Trump and Vance Can’t Be ‘Pro-Life’ While Committing Violence Against Children

Children aren’t exempt from ICE’s violence. And for administration hardliners, that’s the point.

By Jordan Liz

Families detained at the Dilley Immigration Processing Center in Texas wave signs during a demonstration on Saturday, Jan. 24, 2026. Brenda Bazán/Associated Press

On January 20, ICE agents detained a five-year-old child just outside his home in Minnesota. The child was used as “bait” to try to draw family members out of their home.

A widely circulated photo of the boy being apprehended, with his Spiderman backpack and fuzzy little animal ears on his winter hat, may become an indelible image of ICE’s cruelty.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) alleges that ICE was conducting a targeted operation against the boy’s father, Adrian Alexander Conejo Arias. Yet he and his son had entered the country via an official crossing point. They have an active asylum case and there was no order of deportation against them.

Zena Stenvik, the local school superintendent, reports that this was the fourth child detained by ICE in that community alone. A 10-year-old fourth grader and two 17-year-olds were also taken.

Since then, more children have been abducted. On January 22, ICE agents detained a 2-year-old girl and her father, Elvis Joel Tipan Echeverria, in south Minneapolis. Like Arias and his son, Echeverria and his daughter are asylum seekers without an active order for deportation.

On January 29, two brothers in the second and fifth grades were detained with their mother. She also has a pending asylum case.

Violence towards children is nothing new for the Trump administration. During Trump’s first term, more than 5,000 immigrant children were forcibly separated from their parents. These children were held in dirty, crowded, chain-linked cages and only provided foil sheets to serve as blankets. In December 2024, Human Rights Watch reported that as many as 1,360 children had still not been reunited with their parents.

Observing Lent

Maybe he couldn't pay Trump's billion dollars membership fee

 I'm liking this guy almost as much as Francis

Cotter bill would allow property tax deferment by senior or disabled homeowners

Pay when you're dead

Rep. Megan L. Cotter has filed legislation to help older Rhode Islanders stay in their homes by allowing deferment of their property taxes.

The legislation (2026-H 7567) would apply statewide and would be available to those 62 or older and those of any age who are permanently totally disabled or are disabled veterans. 

Under it, the payment of property taxes on single-family homes owned and occupied by those who qualify could be deferred until the property is disposed because of the death of all owners or otherwise sold or transferred. The deferred amount, which would be subject to a 6% annual interest rate, would constitute a lien on the property and would be added to its final tax bill.

“For most people, a home is their largest asset, an investment in their physical and financial security for life,” said Representative Cotter (D-Dist. 39, Exeter, Richmond, Hopkinton). 

“Unfortunately, staying in that home can become unaffordable when people retire or become disabled. Allowing property tax deferment would provide another option, similar to a reverse mortgage, that would give homeowners more opportunity to age in place and remain in the home they love for the rest of their lives.”

Rhode Island is in court against Trump again, this time over his decision to destroy efforts to curb climate change

CLF: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sued over illegal repeal of climate protections

Steve Ahlquist 

From a CLF press release:

Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), as part of a broad coalition of health and environmental groups, has sued the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over its illegal determination that it is not responsible for protecting us from climate pollution and its elimination of rules to cut the tailpipe pollution fueling the climate crisis and harming people’s health.

The case, filed in the D.C. Circuit, challenges the Trump EPA’s rescission of the 2009 endangerment finding, which found that climate pollution is a threat to public health and welfare. The finding supported common-sense safeguards to cut that pollution, including from cars and trucks. In addition, the agency eliminated the clean vehicle standards, which were set to deliver the single biggest cut to U.S. carbon pollution in history, save lives, and save Americans’ hard-earned money on gas.

The case was brought by:

• The American Public Health Association, American Lung Association, Alliance of Nurses for a Healthy Environment, Clean Wisconsin, represented by Clean Air Task Force (CATF),
• Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice (CCAEJ), Clean Air Council, Friends of the Earth, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Rio Grande International Study Center (RGISC), and the Union of Concerned Scientists, represented by Earthjustice, and
• Center for Biological Diversity, Conservation Law Foundation, Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Law & Policy Center, NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council), Public Citizen, and Sierra Club.

The named defendants are EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and EPA itself as an agency.

