5
#000000
#FFFFFF
environment
Why Trump's Attack on Minneapolis Is Also an Attack on Our Elections
This armed assault on a major American city, coupled with a thuggish offer implying that the bully boys might be pulled back if state officials will betray their voters, shows the damage that can be done without outright canceling the midterms.
Jan 29, 2026
The nation has been convulsed by the shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis. Millions now see with sickening clarity a lawless assault by federal officers on an American city and its people. As The Wall Street Journal editorialized, it is a “moral and political debacle for the Trump presidency.”
The videos were followed by a fusillade of lies from senior government officials. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Pretti had engaged in “domestic terrorism.” White House aide Stephen Miller called Pretti an “assassin” who tried to “murder federal agents.” Border official Gregory Bovino declared, “This looks like a situation where an individual wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement.” The instant impulse by these high officials was to bully and smear.
Another outrageous statement by a cabinet official has not gotten enough attention.
On Saturday, Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote to Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz linking the violence in Minneapolis to a demand that the state give the Justice Department complete access to the state’s sensitive voter rolls, among other things. There’s no explicit quid pro quo offered—but anyone familiar with Grade B gangster movies won’t miss the implication. Certainly that’s how state officials have read it. Let that sink in: Federal agents have killed innocent civilians in cold blood. And the response of the attorney general of the United States is to use it as leverage to illegally access voter data. That is an unambiguous abuse of power.
That sense of crisis, consciously instigated, can create opportunities to undermine the election and sow doubt and division.
As my colleague Wendy Weiser has written, “What do voter rolls have to do with ICE? Nothing. But they have a lot to do with the administration’s ongoing efforts to meddle in elections.”
Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon provided Bondi with the only legal and responsible answer (a simple “no”), describing her offer as “an apparent ransom.”
Make no mistake: The federal government has no authorization to demand confidential voter information from the states. In our constitutional system, states are responsible for maintaining and protecting voter rolls. Indeed, various state and federal laws limit how much data the federal government can collect.
But that hasn’t stopped it from trying. Bondi’s Justice Department has demanded access to the voter records of 44 states and Washington, DC, and it has sued more than 20 states for not complying. Two courts have already ruled on the side of the states.
Why would the administration want to hoover up this data? It would give election deniers new ammunition to push false claims of voting by people who are not US citizens. It would help the federal government pressure states into reckless voter purges, which would kick eligible citizens off the rolls just as November rolls around.
Plainly, it’s all part of a broader strategy to meddle with our elections. Last weekend, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) said Republicans are looking into yet another version of the unpopular SAVE Act—the bill that would require American citizens to produce a birth certificate, passport, or similar document to register to vote. At least 21 million Americans lack ready access to those documents, according to our research. The bill narrowly passed the House but stalled in the Senate last year after massive public pushback.
Bondi’s letter is a gross escalation of this effort—an explicit abuse of this moment to coerce Minnesota to step into line.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) worries that this escalation is by design. Over the weekend, he warned that the “Trump administration is creating this mayhem, particularly in cities in swing states, in order to take control of the election.”
When Donald Trump took office the first time in 2017, he talked of “American carnage.” Shooting of bystanders, squads of masked armed men, terrorized immigrants, clouds of tear gas, vague claims of conspiracy, and more—all bring that “carnage” to life. That sense of crisis, consciously instigated, can create opportunities to undermine the election and sow doubt and division.
To be clear (and I get asked this a lot): Donald Trump cannot cancel the midterms. Presidents have no power to do that.
But this armed assault on a major American city, coupled with a thuggish offer implying that the bully boys might be pulled back if state officials will betray their voters, shows the damage that can be done nonetheless.
The dignified and angry public response from around the country to the latest killing suggests maybe something has snapped. It would not be the first time in our history that government violence kindled an even more powerful reaction.
It’s not only the safety and sanity of people in Minnesota that’s at stake. As we are reminded once again, our democracy is on the line.
Keep Reading
Show Less
US Senate, Do the Right Thing and Refuse to Fund ICE
Senators who believe in compassion and human rights have a unique opportunity to pull back the agency’s powers by refusing to back an appropriations bill passed by the House of Representatives that would renew ICE's budget.
Jan 29, 2026
More Americans now support abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, than keeping it.
A January 13, 2026 Economist/YouGov poll found that 46% want to eliminate ICE, compared to 43% who support preserving it. It’s a trend that’s been growing since ICE agents have been running rampant in US cities during Donald Trump’s second term.
A majority of Americans in 2024 backed strict immigration enforcement, so this surge in anti-ICE sentiment likely stems from the agency’s draconian crackdown on immigrants, protesters, citizens, and even children. Most recently, federal agents shot and killed an ICU nurse named Alex Pretti in Minneapolis when he came to the defense of other protesters.
Pretti was only the latest casualty. On New Year’s eve, a Black man named Keith Porter was killed in Los Angeles, allegedly at the hands of an off-duty ICE officer with a documented history of abusing children and being racist and homophobic.
