ICE’s Law & Order (Breaking the Law & Defying Court Orders)

Less than two weeks after Garrison Gibson checked in with immigration authorities, as he has been doing for years, masked federal agents broke down his front door with a battering ram and arrested him in front of his family. They had only an administrative warrant, not a judicial warrant, which is required in order to enter someone’s home without their permission. (An internal ICE memo exposed by whistleblowers asserts that agents do not need a judicial warrant to force their way into people’s homes.) 

A federal judge strongly disagreed, quickly ruled that agents had “violated the Fourth Amendment,” and ordered Gibson’s immediate release. 

Gibson’s illegal arrest was not an anomaly. Just since October, over 4,400 immigrant detentions have been ruled unlawful. (Hundreds of judges have made these rulings, not a handful of “activist” judges, despite DHS’s claims.) In one such ruling, a George W. Bush appointee writes, “It is appalling that the Government insists that this Court should redefine or completely disregard the current law as it is clearly written.” 

Forty-four hundred illegal detentions are not an understandable mistake. They’re evidence of a federal agency that is either ignorant of the law or uninterested in following it. 

I’ve set out to explain why people who believe in secure borders and want common sense immigration enforcement can and should oppose ICE as it exists today. Earlier this month, I wrote about The Worst of the Worst, and how the administration is dishonestly using that line to marshal support for its cruel and irrational treatment of immigrants, the vast majority of whom have never even been charged with a violent crime. This week, I’m going to highlight ICE’s unprecedented lawlessness. 

(As I delved into this issue, I realized there is far too much to fit into one article; it will have to be a two-parter. In this piece I’ll focus on the lawbreaking, and in the next I’ll cover the defiance of court orders.) 

As if the tidal wave of illegal arrests weren’t enough, even ICE’s legally appropriate detentions are far too often unlawful in other ways. The Constitution, as well as statutory law, require the government to provide for the basic human needs of people in its custody (clean water, sufficient food, clothing, shelter, medical care, safety). In addition, immigration detention is categorized as civil detention, not criminal, so conditions in immigration detention centers are supposed to be non-punitive. 

Yet reports are proliferating about the hellish conditions in detention centers around the country as their populations skyrocket. Not only reports, but lawsuits. The allegations are so troubling and so numerous that this issue could have been a separate article on its own. 

The largest ICE facility in California, referred to by detainees as “a torture chamber,” and “hell on earth,” is being sued for providing inadequate water and food and insufficient heat, “terrifyingly inadequate medical care,” failing to care properly for people with disabilities, violating detainees’ religious freedom rights, and depriving them of their right to access legal counsel. 

ICE’s Adelanto facility, also in California, is facing a lawsuit for similar inhumane conditions, as well as lack of basic sanitation and prolonged solitary confinement. At least two detainees have died while in the facility’s custody. 

Chicago’s Broadview processing facility faces a lawsuit and a laundry list of allegations: severe overcrowding, lack of beds, insufficient food, water, and toilets, no working showers, no hygiene supplies, not even soap or toothpaste. Water that tastes like sewage. A detainee using a garbage bag to clear a clogged toilet. It has taken a federal court order to force Broadview officials to allow clergy into the facility to give communion to detainees. 

Seamus Culleton, an Irish man with a valid work permit and no criminal record, married to an American citizen, missed his final green card appointment because he’d been detained in the country’s largest ICE facility, at Fort Bliss in El Paso. He has been locked up there for five months. He is begging to be released, saying that living in the detention center is “an absolute torture, psychological and physical torture.” He clarifies, “I’m not in fear of the other inmates. I’m afraid of the staff. They’re capable of anything.” 

Three detainees have died so far while in the center’s custody—in a period of 44 days. ICE claimed the second death was a suicide, but the El Paso medical examiner ruled it a homicide. Two detainees who witnessed his death say he died after he was handcuffed, tackled, and placed in a chokehold by guards until he lost consciousness. DHS is trying to deport the two witnesses. When a third man died 11 days later, ICE bypassed the El Paso ME, instead sending the body to an Army hospital, which will not release the autopsy to the public.

These are only a few of the nightmarish ICE facilities in operation right now around our country, violating the law and the Constitution day in and day out. 

ICE is doing its best to hide the inner workings of these facilities from the public and from Members of Congress—I’ll write more about that in the next piece. But what about the actions ICE is proud of? 

During Operation Midway Blitz in Chicago, DHS raided an apartment building they had repeatedly claimed was filled with Tren de Aragua gang members. They had cameras ready to capture the action: agents rappelling from Black Hawk helicopters, 300 of them swarming the building, guns drawn. They made a slick video which racked up over 6 million views. (Subsequently released documents prove their rationale for raiding the building was suspected illegal squatters, with no mention of the gang.) 

They forced open doors and dragged residents outside in their nightclothes, children screaming. US citizens—including children—were caught up in the raid, pulled from their homes in the middle of the night and zip-tied for hours before being released. 

What does Kristi Noem have to show for violating these people’s Fourth Amendment rights so brazenly? (And spending who knows how many taxpayer dollars?) 37 arrests. Supposedly, two Tren de Aragua members. A handful of deportations. But today, more than four months after the raid, DHS has provided no proof that the two men were gang members, and the government has filed zero criminal charges against anyone arrested during the raid. 

Rappelling from Black Hawks in the middle of the night to arrest squatters makes for better social media posts, but ICE isn’t above petty acts of lawbreaking, either. Sixteen year-old citizen, Arnoldo, was put in a chokehold and arrested along with his undocumented father. ICE confiscated Arnoldo’s phone and didn’t return it when they released him. Using Find My, he located the phone near an ICE detention facility—inside a vending machine for used electronics. 

They stole his phone and sold it. 

In an especially chilling example of infringing our First Amendment rights, in October a retiree in Philadelphia named Jon sent a brief (four sentences) and completely innocuous email to the lead prosecutor in a case he’d read about: DHS was trying to deport an Afghan man who was terrified the Taliban would kill him. Jon urged the prosecutor to “apply principles of common sense and decency.” Within hours, DHS had subpoenaed his Google account, and within weeks, two DHS agents showed up on his doorstep to question him. 

Jon is not alone: DHS has issued hundreds of these subpoenas. (Like the unconstitutional ICE warrant used to break into Garrison Gibson’s home, these are administrative subpoenas issued by DHS itself, not signed by any judge.)

In the United States of America, we have the freedom to email government lawyers and encourage them to use common sense and decency without the government then seizing our personal emails and sending federal agents to our homes to intimidate and harass us. Kristi Noem’s agencies are either ignorant of the First Amendment, or believe they have the authority to violate it.  

Habeas corpus is a legal concept dating back at least to the Magna Carta. In Latin it means “you should have the body,” and in simple terms, it gives a detained person the chance to challenge their detention in court. It prevents the government from disappearing people, and requires it to show good reason for detaining someone. It is one of our most foundational civil liberties, and in 1829, William Rawle wrote that it “repels the injustice of unconstitutional laws and despotic governments.”

In May, when Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was asked to define habeas corpus, she said, “Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the President has to be able to remove people from this country.”

The person in charge of ICE and CBP not only did not understand this fundamental civil liberty, she believed virtually the opposite of its true meaning. 

It’s no wonder the agencies under her direction have been running roughshod over the Constitution. 

Last week, David Bier of the Cato Institute (a libertarian think tank which advocates for individual liberty and limited government) testified at a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee hearing. “In less than a year, DHS has attacked the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 14th amendments to the US Constitution, the writ of habeas corpus, the independent judiciary, and much more,” he told Senators. “Rather than a law enforcer, DHS has become the biggest law breaker in America today.”

John Mitnick is a conservative attorney who served in the White House Counsel’s office under George W. Bush, General Counsel for DHS under Trump 1.0 (he was nominated by Trump for the position), and also worked for the conservative Heritage Foundation. He helped create the brand-new agency of DHS in the early 2000s. 

Last month, on January 24, he had this to say:

This is not some wild-eyed liberal activist, friends. This is a highly accomplished conservative who has served under multiple Republican Presidents and who helped create DHS. He says it is lawless, fascist, and cruel. You may not want to listen to Democrats in Congress, but will you listen to him?

I’ve already written about the many ways in which this President believes he is above the law—including the time he publicly advocated terminating the Constitution. This applies when it comes to his administration’s immigration enforcement as well. 

In May, in an interview about Kilmar Abrego-Garcia, who was unlawfully deported, the reporter asked Trump directly: “Don’t you need to uphold the Constitution of the United States as President?”

There is a simple and obvious answer to this question. Just one.

Trump’s answer? “I don’t know.”

What can we do? 

