

It leads to this story at TribLive:

Harriett Flores, 38, said her husband took Lily outside and was warming up the car when he was approached by two Immigration and Custom Enforcement agents.

“The ICE agents came up to him, showed no warrant. They just shackled him,” Flores said through an interpreter. “They said he was getting arrested because he was illegal in the country.”

When she tried to ask questions, one of the agents told her to shut up because her daughter was present, Harriett Flores said.

A video Harriett Flores took of the incident shows, Jose, 47, being shuttled to an unmarked vehicle by the agents shortly after 10 a.m.

Some important context: 

Flores said her husband has no criminal record. A TribLive search of state and federal court databases showed no criminal record nor pending charges against Jose.

State Rep. Joe McAndrew, D-Penn Hills, said in a social media post Friday that Jose’s immigration status is legal. He called the incident an abduction.

Harriett Flores said she and Jose each have five-year work visas. Both are employed, making the visas valid. They also both have Real IDs, valid driver’s licenses and Social Security numbers.

And so on.

This is the social media post from State Rep McAndrew:

 Last time I checked, the Fourth Amendment: 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. 

And the Fifth Amendment:

No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. 

And the Fourteenth Amendment: 

...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. 

Are still the law of the land.

Perhaps our friends in ICE should read (can they read?) this posted at Congress.gov: 

ICE was established following the creation of DHS in 2003. The authority for ICE officers to arrest and detain aliens believed to have committed immigration violations derives primarily from 8 U.S.C. §§ 1226 and 1357.

Section 1226(a) provides that, upon issuance of an administrative warrant (otherwise known as an ICE warrant), an immigration officer may arrest and detain an alien pending a decision as to whether the alien is subject to removal. An ICE warrant is issued by certain immigration officials who have been authorized or delegated such authority and is exclusively for use by immigration officers who have successfully completed immigration law enforcement training. Unlike judicial warrants issued in criminal cases, ICE warrants do not require a detached and neutral magistrate; instead, ICE warrants require the officer to establish that "there is probable cause to believe" that the individual named in the warrant is subject to removal. 

What was the "probable cause to believe" that he was subject to removal? 

The man's skin tone and name are not enough. 

And Now, The Boss

Lyrics:

Through the winter's ice and cold
Down Nicollet Avenue
A city aflame fought fire and ice
'Neath an occupier's boots
King Trump's private army from the DHS
Guns belted to their coats
Came to Minneapolis to enforce the law
Or so their story goes

Against smoke and rubber bullets
In the dawn's early light
Citizens stood for justice
Their voices ringing through the night
And there were bloody footprints
Where mercy should have stood
And two dead, left to die on snow-filled streets
Alex Pretti and Renee Good

Oh, our Minneapolis, I hear your voice
Singing through the bloody mist
We'll take our stand for this land
And the stranger in our midst
Here in our home, they killed and roamed
In the winter of '26
We'll remember the names of those who died
On the streets of Minneapolis

 
Trump's federal thugs beat up on
His face and his chest
Then we heard the gunshots
And Alex Pretti lay in the snow dead
Their claim was self-defense, sir
Just don't believe your eyes
It's our blood and bones
And these whistles and phones
Against Miller and Noem's dirty lies

Oh, our Minneapolis, I hear your voice
Crying through the bloody mist
We'll remember the names of those who died
On the streets of Minneapolis

Now they say they're here to uphold the law
But they trample on our rights
If your skin is black or brown, my friend
You can be questioned or deported on sight
In our chants of "ICE out now"
Our city's heart and soul persists
Through broken glass and bloody tears
On the streets of Minneapolis

Oh, our Minneapolis, I hear your voice
Singing through the bloody mist
Here in our home, they killed and roamed
In the winter of '26
We'll take our stand for this land
And the stranger in our midst
We'll remember the names of those who died
On the streets of Minneapolis
We'll remember the names of those who died
On the streets of Minneapolis

ICE out (ICE out)
ICE out (ICE out)
ICE out (ICE out)

The names of those who died on the streets of Minneapolis:

 

Renee Good
Alex Pretti 

 

Alles Gute zum Geburtstag, Herr Mozart!