Imagine living in a nation where, instead of pouring our collective resources into hurting and killing our fellow human beings, we pay to house, feed, clothe, educate, and care for one another.
A week later in Minneapolis, ICE officer Jonathan Ross shot and killed a white woman named Renee Good in an incident that galvanized the nation.
During the same crackdown, ICE agents dragged an elderly Hmong American man into the street in his underwear in frigid temperatures after invading his home and terrorizing his family. Other agents tear-gassed a family of eight trying to get home from their son’s sporting event, causing their infant child to lose consciousness.
These are just the documented incidents involving US citizens. Meanwhile, immigrant children as young as 5 years old are being targeted and detained, and dozens of noncitizens have died in ICE custody.
Senators who believe in compassion and human rights have a unique opportunity to pull back the agency’s powers by refusing to back an appropriations bill passed by the House of Representatives. That bill, according to the American Civil Liberties Union, “would renew ICE’s excessive budget, with no strings attached, adding to the over $170 billion in taxpayer funds already allocated for immigration enforcement in July 2025.”
Although seven House Democrats voted for the bill alongside Republicans, a majority of Democrats voted against it and there are even rumblings within the party to support the idea of eliminating the agency altogether. Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) recently introduced legislation to that effect.
Abolishing ICE is not only good for human rights in the nation—it would also free up funding for such critical needs as healthcare. “My position has always been clear that ICE funding should be cut,” explained Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) after Good was shot, adding: “the cuts to your healthcare are what’s paying for this.”
She’s right. Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” deeply slashed Medicaid funding and allowed subsidies that lowered healthcare costs for Affordable Care Act plans to expire at the same time it hiked ICE funding to historic levels.
ICE funding comes out of the pockets of all working Americans—who are currently, absurdly, funding an agency with striking similarities to Hitler’s Brown Shirts. This comes at a time of continued economic insecurity for a majority of Americans.
For a microcosm of what it would look like to reverse the equation, look at New York City. In just a few weeks the city’s popular new mayor, Zohran Mamdani, who has clearly stated his desire to abolish ICE, has taken actionable steps toward affordable housing, universal childcare, and other bread-and-butter issues.
Imagine living in a nation where, instead of pouring our collective resources into hurting and killing our fellow human beings, we pay to house, feed, clothe, educate, and care for one another.
The Senate now faces such a choice. It was only after Pretti was killed that Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) signaled his party would take a stand and block the vote.
This can and should be the first step toward eliminating ICE altogether.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Over 120 civil society groups demand EU leaders phase out US fossil fuels in light of Trump’s fossil fuel imperialism
Following Trump’s strikes on Venezuela and his escalating threats to other Latin American countries and Greenland, over 120 European and international civil society groups sent a letter to EU leaders to urge them to cancel negotiation and implementation of the US-EU trade deal and reduce reliance on US fossil fuels.
Jan 29, 2026
Today, over 120 European and international civil society groups sent a letter to EU leaders to urge them to cancel negotiation and implementation of the US-EU trade deal and reduce reliance on US fossil fuels in solidarity with those threatened by Trump’s fossil-fueled imperialism in Latin America and Greenland. Signatories include Oil Change International, Greenpeace International, Conexiones Climáticas, European Trade Justice Coalition, and the EU-LAT network.
In July 2025, Trump used the threat of economically devastating tariffs to ensure the EU would agree to import $750 billion of US energy products over the next three years. Many analysts say this deal risks creating yet another dangerous dependency for Europe while leading to the weakening or abandoning of crucial climate and human rights legislation in the bloc. The letter argues that every Euro spent on US fossil fuels, and every fossil fuel investment made by European companies and banks in the United States, fuels Trump’s authoritarian agenda at home and his imperial ambitions abroad. Increased reliance on US fossil fuels will also worsen the climate crisis, spread toxic pollution in frontline communities, and is expected to raise energy prices for EU households.
The letter concludes that the EU must courageously oppose Trump’s fossil fuel agenda and defend people, our planet, and the rule of law. It demands EU leaders:
-Stand in solidarity with the Latin American nations threatened by the United States and other manifestations of imperial force, and to stand against all forms of oppression affecting local communities, as in the specific case of Venezuela.
-Stand in solidarity with Greenland. It is up to its people, and only them, to decide on their future.