Democrats succeeded in shutting down DHS when Congress failed to reach an agreement on funding the agency by Friday’s deadline. But ICE and CBP will continue to operate essentially as before, funded by the One Big Beautiful Bill. Keep up the pressure on Congress not to fund DHS (or to defund ICE entirely) until they’ve achieved some real reforms and strictly limited Kristi Noem’s ability to keep violating the Bill of Rights. 

The Worst of the Worst

The constant refrain of this administration, beginning during the campaign and continuing to the present day, has been that they are getting rid of “the worst of the worst.” (DHS has a page of their website devoted to showcasing “The Worst of the Worst” criminal aliens they’ve apprehended.) We rarely hear a public statement from ICE or DHS without being reminded that they are taking rapists, murderers, and gang members off our streets. 

This is one goal that nearly all Americans support: 89% of registered voters say illegally present people who commit violent crimes should be deported. This isn’t controversial; it’s common sense. It was smart for Trump to run on this, and it’s smart that his administration continues to claim that’s what it’s doing. 

To those whose information sources tend to favor this administration, it may seem that only far-left agitators and paid protestors would oppose the good work of ICE. After all, who besides extremists and open-borders activists could be against removing the worst of the worst from our communities?

If that were all that was happening, I wouldn’t be writing this, Minneapolis wouldn’t be a war zone, and several people would still be alive today. 

I want to show folks from my former party and my former way of thinking about immigration enforcement why people of good faith—people who believe in secure borders and common sense immigration enforcement—can and should oppose ICE as it exists today. There are too many angles to cover to convey the full scope of this reasoning in just one article; it will have to be a series. I hope you will stick with me and find it useful. 

First up: “The Worst of the Worst.”  

While the overwhelming majority of Americans want violent criminal aliens removed, when it comes to immigrants who’ve lived here for many years without committing any crimes, less than one in four Americans say they should be deported. It’s a deeply unpopular policy—which is why the administration keeps touting its removal of “the worst of the worst,” even though they make up a tiny percentage of the deportations it’s conducting. 

By the end of November last year, over 73% of detentions had been of immigrants with no criminal convictions whatsoever. ICE’s own data shows that about 5% of their detainees have been convicted of violent crimes. 

So, who are they detaining and deporting? I’m glad you asked. Here are just a tiny fraction: 

Maher Tarabishi came to the US in 1994. He was allowed to remain because he was the primary caregiver for his son, a US citizen, with a debilitating muscle disease. He checked in regularly with ICE as required, and has no criminal record. But he was handcuffed and detained at one of his routine check-ins. While he was in ICE custody, his son’s condition rapidly worsened, and after three months, he died. The family pleaded for Maher to be allowed to attend his son’s funeral. ICE’s decision came “from higher up”: No. 

Vilma Palacios was brought to the US at age six. She grew up in Louisiana and graduated college with a nursing degree. She had a pending asylum case, and checked in regularly with authorities. In June, after getting her car inspected for a tag renewal, she was pulled over, handcuffed, and put in a detention center for six months before she was shackled and deported to Honduras, a country she has not seen since she was six years old. 

Viktoriia Bulavina came to the US legally in 2022 from Ukraine. Her legal status has never expired at any point since, and she married a US citizen. They were at their final green card appointment when federal agents handcuffed her and led her away. Her husband did not know where she was for days. 

While in ICE custody, she was forced, along with other female detainees, to use an open toilet in view of the guards, were given expired food, had to huddle together for warmth, and were shackled whenever they had to be moved. 

(ICE released her after three days with no explanation.)

Melissa Tran arrived in the US at age 11, legally, on a greed card. She was a lawful permanent resident. At age 18, she stole some checks from her employer. She pleaded guilty. Over the next 20+ years, she married, had four children, started a nail salon, and checked in regularly with immigration authorities.  

Under Trump 2.0, ICE arrested her, kept her in detention for five months—where the stress caused her hair to grey and she lost 30 pounds—until a judge ordered them to release her, then three weeks later they deported her to Vietnam because of her decades-old conviction. She was shackled for the entire 48 hours it took to get to Vietnam. She is still there, thousands of miles from her husband and children. 

In a statement about Melissa, DHS said, “President Trump and Secretary Noem’s message is clear: criminal illegal aliens are not welcome in the United States.”

Donna Hughes Brown, an Irish citizen who has lived in America legally since she was 11 years old, is married to a combat veteran—and that is likely the only reason she escaped deportation at age 59. Over ten years ago, she wrote two bad checks, totaling less than $60. For these heinous crimes, ICE detained her when she returned from a trip to Ireland in July. They kept her in detention for 143 days, until her husband testified at a hearing in DC, 18 US Senators signed a letter of support, and a judge ruled she was not a threat to her community. 

Subu Vedam came to the US from India at 9 months of age, was a legal permanent resident, and had his citizenship application accepted before he was arrested and charged with the murder of his friend. Subu spent over 40 years in prison for a crime he did not commit, until new evidence exonerated him. As soon as he was released after this monumental injustice, ICE arrested him with the intention of deporting him, because of a drug offense from 1984. (Two courts have since halted his deportation.)

Sergio Garcia, father to four US citizens and beloved owner of a restaurant in Waco that was a favorite of the Bushes, had built a life in the US for 36 years. He had no criminal record, but a decades-old deportation order because of an illegal re-entry, which ICE had never tried to enforce until 2025. That’s when agents arrested him, and within 24 hours had deported him across the border to Mexico. 

Barbara Gomes Marques went with her US citizen husband, Tucker May, for her scheduled green card hearing in Los Angeles in 2025. She thought she was taking another step toward citizenship, but instead she was arrested by Customs and Border Protection agents. 

“She put so much effort into looking nice, because she was excited to take a step toward becoming an American,” Tucker said, “and I had to go home, and I had to put away the shoes that they took off her feet and gave to me in a plastic bag.”

He says they told Barbara she was being arrested for missing a court date in 2019, something neither of them had any idea about. 

“They put her in hand shackles and in leg shackles, and around the waist as well, like she’s some hardened criminal. She had tears streaming down her face, and she told me one of the ICE agents pulled out his cell phone, laughing, and took a selfie,” Tucker said. 

In September, ICE obtained a warrant for a Hyundai plant which named four (4) Mexican nationals as its target. ICE then raided the plant with 400 agents. Because the agents did not understand the law regarding B-1 visas and work authorization (and because of Stephen Miller’s 3000-arrests-per-day quota), they decided to arrest 330 South Korean workers. 

The Koreans were kept imprisoned for eight days in a detention facility that “failed to meet any of the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.” Their hands were bound to their waists, forcing them to bend over and lick water when they were thirsty. Their arrest and subsequent treatment caused an international incident and enraged our South Korean allies.

Jemmy Rosa, a legal resident and mother of three little girls, was arrested when she and her family came through customs on their way back from vacation in Mexico. A 22-year-old conviction for marijuana possession (which is no longer a crime in her state of Massachusetts) was enough reason for ICE to detain her. They kept her in custody for ten chaotic days, transferring her between multiple detention facilities—including one for men only. She has diabetes and asthma and did not receive proper medical care. She had to be hospitalized twice. 

Her husband, finally reaching a CBP official, asked about his wife’s medical care. “He said, ‘We’ll notify next of kin if she dies.’ And at that moment, I knew that I was no longer dealing with humans,” her husband says.

When they released Jemmy, they left her in the street, in the rain, with no phone, 30 miles from home.

Isidro Perez, a Cuban national who had lived for nearly 60 years in the United States, was detained in 2025 because of a marijuana conviction from 1984. Isidro had a weak heart, but he was not given the medication he requested, he was kept in a place he called “the fridge,” and had to sleep on the floor. He was 75 years old. He died in ICE custody. 

Donna Kashanian has been in the US for nearly 50 years. She is the wife and mother of US citizens, has no criminal history, and is a volunteer for Habitat for Humanity and her local school district. While her request for asylum was not granted, she was permitted to stay in the country as long as she continued to check in regularly with immigration authorities, which she has done without fail—even when she was displaced by Hurricane Katrina. 

She was only released from detention, and is only still in the country, because of the intervention of her Congressman, Steve Scalise (R). Not everyone is so fortunate.  

Last month, a Venezuelan couple took their 7-year-old daughter to the emergency room for a bad nosebleed. She never saw a doctor because federal agents surrounded them in the parking lot, handcuffing and detaining them before shipping them off to a Texas detention facility. 