“Taking away the endangerment finding doesn’t protect families — it abandons them,” said Conservation Law Foundation Senior Vice President for Law and Policy Kate Sinding Daly. “This scientific determination has for years served as the bedrock of our nation’s efforts to curb deadly pollution and safeguard public health and welfare. Taking it away only absolves the EPA of acting on behalf of every family in the country. We won’t let that stand and we’re prepared to take this fight to court to ensure our communities aren’t left to bear the consequences of unchecked climate-warming pollution.”

Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA is legally required to limit vehicle emissions of any “air pollutant” that the agency determines “cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” 

In 2007, the United States Supreme Court held in Massachusetts v. EPA that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases unambiguously are “air pollutants” under the Clean Air Act and told EPA to determine, based on the science, if that pollution endangers human health and welfare. EPA made that determination in 2009, which led to new standards for vehicles. It built on that finding when issuing other standards.

In its repeal, the Trump EPA is rehashing legal arguments that the Supreme Court already considered and rejected in Massachusetts v. EPA.

Along with the repeal of the endangerment finding, the EPA eliminated all carbon emissions standards from vehicles. The EPA’s clean car standards set in 2024 would save drivers of new cars an average of $6,000 over the lifetime of their vehicles. The EPA’s own analysis found that eliminating vehicle standards will increase gas prices, force Americans to spend more on fuel, and have a net negative effect on the economy.

Rhode Island Health Department warning to pet owners whose pets have gotten rabies shots recently

Animal Rabies Vaccine Recalled

Make sure they get the RIGHT shots

The Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) and the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (DEM) are alerting pet owners, animal control officers, and municipal clerks that a shipment of rabies vaccine is being recalled because some vials in that shipment may have contained sterile water instead of rabies vaccine. 

This vaccine was received by veterinarians, including veterinarians in Rhode Island, between September 29, 2025 and January 8, 2026. The recalled vaccine was made by Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health. The recalled lot is IMRAB 3TF, vaccine; 1 mL; Serial 18665; expiration date March 12, 2027. Other manufacturers and brands, and other serial lots manufactured by Boehringer Ingelheim, are not affected by this recall. 

Rhode Island law requires dogs, cats, and ferrets to be vaccinated against rabies. Any animal that was vaccinated with this lot will not be considered currently vaccinated for rabies management or dog licensing purposes. 

Any pet that was administered this recalled product should be revaccinated against rabies. There are no health concerns for pets with being administered sterile water or with being readministered rabies vaccine. 

Without Evidence, US Cancer Institute Studying Ivermectin’s ‘Ability to Kill Cancer Cells’

Once touted by MAGA as a COVID cure, Bobby Jr. is now ordering it be studied as a cancer cure. Really.

After Trump cancelled billions for real cancer research, we get this

Rachana Pradhan

The National Cancer Institute, the federal research agency charged with leading the war against the nation’s second-largest killer, is studying ivermectin as a potential cancer treatment, according to its top official.

“There are enough reports of it, enough interest in it, that we actually did — ivermectin, in particular — did engage in sort of a better preclinical study of its properties and its ability to kill cancer cells,” said Anthony Letai, a physician the Trump administration appointed as NCI director in September.

Letai did not cite new evidence that might have prompted the institute to research the effectiveness of the antiparasitic drug against cancer. The drug, largely used to treat people or animals for infections caused by parasites, is a popular dewormer for horses.

“We’ll probably have those results in a few months,” Letai said. “So we are taking it seriously.”

He spoke about ivermectin at a Jan. 30 event, “Reclaiming Science: The People’s NIH,” with National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya and other senior agency officials at Washington, D.C.’s Willard Hotel. The MAHA Institute hosted the discussion, framed by the “Make America Healthy Again” agenda of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The National Cancer Institute is the largest of the NIH’s 27 branches.

During the covid pandemic, ivermectin’s popularity surged as fringe medical groups promoted it as an effective treatment. Clinical trials have found it isn’t effective against covid.

Ivermectin has become a symbol of resistance against the medical establishment among MAHA adherents and conservatives. Like-minded commentators and wellness and other online influencers have hyped — without evidence — ivermectin as a miracle cure for a host of diseases, including cancer. Trump officials have pointed to research on ivermectin as an example of the administration’s receptiveness to ideas the scientific establishment has rejected.

“If lots of people believe it and it’s moving public health, we as NIH have an obligation, again, to treat it seriously,” Bhattacharya said at the event. According to The Chronicle at Duke University, Bhattacharya recently said he wants the NIH to be “the research arm of MAHA.”