 

Note: Peter Schickele passed away in 2024.

What Colbert Said

 

On January 24, 2026, members of Donald Trump's ICE/DHS occupying force killed Alex Pretti, a US citizen, after disarming him.

The agents involved in the shooting have been transferred out of Minneapolis and are still working for ICE/DHS - moved out of the area for their safety. 

Watch How Trump's DHS Lies About Killing Alex Pretti - US Citizen

She's head of Trump's DHS.  If she didn't know the facts, she should not speak as if she did. If she did know the facts and yet said what she said, she's lying. 

BTW, while he's seemingly calling for a full investigation into the shooting, Pennsylvania Senator Dave McCormick points the blame elsewhere (he also does not even bother to mention Alex Pretti's name or the manner of his death):

As I have often said, I support the Border Patrol, ICE, and the critical work they do to enforce our laws. Irresponsible rhetoric and a lack of cooperation from Minnesota’s politicians are fueling a dangerous situation.

I also agree with the NRA and others — we need a full…

— Senator Dave McCormick (@SenMcCormickPA) January 25, 2026

Donald Trump's ICE/DHS shot and killed a US citizen - a man with a permit to carry a weapon in an open carry state and who had no criminal record. 

This Happened To Alex Pretti, A US Citizen With No Criminal Record

From The New York Times:

Videos on social media that were verified by The New York Times appear to contradict the Department of Homeland Security’s account of the fatal shooting of Alex Jeffrey Pretti, 37, by federal agents in Minneapolis on Saturday morning.

The Department of Homeland Security said the episode began after a man “approached US Border Patrol officers with a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun” and they tried to disarm him. The statement did not specify whether the gun was in the man’s hands or merely on his body.

Footage shows Mr. Pretti was clearly holding a phone, not a gun, before the agents took him to the ground and shot him. 

Specifically: 

A small group of protesters stands in the street, speaking to a federal agent as whistles sound. Mr. Pretti appears to be filming the scene with his phone and directing traffic.

An agent begins shoving the demonstrators, and squirts pepper spray at their faces.

At this moment, Mr. Pretti has both hands clearly visible. One is holding his phone, while he holds the other up to protect himself from pepper spray. He moves to help one of the protesters who was sprayed, as other agents approach and pull him from behind.

Several agents tussle with Mr. Pretti before bringing him to his knees. He appears to resist as the agents grab his legs, push down on his back and strike him repeatedly.

The footage shows an agent approaching with empty hands and grabbing at Mr. Pretti as the others hold him down.

About eight seconds after he is pinned, agents yell that he has a gun, indicating that they may not have known he was armed until he was on the ground.

The same agent who approached with empty hands pulls a gun from among the group that appears to match the profile of a firearm DHS said belonged to Mr. Pretti.

The agents appear to have him under their control, with his arms pinned near his head.

As the gun emerges from the melee, another agent aims his own firearm at Mr. Pretti’s back and appears to fire one shot at close range. He then appears to continue firing at Mr. Pretti, who collapses.

A third agent unholsters a weapon. Both agents appear to fire additional shots into Mr. Pretti as he lies motionless.

In total, at least 10 shots appear to have been fired within five seconds.

ICU nurse Alex Pretti, a US Citizen who had no criminal record was shot at least 10 times after he was disarmed and after he was beaten by Trump's ICE/DHS ground troops currently occupying a US city.

Have our two US Senators (Senator John Fetterman and Senator Dave McCormick) denounced the government's killing of Alex Pretti yet? 

Ask them if they will be making such a statement and if they won't, ask them why not. 

 

 

 

Senator McCormick Responds!

I think it's to this blog post.

I frame my criticism of recent ICE incidents in contrast to The Fourth Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. 

And I will continue to do so as the amendments are part of the constitution of the United States is the law of the land. 

In that blog post I referenced an incident where agents of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement "bashed open a door" without a warrant - in seeming violation of The Fourth Amendment.

After reminding US Senator Dave McCormick of his oath of office, I ask if The Fourth Amendment still applies.

And this is how he responded (image of the full email response at the end of this blogpost).