DHS claims they entered illegally in 2024 by using a Biden-era app which allowed immigrants without documents to schedule appointments at designated ports of entry. Considering Biden was president in 2024, use of the app was heavily encouraged by CBP, and was the only way for Venezuelans to have successful asylum claims, it is difficult to see how this qualifies as an illegal entry, even though Trump immediately ended its use when he took office in 2025. Indeed, some outlets are relying on common sense and plain facts rather than DHS statements, and simply reporting that they entered legally. 

The family is still locked up in the Texas detention facility, but will receive a visit from their Congresswoman, who is trying to get them released. 

Friends, these stories are endless. I could go on and on, and these are only the stories that have been reported in the press. The human toll is staggering. 

Perhaps reading these stories and seeing these faces has not moved you. Perhaps you are still entrenched in the belief that every single unlawfully present person must be removed—regardless of the catastrophic effect on our economy. That is certainly your prerogative.

What I hope to help you understand is that you are in a very small minority. Most Americans do not want this, and many of us are infuriated by the cruelty inflicted on people who came to this country to build lives, to work hard, to become Americans. We don’t see these people as the worst of the worst, because they obviously are not. We don’t feel safer with them locked up or deported: we feel diminished by the loss of our neighbors. And we don’t trust the government that keeps lying to us by calling them “the worst of the worst.”

I’ll leave you with some words from Ronald Reagan: “It was once written that America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”

What can we do?

Keep up the pressure on your representatives. But also, seek out organizations in your area that serve immigrants and refugees, and find out how you can help. 

Their Final, Most Essential Command

It’s difficult to write today. It’s difficult to pull a coherent, useful message from the maelstrom in my mind, in my heart. It’s hard not to succumb to rage and despair.

I take comfort from how many fellow Americans are as horrified as I am—and our numbers are growing. Every new outrage visited upon our country is the final straw for someone. 

For those who have not yet reached the same conclusions, please read on. 

Surely we can agree that when the federal government (or state or local governments for that matter) use force of any kind against us, we should be able to trust what officials say in the aftermath. We ought to feel confident that our government, which works for us and by our consent, will not use force against us and then lie to us about it. We should be able to trust that there will be an investigation, it will be impartial, and justice will be done regardless of who was at fault.  

With that agreement, let’s examine what the administration is telling us about this shooting. 

“This looks like a situation where an individual arrived on the scene to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement.” -Kristi Noem, DHS Secretary

“This looks like a situation where an individual wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement.” -Gregory Bovino, CBP Commander

You can watch both full statements, and see that they are the same, nearly word-for-word. So we know these statements were prepared and approved in advance.

Here we have one of at least three tweets in which the Deputy Chief of Staff for policy—and the architect of Trump’s immigration policy—calls Alex Pretti a domestic terrorist and/or assassin, and says he tried to murder federal agents. 

Presumably, these people all have at least as much access to the videos of the shooting as we do. Presumably, they know, as we do, that the sheriff believes Pretti was licensed to carry a handgun. They certainly know that carrying a gun, loaded or otherwise, is a right guaranteed to Americans by the Second Amendment. 

So, how did they reach their conclusion that he intended to murder federal agents?

Pretti was holding his phone, not his gun. 

He didn’t draw his weapon when an officer roughly shoved a woman onto the ground right in front of him. 

He didn’t draw his weapon when that same agent pepper sprayed him in the face. 

He didn’t reach for his gun when the agent continued spraying him around the head while Pretti had his back turned to the agent and was bending down, trying to help up the woman who’d been shoved to the ground. 

He didn’t pull his gun when the agents grabbed him and yanked him away from the woman he’d been trying to help. 

He didn’t draw his weapon when other agents jumped in and wrestled him to the ground. 

At no point from any angle is he seen reaching for his gun while he’s on his elbows and knees, with multiple agents on top of him. 

He didn’t reach for his gun while an agent repeatedly beat him in the face and head with his chemical spray canister. 

He didn’t reach for his weapon while an agent took the gun off him.

He didn’t reach for his already-confiscated weapon when he was first shot, nor once he was lying motionless on the ground—after which they fired at least five more shots at his prone body. 

So where was the attempted murder? Where was the intent to kill law enforcement? 

There was none. This is obvious to anyone who watches the videos.   

Even if we can agree on little else, can we agree that this careful, intentional, orchestrated lying by our government officials is unacceptable? Do they think you are stupid? Do they expect that,  because you care about enforcing our immigration laws, you will blindly accept and repeat their lies? Why couldn’t they have just released a statement that there will be a thorough and impartial investigation? Why must they spread obvious smears about the man they killed?

My friends, if they will lie to us this blatantly in the face of overwhelming video evidence, how can we trust anything they tell us?

These officials keep stressing the fact that he was armed in their justifications for killing him, despite the fact that he had every right to be armed, despite the fact that he never even reached for his weapon, and despite the fact that they disarmed him before they shot him. They are trying to convince us that exercising our Constitutionally protected freedoms in the vicinity of federal agents gives them the right to summarily execute us.

They are trying to convince us that we did not see and hear what we all saw and heard. They’re trying to convince us that we did see and hear what we clearly did not. 

“The Party told you to ignore the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

This famous quote from Orwell’s 1984 is seeing a lot of use lately, and it’s because of brazen falsehoods like these from our government. 

If this extrajudicial execution and the blatant lies trying to spin it as justified are your final straw, welcome. If this is the moment you can no longer support an administration that up until now you had given the benefit of the doubt, join us. 

This dystopian use of force against us by armed, masked, unaccountable agents of the state cannot last. This shameless lying and victim-blaming by those tasked with protecting us will not succeed. Not forever. 

Because this is America, and there are more of us than there are of them. More of us who value truth, more of us who cherish our freedoms, more of us who love our neighbors.  

We are going to win. 

What can we do?

First, for your own soul, do something to help in your own community. Donate blood, volunteer at a shelter, read to folks at a nursing home. Remind yourself of the good in this country that is still so worth fighting for. 

The deadline to pass a new spending bill in the Senate is this Friday. (It has already passed the House.) Republicans cannot pass it without help from Democrats. Tell your Senators that under no circumstances should DHS continue to be funded until serious, binding measures are taken to reign in ICE’s terror campaign—and while they’re at it, they should impeach Kristi Noem yesterday. If they have to shut down the government again, so be it. Not another dime for this lawless DHS to continue terrorizing and murdering people.

The King is Mad

There are a hundred articles I could be writing today about ICE in Minnesota, a topic that has dominated my thoughts since the administration started “Operation Metro Surge.” That I’m writing about this instead should give you an idea of how important and urgent I believe this issue to be. 

Yesterday, the Prime Minister of Norway, Jonas Stoere, texted Donald Trump on behalf of himself and the President of Finland, Alexander Stubb. Here is the full text of his message:

“Dear Mr President, dear Donald – on the contact across the Atlantic – on Greenland, Gaza, Ukraine – and your tariff announcement yesterday. You know our position on these issues. But we believe we all should work to take this down and de-escalate – so much is happening around us where we need to stand together. We are proposing a call with you later today – with both of us or separately – give us a hint of what you prefer! Best – Alex and Jonas”

(In case you have not heard, President Trump announced sweeping new tariffs on our European allies in an attempt to pressure Denmark into giving up Greenland. As we know, American consumers and businesses absorb the cost of these tariffs; once again we are the whipping boy he punishes when other countries displease him.)

How did the leader of the free world respond to this extremely polite and respectful request for a conversation with fellow alliance leaders?

“Dear Jonas: Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America. Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China, and why do they have a “right of ownership” anyway? There are no written documents, it’s only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there, also. I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding, and now, NATO should do something for the United States. The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland. Thank you! President DJT”

Take a moment. Read it again. 

I’ll go on to break this down line by line, but here’s the bottom line: This man is manifestly insane. He is vain and ignorant and in the grip of megalomania, and poses a serious threat to the overall peace western civilization has enjoyed since the end of World War Two. We are solidly in 25th Amendment territory, but this Cabinet will never fulfill that duty, so Congress should remove him from office.

Hopefully I don’t need to explain to my friends on the right the visceral mortification most of us feel when we see this text. For those whose sense of shame was cauterized long ago, let me at least show you why he is wrong on the merits. (For brevity, I will ignore the childish writing, punctuation errors, and bizarre use of capitalization.)

“Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize…” Even if not receiving the prize he so obsessively wanted were a valid reason to threaten our allies and escalate his damaging trade war, the Norwegian government does not award the Nobel Prize any more than the government of Denmark does. So he is threatening the wrong people. 

“…for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS…” He has not stopped eight wars, and the one war he repeatedly bragged he would end within 24 hours of taking office is still raging. 