The decision by the world’s premier cancer research institute to study ivermectin as a cancer treatment has alarmed career scientists at the agency.

“I am shocked and appalled,” one NCI scientist said. “We are moving funds away from so much promising research in order to do a preclinical study based on nonscientific ideas. It’s absurd.”

KFF Health News granted the scientist and other NCI workers anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to the press and fear retaliation.

HHS and the National Cancer Institute did not answer KFF Health News’ questions on the amount of money the cancer institute is spending on the study, who is carrying it out, and whether there was new evidence that prompted NCI to look into ivermectin as an anticancer therapy. Emily Hilliard, an HHS spokesperson, said NIH is dedicated to “rigorous, gold-standard research,” something the administration has repeatedly professed.

A golden calf speaks at the National Prayer Breakfast

Go figure: Evangelicals love a lying, accused child-rapist, convicted felon, narcissist who doesn't go to church, doesn't know the Bible and spreads racism and hate

Sabrina Haake

On February 5, Trump addressed the 2026 National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C., a tradition President Dwight Eisenhower began in 1953 to solemnify the confluence of faith, gratitude, and public service. At Eisenhower’s ceremony, after he swore the oath of office, he delivered an unscripted and spontaneous prayer of humility, calling on God to “make full and complete our dedication to the service of the people.”

Seventy-odd years later at this year’s national prayer breakfast, Trump met Eisenhower’s prayer of humility and raised him one.

Thanks for reading The Haake Take! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Instead of somber reflection or words to soothe an anxious nation, Trump used the national prayer to deliver a blasphemous meditation on Trump: 77 minutes of self-indulgence, grievance and hatred.

Using national prayer to promote violence

Trump opened his remarks by maligning the press, complaining that he never gets “a fair break from the fake news, which is (points dismissively) back there.”

Then, only three sentences in, he started referring to himself referentially as “Sir” while calling everyone else by their first name.

Forgetting the prayer theme of the breakfast, Trump joked about murdering people in Venezuela like it was locker room talk. “I was just talking to a great leader from El Salvador and he said, man, that was some attack, I’ve never seen anything like that one. Right? Right?” Continuing his banter with the murderous Bukele across the room, Trump laughed, “That (violent attack) was good even by your high standard, right? That was a hell of an attack.”

Only ghouls or morons would think that was funny. In a rule of law world, Trump would be hauled into the ICC on multiple charges of murder.

He's not a racist

Get out there

Courtney Cox to discuss gender, media, politics within basketball at upcoming URI humanities lecture

But not THAT Courteney Cox

James Bessette 

Courtney M. Cox follows athletes, coaches, journalists and advocates of women’s basketball as they pursue careers within the sport. She also explores the intersection of race and gender against the backdrop of many leagues around the United States and the world, such as the WNBA and the NCAA.

In Cox’s book, Double Crossover: Gender, Media, and Politics in Global Basketball, she explores how Black women and nonbinary athletes maneuver through the global sports media complex. Cox, a former ESPN associate director and now associate professor at the University of Oregon, will discuss her book and work during the University of Rhode Island’s Humanities and Popular Culture/Counterculture lecture series. 

Cox’s talk, followed by a book signing and reception, will be held Thursday, Feb. 26, at 4 p.m., in the Hope Room of the Robert J. Higgins Welcome Center, 45 Upper College Road, on the Kingston Campus.

The year-long lecture series, hosted by the URI Center for the Humanities, has already featured talks on music and social justice, art and Black Southern life, and Indigenous peoples’ space in pop culture. The series is co-sponsored by the URI College of Arts and Sciences, Division of Research and Economic Development, Department of Gender and Women’s Studies, a grant from the Mellon Foundation, and Department of Philosophy.

Bobby Jr.'s anti-vax committee sets its sight on proven anti-cancer vaccine

The HPV vaccine prevents cancer. The new ACIP wants to re-examine that.

Jake Scott, MD

Here's a win for Bobby Jr. - driving Moderna out of the
vaccine business

The vaccine against human papillomavirus, or HPV, has reduced cervical cancer by nearly 90% in women vaccinated as adolescents. It has been studied in more than 70 randomized controlled trials. Over 135 million doses have been administered in the United States. 