-Put forth a motion at the United Nations that condemns the US’s blatant violations of international law
-Immediately cancel negotiations and implementation of the US-EU trade deal
-Engage with EU Member States to renew the European Green Deal and establish a binding roadmap for the phase-out of fossil gas,in particular US liquefied natural gas (LNG)
-Engage with EU Member States to appropriately terminate existing and prevent new long-term contracts for the import or financing of US LNG
-Defend the existing EU Methane Regulation and ensure a strong and robust implementation that applies to imports
-Support the First International Conference on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels, organized by the governments of Colombia and the Netherlands
Quotes:
“The EU has shifted its energy dependence from one authoritarian regime to another. Under Trump, the U.S. has become a rogue state that violates international law and bullies sovereign nations into submitting to its ‘energy dominance’ agenda. The EU must stop wasting money on risky, expensive U.S. fossil fuels, which threaten climate goals, put people at greater risk of climate disasters, and harm communities with toxic pollution. The EU is at a fork in the road: it can follow the U.S. down a volatile, destructive path or it can forge its own course toward stability. It can save billions, build a resilient economy, and ensure its long-term energy security and independence through a just transition to renewable energy.” Myriam Douo, False Solutions Senior Campaigner, Oil Change International
“There’s nothing clean about US LNG. This industry has destroyed wetlands, damaged fishermen’s livelihoods, and condemned Gulf South communities like mine to higher rates of heart conditions, asthma, and cancer. We’re also on the frontlines of hurricanes and flooding made worse by continued fossil-fuel dependency Europe keeps importing. The EU must side with communities like mine, not the fossil fuel executives bankrolling Trump, by ending its reliance on U.S. gas.” James Hiatt, Executive Director of For a Better Bayou
“If there was ever a time to realize that Europe needs to hold its ground and resist the fossil fueled imperialism of both Putin and Trump, than this time is definitely now! Switching one foolish fossil dependency for another is like switching from Vodka to Whiskey (or rather Bourbon) while claiming to get sober. Europe must stop lying to itself and get real. Real sovereignty is fossil free!” Andy Gheorghiu, freelance climate campaigner, consultant, and initiator of the letter
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Beginning of the Chaos': FBI Raid in Georgia Seen as Ominous Sign of Trump Plans for 2026 Midterms
"This should have people across the country absolutely shook," said Sen. Jon Ossoff.
Jan 29, 2026
The FBI's Wednesday raid on an elections center in Fulton County, Georgia is raising alarms about President Donald Trump's plans to disrupt the 2026 midterm elections.
Shortly after FBI agents executed a search warrant at the Fulton County Election Hub and Operations center to search for materials related to the 2020 presidential election, Fulton County Commissioner Mo Ivory warned that this kind of operation would likely be spreading to other counties and states.
"Fulton County is right now the target, the only county right now fighting over an election that already happened," she said, referring to Trump's election loss that he has refused to concede more than five years after it happened. "But it is coming to a place near you. This is the beginning of the chaos of 2026 that is about to ensue."
Commissioner Mo Ivory: Fulton County is right now the target, the only county right now fighting over an election that already happened. But it is coming to a place near you. This is the beginning of the chaos of 2026 that is about to ensue. pic.twitter.com/0HvPMMoQO8
— Blue Georgia (@BlueATLGeorgia) January 28, 2026
In a Wednesday interview on MSNOW, Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) described the raid on the elections center as a "seismic event" that should be a flashing red light for US voters.
"This should have people across the country absolutely shook," Ossoff said. "This is a huge deal. This is an FBI raid on the Fulton County Elections office. [Trump's] conspiracy theories about the 2020 election have been based in Georgia from the very start... this is a shot across the bow at the midterm elections. He tried to steal power when he lost it in 2020. We have to be prepared for all kinds of schemes and shenanigans."
Ossoff: "This is a seismic event. This should have people across the country absolutely shook. This is a huge deal. This is an FBI raid on the Fulton County Elections office ... This is a shot across the bow at the midterm elections. He tried to steal power when he lost it in… pic.twitter.com/vb8YwcP3Pa
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 29, 2026
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) noted that US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was spotted at the elections center during the FBI raid, which he said was wholly unprecedented given that her job is supposed to be focused on foreign national security threats.
Warner then posited two explanations for her presence on the ground in Fulton County.
"Director Gabbard believes there was a legitimate foreign intelligence nexus," Warner wrote in a social media post, "in which case she is in clear violation of her obligation under the law to keep the intelligence committees 'fully and currently informed' of relevant national security concerns."
The other option, said Warner, is that Gabbard "is once again demonstrating her utter lack of fitness for the office that she holds by injecting the nonpartisan intelligence community she is supposed to be leading into a domestic political stunt designed to legitimize conspiracy theories that undermine our democracy."
ProPublica published a report on Thursday that dove into the specifics of the search warrant executed at the Fulton County election center that allowed federal agents to seize 2020 election ballots, tabulator tapes, digital data, and voter rolls.
Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, told ProPublica that he has never seen a search warrant of this nature.
"The idea that federal officials would seize ballots in an attempt to prove fraud is especially dangerous in this context," said Hasen, "when we know there is no fraud because the Georgia 2020 election has been extensively counted, recounted, and investigated."
Derek Clinger, a senior counsel at the State Democracy Research Initiative, an institute at the University of Wisconsin Law School, told ProPublica that the sweeping search warrant marked "a dramatic escalation in the Trump administration’s efforts to expand federal control over our country’s historically state-run election infrastructure."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Most Popular