“…I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace…but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America.” Don’t miss what he reveals here: he only “felt an obligation” to think “purely of Peace” while there was something in it for him: his hope of winning the Nobel. And only now that they have denied him his prize will he “now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America.”

He has unintentionally but clearly laid out what has been obvious for years: his top priority is Donald Trump’s ego. America—and peace in the West—come second.

“Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China…”  On their own, no. Fortunately, Denmark is part of the most powerful alliance in the history of the world, so Greenland is better protected than almost any nation in the annals of human civilization.

“…and why do they have a ‘right of ownership’ anyway? There are no written documents, it’s only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago…” This document on his own State Department website details how 110 years ago the United States confirmed Danish ownership of Greenland—an easy decision for President Woodrow Wilson considering that Denmark had already been running Greeland for centuries. This naked ignorance paraded before other world leaders is humiliating to America.

“…but we had boats landing there, also.” Denmark was colonizing Greenland before the United States existed. Again, humiliating, arrogant ignorance.

“I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding, and now, NATO should do something for the United States.” I won’t pretend to know what he thinks he’s done for NATO; he’s been publicly antagonistic toward the alliance since 1987. As for NATO doing something for the US, Article 5, our collective defense agreement, has been invoked exactly one time in the 77 years since its founding: September 11, 2001. NATO helped defend our airspace after we were attacked, and assisted us in Afghanistan for years afterward. It takes a special kind of gall to imply NATO has done nothing for us when we are the only nation who has ever called for its aid.

“The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland.” Gosh, how did we survive the Cold War without complete and total control of Greenland? It’s simple: Denmark is our friend and ally. A pact with Denmark, in effect since 1951, gives us the right to build and maintain military bases in Greenland—one of which is still there and manned today. (This pact is, incidentally, another document wherein the US explicitly affirms Danish sovereignty in Greenland.) If the President wants more US troops and weaponry in Greenland, there is no barrier to achieving that aim—at least there wasn’t until he began threatening to take the territory by force. Now, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands and the UK have sent small contingents to the island to deter their mutual ally, the United States, from forcibly taking over. 

To call this unprecedented is to severely understate the situation. 

This President is threatening our allies, and for no good reason. In his own words, when asked why ownership of Greenland is important (when we already have all the access we could want), he said, “Because that’s what I feel is psychologically needed for success.” Following up on this weird-to-say-the-least response, a White House correspondent asked, “Psychologically important to you or to the United States?” 

Would you like to take a guess?

“Psychologically important for me.” 

So, we can see clearly from the President’s own words and actions that he is lashing out against our longtime allies because he didn’t win a prize. He is making America into a simultaneous bully and laughingstock because he is ignorant of our own history and unwilling to learn. He is risking the collapse of the most powerful alliance in world history because of his psychological need to wrest ownership of territory away from a sovereign nation.

This is mad king behavior. While it is humiliating, more importantly, it’s dangerous, for us and for the world. 

What can we do? 

Congress has the power to stop this, either with legislation or impeachment and removal. Contact your Representative and Senators, especially if they’re Republicans. This should be an issue they are subject to pressure on because it’s so overwhelmingly unpopular: 86% of Americans oppose using military force to acquire Greenland, and even among self-identified Republicans, half oppose attempting to take control of the island with or without military force.

Tomorrow, January 20, there is a nationwide walkout planned. To take part, at 2:00, wherever you are, get up, walk out, and go to your representative’s office to demand the removal of this dangerously unhinged president. 

No Kings: What Republicans Taught Me

I am not your stereotypical No Kings protester. I’m a pro-life, Christian conservative who hates Hamas with a fury. I rolled my eyes at what little of Bernie’s speech I heard: the usual pro-abortion, class warfare talking points that had nothing to do with the point of a “No Kings” protest.

I attended the protest because of what Republicans taught me. 

And just so we’re clear: they taught me well. Politics were discussed in my home as far back as I can remember. As a little girl, I knew that Jimmy Carter had been a good man but a terrible president. I knew that Ronald Reagan was a hero who had stood up to communists and won. I looked forward to listening to Rush Limbaugh after school; I read his books, and chose one of them to write a book report on in 8th grade. I doodled cartoons mocking Bill Clinton for his lies and adultery when I got bored in class. I swelled with patriotic pride when George W. Bush threw out that beautiful opening pitch at Yankee Stadium after 9/11. I hated the overwhelming bias in media coverage of Barack Obama, the fawning adoration that led to his receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for reasons that are still unclear to me, and the passage of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), whose ramifications are still negatively affecting my family’s finances to this day. 

Republicans taught me that the Constitution is sacred, second only to the Bible. That the foundational American value of freedom sets us apart from the rest of the world. That liberty is worth dying for. That the federal government has grown too large and too powerful, and states’ rights are being infringed. That our government serves the American people; it derives its power from the consent of the governed. That our nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values. That free markets are the bedrock on which a thriving economy is built. That America is a melting pot, Reagan’s shining city on a hill, whose doors are open to anyone who has the will and the heart to get here, “a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.” 

That’s what Republicans taught me.

Last week, elected Republicans went hard with their agreed-upon talking points: No Kings protesters hate America; they’re violent; they’re paid. (All of which were comically, embarrassingly wrong.) But I’ve seen many regular Republicans respond to No Kings protesters like me with pats on the head: “Sillies! We have a president, not a king. He isn’t a king and he doesn’t want to be a king.”

Meanwhile, the president and his administration:


I know my Republican friends will say all these memes—including the video he posted on No Kings day of himself in a crown, flying a jet emblazoned “King Trump,” dumping diarrhea on Americans—are just Trump being Trump, trolling. Setting aside the humiliation he’s inflicting on the entire nation with this crass, juvenile behavior utterly unworthy of the office, he is doing more than trolling.

He means it. He sees the presidency as kingship.

“Then I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as President.” -Donald Trump, July 23, 2019

“I have the ultimate authority…When somebody’s the president of the United States, the authority is total. And that’s the way it’s gotta be. It’s total.” -Donald Trump, April 13, 2020

“More importantly, Article II allows me to do whatever I want.” -Donald Trump, June 16, 2019

“I have the right to do anything I want to do. I’m the President of the United States.” -Donald Trump, August 26, 2025

My friends on the right, just take a moment to imagine how you’d have reacted if Barack Obama had said any of this. Be honest, if you can.

If you can’t, I’ll tell you how you’d have reacted: with rage. You’d have been the ones marching in the streets, decrying the wannabe tyrant in the White House. And you’d have been completely justified, because obviously the president can’t just do whatever he wants. Of course the Constitution doesn’t give one man total authority. We all know this. You taught me this.

But if his authoritarianism stopped with words, we wouldn’t have seen 2% of the entire population of the country take to the streets this weekend to protest.

This man publicly called for terminating the Constitution to overturn an election and put himself back in power.

Republicans, you raised me. You are the reason I am a passionate supporter of the US Constitution.

When I watched so many of you excuse this, it blew my mind and broke my heart. Never could I have believed anyone who called themselves conservative would support a man who put himself above the Constitution.

If you excuse this, you are not a conservative. You can still be a Republican today, thanks to the way the party has twisted itself, but you are not a conservative. You’re certainly not a patriot. I know this because you taught me.

In case you think I’m still making a big deal out of nothing but words, this president has repeatedly usurped powers explicitly invested in the legislative branch by the Constitution. He has withheld Congressionally-approved funds in violation of the law, drawing bipartisan criticism and numerous lawsuits.

He signed an executive order (currently blocked nationwide by federal courts) attempting to end birthright citizenship. In other words, he thought he could singlehandedly cancel part of the Constitution.

He thought he could singlehandedly cancel part of the United States Constitution.

He thought he could singlehandedly cancel part of the United States Constitution.

He has openly defied federal court rulings, including the Supreme Court. Republicans, you taught me about our magnificent and time-tested system of checks and balances—you, and Schoolhouse Rock. I remember. Do you?

This president declared a non-existent emergency to usurp Congress’s explicit power to regulate foreign trade so he could tax Americans with heavy, damaging tariffs on imports, all while lying that foreign countries pay them. All because, incidentally, he believes “Trade is bad.”

You taught me that free markets are one of the pillars of conservatism. But more importantly, he’s usurping power the Constitution does not give to the president. Republicans, you would not put up with this from a Democrat. You wouldn’t.

But these all pale in comparison to sending armed military into American cities over the objections of those states’ governors. This is every small-government conservative’s worst nightmare. This is what you told me we needed the Second Amendment to prevent. If Obama had done this, you would have lost your minds. You would have demanded his immediate impeachment and removal from office. You would have been gearing up for civil war. Because it’s unthinkable. It’s un-American. It’s tyrannical. It’s illegal. I cannot believe the Republican Party that raised me has fallen so far, into servile submission to authoritarianism, just because it’s directed at Americans they disagree with.