He wrote:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a component of the Department of Homeland Security, is responsible for enforcing the nation’s immigration laws. Within ICE, Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) identifies, arrests, and detains noncitizens who violate the Immigration and Nationality Act (P.L. 82-414). Under federal law (8 U.S.C. §§ 1226 and 1357), immigration officers have the authority to apprehend and detain individuals who are unlawfully present in the United States. 

And:

The federal government has a responsibility to enforce immigration laws. I support President Trump’s efforts to restore order at the southern border, uphold the rule of law, and protect American communities. This includes detaining and removing inadmissible individuals who pose a threat to public safety and national security. My office remains committed to ensuring that established standards and appropriate due process are upheld through careful oversight and ongoing engagement with DHS.

You'll note that there's no mention of The Fourth Amendment - a part of the constitution that the federal government also has a responsibility to respect. 

I was in the middle of writing this when I learned about this:

 

Ok, Senator - how does this fit into your office's efforts to ensure established standards and appropriate due process regarding ICE/DHS.

DHS posted this:

At 9:05 AM CT, as DHS law enforcement officers were conducting a targeted operation in Minneapolis against an illegal alien wanted for violent assault, an individual approached US Border Patrol officers with a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun, seen here.

The officers attempted to… pic.twitter.com/5Y50mYONGH

— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) January 24, 2026

Explain something to me, Senator. It's obvious from the video that the soon-to-be bulletted man was already on the ground and was in the midst of taking a taking a serious beating.  Hadn't the ICE-trained officers disarmed him by the time they were beating him?

Why kill him, then?

How much more of this do you have to see before you stand up for the people of the country and for the constitution and for the rule of law, Senator? 

The Fourth Amendment still applies, doesn't it?

We'll head back to The Fourth Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

And yet, this happened:  

Federal immigration agents bashed open a door and detained a U.S. citizen in his Minnesota home at gunpoint without a warrant, then led him out onto the streets in his underwear in subfreezing conditions, according to his family and videos reviewed by The Associated Press.

ChongLy “Scott” Thao told the AP that his daughter-in-law alerted him on Sunday afternoon that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were banging at the door of his residence in St. Paul. He told her not to open it. Masked agents then forced their way in and pointed guns at the family, yelling at them, Thao recalled.

“I was shaking,” he said. “They didn’t show any warrant; they just broke down the door.”

There's even an ICE memo to back this up:

Federal immigration officers are asserting sweeping power to forcibly enter people’s homes without a judge’s warrant, according to an internal Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo obtained by The Associated Press, marking a sharp reversal of longstanding guidance meant to respect constitutional limits on government searches.

The Fourth Amendment still applies, doesn't it?

Every Senator in the US Senate takes an oath that starts with this:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same...

In an email response to me, Senator Dave McCormick once wrote: 

I support ICE officers and other federal law enforcement personnel who risk their lives daily to protect our communities and uphold the rule of law. 

I am wondering if he still supports ICE in light of this assault on The Fourth Amendment. 

I suppose I'll have to go to his contact page and ask him.

I suggest you do, too, 

 

 

 

The World's Gone Wrong - Everybody Knows It

Truth - From Lawyer Oyer

Watch this.

The text.

It starts with this:

One of the most contradictory areas of U.S. policy this past year has been drug enforcement. I’ve put together a timeline — which I’ve also shared in video form on my socials — which I think will help to explain why many of us are so confused. Check it out.

January 20, 2025. Donald Trump signs an Executive Order designating drug cartels terrorist organizations, and declaring that “it is the policy of the United States to ensure the total elimination of [their] presence in the United States.”

Then goes through lots of contradictory stuff and then ends with this:

January 2026. Trump sends troops into Venezuela to capture their president, Nicolas Maduro, and try him in the United States on charges of drug trafficking. The charges against Maduro are almost identical to the ones that Trump pardoned Hernandez for.

So how can we reconcile this totally contradictory timeline? That’s exactly what we should be asking our elected officials. It’s not our job to make it make sense—it’s theirs. My focus in 2026 will be seeking accountability from those entrusted to run our country. I invite you to join me. You can be part of my accountability circle by subscribing to my channels, sharing this information, asking questions, and demanding answers. It’s what we deserve from our elected leaders.

Pass it on.