Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT) has ignited a firestorm of criticism after delivering a provocative warning on MSNBC, suggesting that MAGA supporters cheering on President Trump’s military strikes against suspected narco-terrorist operations in the Caribbean should brace for future political payback — including the possibility of lethal force being used by a hypothetical President Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
“There will be a Democratic president someday,” Himes said. “And all my MAGA friends who are cheering on these illegal killings need to imagine who gets killed when President Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says that it doesn’t matter what the law says, she’s going to do what she’s going to do.”
That kind of statement doesn’t just break norms — it shatters them. In one breath, a sitting U.S. congressman essentially suggested that a future progressive administration might use military force domestically, not just abroad, to settle ideological scores. It’s a threat wrapped in hypothetical speculation, but one that instantly set off alarms about the increasingly reckless rhetoric coming from Democratic leadership.
Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes informed the world that AOC really does run the Democrat Party, stating, “Imagine who gets killed when President Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says that it doesn’t matter what the law says.” pic.twitter.com/837GPnrYGD
— Loomer Unleashed (@LoomerUnleashed) October 29, 2025
The comments came in the context of a heated national debate over President Trump’s authorization of military strikes on vessels in international waters — boats suspected of trafficking drugs under the banner of narco-terrorism. Critics like Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) have gone as far as to label the strikes “sanctioned murder,” prompting a fierce rebuttal from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).
“To say that we’re engaging in murder is just such an outrage,” Graham said, pointing to the commander-in-chief’s longstanding authority to engage military force under Article II of the Constitution. “Nobody accused Bush of murder when he invaded Panama. Nobody accused Reagan of murder in Grenada.” Graham’s bottom line? The president has both the historical and constitutional authority to act decisively in America’s defense.
But Himes wasn’t interested in that constitutional nuance. Instead, he veered into dangerous territory — suggesting that if Republicans accept these strikes now, they’ll have no ground to object when the next far-left president does the same, perhaps with entirely different motives. That’s not a legal argument. That’s political intimidation.
Worse still, Himes seemed to ignore one of the most glaring examples of executive military overreach in recent memory — President Barack Obama’s 2011 drone strike that killed Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen and known Al Qaeda leader, in Yemen. That strike also took the life of his 16-year-old son in a separate attack. At the time, Democrats largely stood by the administration’s decision — and there was no MSNBC meltdown over “illegal killings” from Rep. Himes.
Now, Democrats like Himes are demanding that President Trump release a memo detailing which groups are considered designated terrorist organizations (DTOs) and justify the legal rationale behind the Caribbean strikes. This sudden urgency over executive war powers appears selective at best — and deeply unserious at worst.