At least I’m not completely alone:

“I don’t know how any limited government conservative can reconcile supporting that [deploying the National Guard to deal with local crime] with a limited government ideology.” -Senator Thom Tillis (R)

Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt, chair of the National Governors Association (R) on Trump sending National Guard troops across state lines: “Oklahomans would lose their mind if Pritzker in Illinois sent troops down to Oklahoma during the Biden administration.”

This last one doesn’t really count, since Noem is now the Secretary of Homeland Security for Trump, and it turns out she’s actually a big fan of federalizing the National Guard in direct attacks on states’ rights, as long as the President is a Republican, and he’s siccing troops on blue states. But it’s useful because it so neatly illustrates the utter hypocrisy of my former party.

Republicans, I proudly participated in the No Kings protests because this President is acting like a king. He’s not even trying to hide it; he’s proud of it. I protested him because of everything you taught me.

You raised me right.

We are remembering two different Charlie Kirks

The way we see Charlie Kirk, his life and death, and indeed, nearly everything, is determined less by the facts than by our personal paradigms. Less by the truth than by our algorithms.

This past week showed me how the media environments we’ve built for ourselves shape our realities. It’s no wonder we’ve become so polarized: we live in different worlds. 

My Christian friends and my Republican friends are grieving deeply. The Charlie Kirk they remember was a uniter: someone committed to reaching across the political aisle and engaging those who disagreed with him with great civility. He was a lion of the faith, boldly proclaiming the gospel in an arena where it is rarely heard. He was a loving and committed husband and father who regularly encouraged other young men to follow this highest calling. He was a good Christian man, and now he is a modern-day martyr.

My progressive friends and my atheist friends have, without exception, expressed horror over his murder. They have unequivocally condemned political violence. They’ve shared how much sadness they feel for his wife and little children. But the Charlie Kirk they remember was not any of the things I listed above. He was a man with a long and unapologetic history of spreading his racist and sexist views, one more prominent Christian whose attitudes toward his fellow human beings seemed to be shaped more by Donald Trump than Jesus Christ. 

So, who is right? 

To some extent, both. 

Depending on how you’ve trained your algorithm, you may not have seen Kirk with Bill Maher, a famously strident atheist. He and Charlie had a really interesting, thoughtful discussion about faith vs. skepticism—though Maher was, in his typical fashion, more caustic. The two displayed mutual respect and kindness, and Charlie was completely unruffled by Bill’s occasional inflammatory comments. 

Can you see how moments like these elevated Charlie Kirk in the opinions of many people, especially believers?  

At his appearance on the Jubilee debate forum, Charlie Kirk faced Dean Withers, a young liberal TikToker with a huge following. Due to the format, their interaction was brief, but completely polite despite the topic: abortion. During their debate, Charlie told Dean he’d made a good point, and when Dean stood to return to his seat, Charlie grinned and shook his hand, telling him he’d been the best debater so far. 

Dean Withers wept openly when Charlie Kirk died. 

My friends on the left, can you see how moments like these endeared Charlie Kirk to even some of his most dedicated ideological opponents? 

At one of his events he was approached by a young person who described themselves as a transgender male who was uncertain about medical interventions, and asked Charlie for his advice. He first asked for more of their story. The advice he gave and the tone in which he gave it might surprise those whose algorithms paint him as a transphobic monster. He advised seeking a diagnosis first, and caution about medical intervention. But what is most striking about the interaction is his kindness, and the apparent care he has toward this young stranger. 

Can you see why people whose algorithms show them moments like these believe the man has been unjustly smeared as a bigot?

That is the Charlie Kirk half of America is mourning. 

They are, quite understandably, deeply offended by those saying critical things about him. After all, they’ve seen no evidence of any wrongdoing, only of kindness and good-faith debate. 

They might be surprised to learn that Joe Biden published a statement on the day Charlie died: “There is no place in our country for this kind of violence. It must end now. Jill and I are praying for Charlie Kirk’s family and loved ones.” They might be more surprised to learn that he released this statement despite the fact that Charlie Kirk publicly called for Joe Biden’s execution. In fact, he called for executions in general to be “quick” and “televised,” and pondered what age would be best for children to begin watching them. 

My Christian friends, can you see how these statements have given others a very different picture of Charlie Kirk than the one you’ve seen?

Kirk fully embraced the white nationalist “Great Replacement Theory.” “The great replacement strategy, which is well underway every single day in our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different,” he said. “They [Democrats] hate those of you that live in rural and small America…and they have a plan to try and get rid of you.” He compared Democrats to Stalin and warned, “You believe in God, country, family, faith, and freedom, and they won’t stop until you and your children and your children’s children are eliminated.”

Can you see how these accusations do not align with a man who was supposedly a uniter? Can you see how hearing him described as civilly reaching across the political aisle rings hollow to those who’ve heard him talk this way?

Kirk was a vocal opponent of DEI initiatives. His supporters saw this as commonsense advocacy for merit-based hiring. After all, who wants a pilot or surgeon who wasn’t held to the same rigorous standards as their white counterparts? They may not have heard the type of language he used over the years on this topic, though. “If I’m dealing with somebody in customer service who’s a moronic black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action?” When speaking about prominent black women such as Michelle Obama and Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, he said, “…you do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.” 

Can you see how comments like these, which are not isolated but part of a long pattern, led an awful lot of people to believe he was a racist? 

In 2020, FOX News producer Blake Neff resigned when FOX learned of his “horrendous and deeply offensive” racist posts online. Charlie Kirk didn’t seem to have a problem with the racist posts; he hired him. Neff would go on to help Kirk produce content about how Martin Luther King, Jr. was actually a terrible person and passing the Civil Rights Act was a big mistake.

Do you see how accusations of racism against Kirk are not all baseless smears? Does knowing these things help you see others’ perspectives with more understanding?

He told a 14-year-old girl there is “an argument to bring back the MRS degree,” and to “be clear, that’s why you’re going to college, right? Don’t lie to yourself. Don’t, like, ‘Ah, I’m going, I’m studying sociology.’ No you’re not. We know why you’re here.” In a long rant about Taylor Swift, he claimed she “doesn’t mean it” if she doesn’t take her husband’s last name. 

Can you see how comments like these are why many people see him as a misogynist?

Standing at a pulpit in a church, Kirk loudly said of controversial trans swimmer, Lia Thomas, “You hear that, William Thomas? You’re an abomination to God!” to cheers from the audience.

My Christian brothers and sisters, I ask you, are these the actions of a man who sees other human beings—all of them—as image-bearers? As people like himself whom Christ died to save? Even if you agree and believe he’s simply interpreting Scripture in good faith, can you see how words like these strike others as deeply offensive and hateful?

Speaking about Democrats, Kirk said, “Like, we’re dealing with maggots, vermin, and swine here.” He said, “They’re parasites. The left are cockroaches.” 

My friends on the right, can you understand why people whose algorithms have been showing them this side of Charlie Kirk are skeptical of the flowery descriptions of him as a thoughtful, cross-aisle engager?

A man was killed on camera. In broad daylight, with scores of witnesses. The video of his murder was everywhere. No one’s family should have to see that. It shocks the consciences of all decent people that anyone could see such a crime and then go use their online platform to say of the murdered man, “He’s a scumbag.” “He shouldn’t be celebrated.” Surely, we can all agree on that?

Can we still agree if I tell you I’m not talking about Charlie Kirk? I’m talking about George Floyd, and the direct quotes of Charlie Kirk about the murdered man—although Kirk never even accepted that Floyd was murdered, despite the conclusions of two separate autopsies and a jury of the murderer’s peers. On the last show he recorded, posted on the same day he died, Kirk addressed the left: “You guys…changed the entire fiber and action of the entire civilization all around a lie because George Floyd overdosed on the side of the street.”

A personal note: that shocked me. I gasped aloud when I heard it. Especially after the hours I’ve spent in the past days searching videos and tributes of Charlie Kirk and seeing the side of him his supporters have seen all these years. The kind man, the man who reached out. The good Christian. Contrasted with the callousness of those words, the harshness of his voice, the willful disregard for the truth…they don’t seem like the same man. 

And so we’re left with these two Charlie Kirks. They both existed. We have the proof. 

What do we do with this?

We can purpose to seek and to see the humanity in those with whom we disagree. For those of us who are believers in Christ, we can remind ourselves, over and over, that every single human being is an image-bearer, loved by God. While we may give bad, ignorant, and immoral ideas no mercy, we can try, always, to remember that the people who espouse them are people, just like us. Imperfect, complicated, and subject to all the weaknesses and biases common to humanity. 

We can especially try to remain aware that our algorithm fundamentally shapes our understanding of reality, and there may be things we’re missing. 

We can admire the good aspects of Charlie Kirk and emulate them. We can fairly judge the bad aspects and strive to overcome them in our own lives. 

Most importantly, we can choose to see one another, even those with whom we vehemently disagree, as human beings, created equal, endowed by our Creator with an unalienable right to life. This fundamental American doctrine is the wide, firm foundation where we can all find common ground. 

Putting a conspiracy theorist in charge: what could go wrong?

My mom was 49 years old when she found out she had cancer. In six months, that thief stole one piece of her after another, until it finally took her life. My husband’s family has suffered for generations from early-onset Alzheimer’s, and he now participates in groundbreaking research that is helping provide treatments proven to delay the disease. I don’t know anyone who hasn’t lost someone they knew to COVID-19. 

I’m only one of tens of millions of Americans whose lives have been affected by these diseases and others. Americans overwhelmingly want ongoing research and real advancements in treatments. That’s why we all need to know what is happening at the highest levels in public health right now. 

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is the current Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). This department is massive, overseeing multiple crucial agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Kennedy was nominated by President Trump and confirmed by the Senate along partisan lines—Mitch McConnell was the only Republican to vote against him, along with every Democrat. 

I learned a lot about Kennedy during the days leading up to his confirmation hearing: mainly that he is a deeply weird dude. His daughter says he once chainsawed the head off a beached whale carcass, strapped it to the roof of their minivan, and drove it 5 hours back to their home, while “whale juice would pour into the windows.” (Kennedy has declined to either confirm or deny this.) Kennedy himself has told the story of the time he pulled over to retrieve the carcass of a bear from the road, intending to skin and eat it, but later decided to leave the dead bear in Central Park as a prank. And Kennedy has also publicly admitted to suffering from cognitive difficulties, which doctors first suspected were caused by a tumor, but later discovered were the result of a pork tapeworm larva in his brain, which, in his own words, “ate a portion of it [his brain] and then died.” (Infections of this type can best be prevented by proper handwashing and cooking meat to safe temperatures.)

He has blithely recounted how he “did very, very poorly in school, until I started doing narcotics.” Regarding heroin, he said, “It worked for me. And if it still worked, I’d still be doing it.”

More revealing of his character were the audio recordings he secretly taped of conversations with his second wife during their acrimonious divorce, including one in which he told her it was her fault he had cheated on her dozens of times. (She had previously found the diary in which he recorded 37 instances of his adultery with various women.)

Kennedy’s nomination came as a shock to many; the fact that he is an attorney with no medical training whatsoever is not unprecedented; several former HHS heads have been lawyers. And the Kennedy name helps to overshadow a lot of personal shortcomings and eccentricities. But no other HHS Secretary has ever been an antivaccine activist. 

RFK Jr. has made a name for himself over the years with his antivax rhetoric and activism. He is a personal friend of Andrew Wakefield, the former doctor whose false claims started the conspiracy theory that vaccines cause autism, and whose “research” was so fraudulent and unethical that he was drummed out of medicine in Britain. But Kennedy says, “In any just society, we would be building statues to Andy Wakefield.” 

The Prime Minister of Samoa holds Kennedy responsible for exacerbating the damage of a measles outbreak in 2019. Infant MMR vaccination rates had dropped to 31% after the tragic deaths of two babies when nurses erroneously mixed the vaccine with expired muscle relaxant. Kennedy visited the country and helped spread misinformation and fear among parents, and later, during the outbreak, sent a letter to the prime minister, absurdly suggesting that the vaccine itself may have caused the outbreak. Ultimately, 5,700 people were sickened, and at least 83 died—mostly small children and babies. The small nation ran out of child-sized coffins.

Putting an antivaxxer in charge of the department that oversees vaccinations was unthinkable before 2025, and is why McConnell and Democrats voted against him. “I’m a survivor of childhood polio,” the Republican Senator writes. “In my lifetime, I’ve watched vaccines save millions of lives from devastating diseases across America and around the world. I will not condone the re-litigation of proven cures…” He goes on to say Kennedy has “a record of trafficking in dangerous conspiracy theories.”

As one example among hundreds, in 2020, RFK Jr. ranted that government efforts to combat COVID-19 were “a pharmaceutical-driven, biosecurity agenda that will enslave the entire human race and plunge us into a dystopian nightmare.” 

More than 15,000 doctors, along with the nation’s largest nurses’ union, urged the Senate to reject RFK Jr. as HHS Secretary. 

But all of this was before his confirmation. Perhaps Kennedy would grow into the role? Learn from the world-class experts at the agencies he would lead? After all, during his confirmation hearing, he told concerned Senators, “I am not anti-vaccine,” and “my job is to empower the scientists, if I am privileged to be confirmed.”

So, how has that been going? 

He mass-fired 10,000 employees across HHS agencies. 

He affirmed the long-debunked chemtrail conspiracy theory and said, “I’m going to do everything in my power to stop it.”

We’ve had the worst measles outbreak in 33 years, and have suffered our first death from measles in a decade—that of an unvaccinated child in Texas—thanks to dropping vaccination rates spurred by antivax rhetoric from people like RFK Jr. The CDC’s new leadership buried a report by its own scientists, which found (unsurprisingly) that the risk of measles infection is high in outbreak areas with low vaccination rates.

During his confirmation hearing, Kennedy promised “radical transparency.” But in May, he said he may bar HHS scientists from publishing in top medical journals. And in April, he fired the entire FOIA office at CDC: the office that handles Freedom of Information Act requests—which government agencies are required by law to fulfill. He fired two-thirds of the FOIA department at the FDA. 

Massive cuts are threatening huge repositories of critical research data gleaned over years of study, now marked for deletion—including cancer and Alzheimer’s data—and this research will likely be lost forever if no one (Congress) stops it. 

PRAMS, a decades-old program dedicated to monitoring infant and maternal health from pregnancy through postpartum, apparently didn’t seem worthwhile to this allegedly pro-life administration. Every single employee was fired in April.  

Dr. Peter Marks, HHS’s top vaccine regulator, was told to “turn over data on cases of brain swelling and deaths caused by the measles vaccine.” He was unable to comply because no such data exists. He was given the option of resigning or being fired. He resigned. 

During his confirmation hearing, RFK Jr. promised a concerned Republican Senator that he would not make any changes to the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). In June, Kennedy fired all 17 members of the committee. 

In April, Kennedy announced that “by September, we will know what has caused the autism epidemic,” a promise no scientist would ever dream of making. He has hired David Geier to investigate the supposed link between vaccines and autism, which has already been disproven countless times. Geier has pushed these debunked claims for many years. He’s also been charged and fined by the State of Maryland for practicing medicine without a license—he administered Lupron, a puberty-blocking drug, as an autism treatment to children despite having no medical training.

RFK Jr. canceled $500 million in funding for mRNA vaccine development, claiming these therapies “fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu.” (The Secretary seems unaware that from 2020-2022, these vaccines saved 3.2 million American lives and prevented 18.5 million hospitalizations, saving the country $1.15 trillion.) He said his team “reviewed the science, listened to the experts, and acted.” But the recently resigned CDC head of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases says Kennedy has never been briefed by anyone from his department on any of these topics, despite their repeated offers. “He’s getting information from somewhere,” Dr. Daskalakis says, but it’s not from the experts. 

His war on mRNA vaccine research threatens some of our most promising cancer studies as well. Recent mRNA studies treating two of the most feared cancers—prostate and glioblastoma—have seen unprecedented success. Kennedy’s bias against this therapy may cost untold lives if these studies are shut down or delayed. 

The National Cancer Institute, the world’s premier cancer research center, has been thrown into chaos by budget cuts and firings. Things are so bad that one lab director who’s worked there for three decades says, “If we survive, I will be somewhat surprised.”

Kennedy fired the director of the CDC, Dr. Susan Monarez, less than a month into her tenure. Almost immediately afterward, we saw a dramatic exodus of CDC leadership as four other top officials publicly resigned. Monarez says she was fired because she would not comply with “unscientific, reckless directives.” Dr. Demetre Daskalakis says in his resignation letter, “I have never experienced such radical non-transparency, nor have I seen such unskilled manipulation of data to achieve a political end…” Of the people now in charge of vaccine policy, he says, “Their desire to please a political base will result in death and disability of vulnerable children and adults.”

Dr. Daniel Jernigan, who also resigned, says he had been asked to “review and change studies that have been settled in the past,” which have shaped vaccination guidelines. 

A lunatic angry about the COVID-19 vaccines—doubtless thanks to the sort of false claims spread about it by people like RFK Jr., who absurdly and recklessly called them “the deadliest vaccines in history”—fired 500 rounds from one or more of 5 guns at CDC headquarters in Atlanta earlier this month, killing a police officer. 

More than 750 current and former employees of HHS signed a letter they sent to both RFK Jr. and Congress after the shooting, accusing him of “dismantling America’s public health infrastructure,” “repeatedly spreading inaccurate health information,” “wasting taxpayer money,” and “misusing data,” among other charges.  

Nine former directors and acting directors of the CDC, who have served under every president dating back to the Carter administration, have written an op-ed for the New York Times, saying what Kennedy has done is “unlike anything our country has ever experienced,” and calling it “unacceptable.” Kennedy’s demands of the recently-fired director, Dr. Susan Monarez, were “not typical requests from a health secretary to a CDC director. Not even close. None of us would have agreed to the secretary’s demands…”

Despite his repeated promises of “gold-standard” science, Kennedy’s “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) report in May, which cast doubt on current vaccine recommendations, cited three studies whose findings are not what MAHA claims they are, and at least four different studies that do not exist. These AI “hallucinations” are a well-known phenomenon in which AI models will make something up if they can’t find what they’re asked to, “especially if prompted to support a specific point.” In other words, at Kennedy’s behest, the geniuses on his team told an AI to find evidence that vaccine recommendations are suspect; it couldn’t find any good studies that said what they wanted, so it made some up. And they published them as fact and used them in official government guidance. 

That scandal alone should have been enough to prompt Kennedy to resign in shame. Alas, this administration seems unfamiliar with the concept. It would have resulted in an undergrad being disciplined or expelled, but it hasn’t earned the Secretary of Health and Human Services so much as a reprimand from the President. 

The full scale of the damage to our public health institutions, medical research, and inevitably, our own health, is difficult to calculate—but we shouldn’t let that overwhelm us to the point of inaction. As Dr. Daskalakis warns us, “The CDC you knew is over. Unless someone takes radical action, there is nothing there that can be salvaged.”

What we can do: Cabinet Secretaries can be impeached. We should all—especially those with Republican representatives—be telling our Congressional reps we want Kennedy gone before he can do any more damage. (Don’t bother contacting your Senator yet; impeachment proceedings must begin in the House.) Democrats should at least try to force a vote, then if Republicans choose to keep him in power, they will even more obviously own the devastating effects of his tenure. 

Epstein controversy proves that it is possible for Donald Trump to lose supporters

For years now, releasing the Epstein files has been one of the top goals of Trump’s MAGA base. I’ll try to briefly explain why:

Roughly ⅓ of Republicans who hold favorable views of Trump are QAnon believers. QAnon is the far-right conspiracy movement which holds that a cabal of Satanic, pedophilic, child-sex-trafficking elites—made up mostly of Democrats and celebrities—rules the world and the “Deep State,” and that Donald Trump is secretly fighting to defeat them and bring them to justice. In Jeffrey Epstein, believers had proof that ultra-wealthy, well-connected child sex traffickers do exist—at least one of them. 

Epstein died in prison in August of 2019. His death was ruled a suicide, but Americans across the political spectrum were skeptical, declaring, “Epstein didn’t kill himself!”

Epstein’s girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, was convicted at the end of 2022 for multiple felonies involving aiding Epstein in trafficking and sexually abusing minors. (While she was in jail, Donald Trump wished her well repeatedly.) 

Maxwell’s conviction and Epstein’s death only served to whet the appetite of the MAGA faithful. They wanted anyone and everyone Epstein may have trafficked young girls to to be exposed and punished. (To be fair, this is an honorable desire. Who wouldn’t want pedophiles, especially rich and powerful ones, brought to justice?)

Epstein’s “little black book” of contacts was published back in 2015 by Gawker, and revealed a lot of famous names, including Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, Alec Baldwin, and Rupert Murdoch, among others. None of the people listed in his contact book have been charged with crimes related to Epstein. As I write this, it’s unclear to me whether there is any solid evidence of Epstein trafficking girls to third parties. Some of the victims have claimed he did, but my understanding is that investigations have not turned up good evidence. 

But my conclusions aren’t important. MAGA world—the voters, the politicians, the influencers— all agreed that Epstein trafficked minors to other powerful men, he had a list of their names, and bringing them to light was imperative. The following is only a tiny sampling of direct quotes from prominent Republicans made after Epstein’s death and before the 2024 election:

 “What the hell are the House Republicans doing? They have the majority. You can’t get the list?…Put on your big boy pants, and let us know who the pedophiles are.” -Kash Patel (now director of the FBI), Dec 2023

Trump’s win in 2024 turbocharged his base’s (and his own administration members’) excitement about finally uncovering the truth, hidden for so long by the dastardly Democrats. 

In February of 2025, Senator Marsha Blackburn sent a letter to newly confirmed FBI Director Kash Patel, reminding him that he’d promised to work with her to release the Epstein files, and telling him, “…it is paramount that the FBI provide full transparency to the American people and immediately release the complete, unredacted records in this case.”

Attorney General Pam Bondi sent shockwaves of excitement through MAGA in February of this year when she claimed Epstein’s client list was “sitting on my desk right now.” 

Later that month, 15 right-wing influencers were invited to the White House and given binders labeled “The Epstein Files: Phase 1” in a meeting attended by President Trump, Vice President Vance, and FBI Director Patel. Their excitement soon fizzled, however, when the binders turned out to contain almost entirely old information that was already public. 

Next major event on the timeline: June 6, 2025. Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s bromance came to a fiery and very public end, climaxing with this jaw-dropping tweet from Musk:

(Musk has since deleted the tweet.) 

One month later, the Department of Justice released an undated, unsigned memo which claims they’ve done a thorough review of all the Epstein evidence and come to the following conclusions:

  1. No third parties are guilty of any wrongdoing.
  2. There is no client list. 
  3. Epstein didn’t blackmail anyone.
  4. Epstein committed suicide.
  5. No further disclosures are forthcoming.

The memo ends by giving a link where they say the “full raw” video feed from Epstein’s cell on the night of his death can be seen. 

This memo sent shockwaves of a very different sort through MAGA world. For once, they were not going to simply accept and parrot whatever the administration said. 

The day after the DOJ released their memo, a reporter asked Pam Bondi to clarify some questions about Epstein. Before she could answer, Trump jumped in and berated the reporter for asking about Jeffrey Epstein.

As if that reaction wasn’t insulting enough to the MAGA faithful, four days later Trump made a lengthy post on his Truth Social site, addressed to his supporters, in which he defended Pam Bondi and complained about the continued focus on Epstein. He blames “selfish people” for trying to hurt his “PERFECT” administration over Epstein—”somebody that nobody cares about.” He goes on to bizarrely claim that the Epstein files were “written by” his greatest enemies list: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the Biden administration. 

On the same day, his FBI Director, Kash Patel—after years of very publicly insisting that there is an Epstein client list and that it wasn’t being released because of the powerful men on it—posted this tweet:

Q: How do you get people to let go of a conspiracy you’ve spent years convincing them is true?

A: It’s too late. You can’t. 

Adding even more fuel to the conspiracy flames, WIRED magazine revealed on July 15 that the “full raw” footage of Epstein’s prison video released by the DOJ was in fact missing about 2 minutes and 53 seconds, and consisted of “two stitched-together clips.”

The Attorney General and the Justice Department getting caught in multiple lies, combined with the President’s demands that everyone stop talking about the case has piqued the interest of folks who, until now, took this story at face value. 

THEN, on Monday of this week, Democrats on the House Rules Committee added an amendment that would have forced Pam Bondi to make the Epstein files public—the very thing Republicans have been demanding for years! Republicans voted against the measure, blocking it. The next day, Tuesday the 16th, Democrats again tried to force the release of the Epstein files, this time in the full House. Republicans blocked their release again: the measure failed by a vote of 211-210. Not one Republican voted in favor. 

So, to recap: 

  • The current Attorney General, FBI Director, FBI Deputy Director, Republican Members of Congress, and the President’s son have loudly insisted for years that Democrats were hiding the Epstein files—specifically his client list—and that justice and the American people demanded they be made public.
  • The Attorney General affirmed she had the client list on her desk. 
  • The White House handed out “Epstein Files: Phase 1” binders to right-wing influencers, clearly implying that more information would be forthcoming. 
  • The world’s richest man, one of Trump’s closest advisors and the head of Trump’s newly created federal agency, who’d had unprecedented access to the computer systems of the federal government for the past five months, Elon Musk, said the reason the Epstein files had not yet been released was because Trump is in them. 
  • DOJ abruptly says there is no client list, Epstein killed himself, and they won’t be releasing any further information. Case closed. 
  • Trump angrily demands people stop talking about the Epstein files, bizarrely claims they were written by Obama, Hillary, and Biden (all people who were out to get him), and says only “bad people,” “weaklings,” and his “PAST supporters” will continue talking about Epstein. 
  • House Republicans blocked the release of the Epstein files twice in two days.

This leaves MAGA caught between two (and only two) very uncomfortable possibilities: Either Trump, his entire Cabinet, and every Republican in DC are all engaged in a massive coverup to protect pedophiles, or those same people have been lying to them for years. 

I, myself, am agnostic on the issue. Before Trump’s recent, ongoing, angry tantrum about the case, I figured most of the rumors swirling around the whole Epstein saga were right-wing fabrications. But the President is giving off major “The lady doth protest too much, methinks” vibes, and behaving exactly as I imagine he’d behave if he knew that he appears in the Epstein files in an incriminating fashion. Short of real evidence, though, we have only circumstantial observations to go by.  

“I was Donald’s closest friend for 10 years.” – Jeffrey Epstein, in recorded interview

“I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.” – Donald Trump 

What we can do: I think we should all follow the advice of Trump’s Deputy Director of the FBI, Dan Bongino, from back in 2023: “Listen, that Jeffrey Epstein story is a big deal, please do not let that story go. Keep your eye on this.” 

Be Careful What You Wish For

When it comes to immigration, some folks on the right will never be moved by emotional appeals. Mothers being torn from sobbing children, terrified refugees being sent back to the countries where they face certain persecution…for some Americans, stories like these will only ever elicit one response: “They shouldn’t have come here illegally.” 

This article is for them. No sob stories, no guilt trips. Just numbers, facts, and logic.  

The minority of Americans who favor mass deportation have, in my experience, a few main misunderstandings that inform their stance. I used to believe some of these, and learning how misinformed I’d been—how I’d been lied to—changed my perspective. Maybe it will change yours, too.  

“Illegal immigrants don’t pay taxes.”

This is simply false. In 2023, unauthorized immigrants in the US paid between $55.8 and $66 billion dollars in federal taxes alone. Many immigrants who lack social security numbers use ITINs (Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers) issued by the IRS to pay their taxes. They pay these taxes despite being ineligible for most federal programs, such as Social Security and Medicare. Contrary to the impression some Americans have been given, the “lazy” immigrants they rail against are in effect subsidizing Social Security and Medicare for American citizens.  

“Illegal immigrants are destroying Social Security and Medicare.”

Before the election, Trump claimed that Democrats were “killing Social Security and Medicare by allowing the invasion of the migrants.”

It is possible for an immigrant to earn lawful status and pay into the system long enough to become eligible for Social Security, but immigrants without lawful status are ineligible. Only lawfully present immigrants who meet certain work and residency requirements can qualify for Medicare. Those here illegally are ineligible no matter how long they’ve lived here or how much they’ve paid into the system. Trump’s claims that immigrants are harming these programs are the opposite of reality: “Immigration, in general, has a very positive role,” says the chairman of the American Academy of Actuaries’ Social Security committee. 

As for immigrants fraudulently receiving benefits, it can and does happen, but is complicated and difficult to pull off, and therefore happens in small numbers. Andrew Biggs, former principal deputy commissioner at the Social Security Administration, says “This is not a problem that I’ve heard specifically that, as [Vance] says, is widespread.”

“They’re sending their rapists; they’re sending their murderers.”

Setting aside the fact that “they” are not “sending” anyone, almost all of us agree that violent criminal aliens should be deported. But let’s address this assumption that immigrants are more likely to be criminals than the rest of us: once again, it’s not only false; it’s the opposite of the truth. 

Multiple large-scale studies have found that immigrants—including undocumented immigrants—are less likely to commit crimes than US-born citizens. This holds true for violent and non-violent crimes, across local, state, and national levels. US citizens are ten times more likely than immigrants to be incarcerated for weapons-related offenses, five times more likely for violent offenses, more than twice as likely for property crimes, and nearly twice as likely for drug crimes. Overall, immigrants are 60% less likely to be incarcerated than US citizens. If you’re concerned about crime, you’re statistically much better off having immigrants as neighbors than American citizens. 

“We have to deport them all, then let people come back legally.”

Large majorities of Americans do not want to “deport them all.” But for the sake of argument, let’s imagine that the president can snap his fingers Thanos-style and instantly remove every undocumented immigrant from US soil. What would the effect on our economy be?

To put it simply: Apocalyptic. 

First, since he can’t actually Thanos-snap people away, there is the mind-boggling cost of the deportations themselves. Six months into Trump’s second term, ICE is already $1 billion over budget. If the so-called “big, beautiful bill” passes, ICE will be funded at $75 billion over the next five years—nearly triple its current budget. 

But on top of the astronomical expenditure to remove these people from the country, we have to consider the effects their absence would wreak. What do you think happens to a nation’s food supply when you kick out roughly half of crop farmworkers? Crops rot in the fields and we face severe shortages, obviously. What happens to real estate prices and supply when 17% of the construction workforce vanishes? Nothing good. What happens when one of every five janitors, groundskeepers, and maintenance workers is gone? When more than one in ten food service employees stop showing up? What happens to budgets across the country when almost $100 billion in tax revenue dries up?

You may be thinking that Americans will simply step into those jobs, but you’d be mistaken. For every 1 million unauthorized workers removed from the country, about 88,000 citizens will lose their jobs. That’s what happens when the economy shrinks. 

Just try to imagine the devastation in California, Texas, and Florida, which would each lose one in every twenty residents. What would that do to communities? Businesses? Schools? 

Removing every illegally present immigrant in America would shrink the economy by 4.2%-6.8%. For comparison, the devastating Great Recession of 2007-09 caused GDP to shrink 4.3%. 

In a nutshell: Great Recession-level wealth losses and unemployment are the best-case scenario if mass deportations succeed. 

Even if you don’t care about the suffering of non-citizens; if you’re in the “They shouldn’t have come here illegally” camp, you can at least appreciate the damage to Americans if we continue on this course—the harm you, your family, and your community will likely suffer if you insist on getting rid of “illegals.” 

Be careful what you wish for. 

If it Ain’t Broke, Don’t Illegally Try to Fix it and Break it in the Process

Last night the President announced the immediate authorization of 100% tariffs on “Movies coming into our Country that are produced in Foreign Lands.” He claimed the American movie industry is dying, other countries are “stealing the movie-making capabilities” from us, and that films made outside the US are “messaging and propaganda.” 

Let’s set aside the chilling and not-so-vaguely communist “messaging and propaganda” accusation and its obvious conflict with the First Amendment. We have plenty to cover here with just the hard facts. 

The American movie industry will be surprised to hear it is “DYING a very fast death” considering its most recent economic report proudly listed $22.6 billion in annual exports, with $15.3 billion in trade surplus. The movie industry trade surplus is larger than that of our telecommunications or health services industries. 

Nevertheless, for some unknown reason, the President has decided this booming business is actually on its deathbed and needs him to rescue it. Enter his favorite cure-all: tariffs! Tariffing films “produced in Foreign Lands” will save the day. 

The President could not have foreseen that his tariff announcement would have the same result as every other tariff announcement: an immediate drop in the stock market. Specifically, hits to the value of major American television and film companies. Disney, Paramount, Netflix, Lionsgate, and Warner Brothers shares all fell this morning. 

Trump will probably insist this is simply short-term pain for long-term gain. It isn’t. It’s short-term pain for absolutely nothing—worse than nothing, because it never should have happened in the first place. 

These tariffs will never be implemented because they are illegal. The law he is using to declare a national emergency and levy all the tariffs he’s enacted so far explicitly prohibits him from regulating the importation of films. The relevant law is 50 U.S. Code § 1702 – Presidential authorities, if you’d like to read it yourself. It’s perfectly clear. “The authority granted to the President by this section does not include the authority to regulate or prohibit…the importation from any country…of any information or informational materials, including but not limited to…films…” 

This illegal attempt to levy tariffs on films will inevitably be challenged in court, where DOJ time and taxpayer dollars will be spent in a futile attempt to defend the President’s illegal actions. And in the meantime, he has once again harmed American businesses and erased American wealth. 

It all seems awfully wasteful. Someone should alert DOGE.

What we can do:

Sometimes all you can do is laugh. Monty Python and the Holy Grail—a foreign film—was re-released in theaters yesterday. Maybe go to the movies?