And last month, a newly formed working group under the reconstituted Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which helps guide vaccine decisions by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced plans to conduct a multi-year "comprehensive review" of the vaccine's efficacy, effectiveness, and safety.

The working group's charter, finalized in December 2025, does not limit itself to the one genuinely open question in HPV vaccine science, whether a single dose provides adequate long-term protection. It calls for a sweeping reexamination that includes adjuvant toxicity, potential contaminants, possible HPV type replacement, and a full reassessment of safety data. It lists neurology and toxicology among the disciplines to be represented on the working group. 

And it operates under an ACIP that was reconstituted in June 2025 after Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired all 17 prior members and replaced them with appointees who include paid expert witnesses against the product now under review.

Messy weather in Charlestown through next Monday

Temps too high for snow to stick, but there might be some ice

By Will Collette

Our winter weather continues to be worse than it has been in several years. The National Weather Service forecast for Charlestown calls for daytime temps above freezing, continuing the melt, and nighttime temps a little below freezing.

Lots of precipitation on the way mixing rain, snow and freezing rain. Very little snow accumulation is expected. But roads could get sloppy nonetheless, especially if we get even the slightest amount of ice. 

The pattern of snow that doesn't stick alternating with freezing rain that might is expected to continue through Monday. The NWS says we will see sunshine on Tuesday but weather just below freezing and brisk wind.

As it stands, NOAA is forecasting a 35% chance that Charlestown could get 0.01 inches of ice. While those are good odds for us, just the tiniest amount of black ice could put you in a world of hurt. So please be very careful.

The question of the ages: Is it OK to sit on public toilet seats?

How can we stop this menace when HHS Secretary Bobby Kennedy Jr. lets his grandkids swim in sewage?

Lotti Tajouri, Bond University

If you’re a parent or have a chronic health condition that needs quick or frequent trips to the bathroom, you’ve probably mapped out the half-decent public toilets in your area.

But sometimes, you don’t have a choice and have to use a toilet that looks like it hasn’t been cleaned in weeks. Do you brave it and sit on the seat?

What if it looks relatively clean: do you still worry that sitting on the seat could make you sick?

What’s in a public toilet?

Healthy adults produce more than a liter of urine and more than 100 grams of poo daily. Everybody sheds bacteria and viruses in feces (poo) and urine, and some of this ends up in the toilet.

Some people, especially those with diarrhea, may shed more harmful microbes (bacteria and viruses) when they use the toilet.

Public toilets can be a “microbial soup”, especially when many people use them and cleaning isn’t frequent as it should be.

What germs are found on toilet seats?

Many types of microbes have been found on toilet seats and surrounding areas. These include:

• bacteria from the gut, such as E. coli, Klebsiella, Enterococcus, and viruses such as norovirus and rotavirus. These can cause gastroenteritis, with bouts of vomiting and diarrhea

• bacteria from the skin, including Staphylococcus aureus and even multi-drug resistant S.aureus and other bacteria such as pseudomonas and acinetobacter. These can cause infections

• eggs from parasites (worms) that are carried in poo, and single-celled organisms such as protozoa. These can cause abdominal pain.

There’s also something called biofilm, a mix of germs that builds up under toilet rims and on surfaces.

Are toilet seats the dirtiest part?

No. A recent study showed public toilet seats often have fewer microbes than other locations in public toilets, such as door handles, faucet knobs and toilet flush levers. These parts are touched a lot and often with unwashed hands.

Public toilets in busy places are used hundreds or even thousands of times each week. Some are cleaned often, but others (such as those in parks or bus stops) may only be cleaned once a day or much less, so germs can build up quickly. The red flags that a toilet hasn’t been cleaned are the smell of urine, soiled floors and what is obvious to your eyes.

However, the biggest problem isn’t just sitting: it’s what happens when toilets are flushed. When you flush without a lid, a “toilet plume” shoots tiny droplets into the air. These droplets can contain bacteria and viruses from the toilet bowl and travel up to 2 meters.

Citizenship voting requirement in SAVE America Act has no basis in the Constitution – and ignores precedent that only states decide who gets to vote

Trump and MAGA Republicans want to make it as hard as possible to vote

John J. Martin, Quinnipiac University

The Republican-led House of Representatives voted Feb. 11, 2026 to approve the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act – or SAVE America Act. The bill would require individuals to provide proof of citizenship when they register to vote and present photo identification when they do vote in federal elections.

This marks the third year in a row that the House has passed similar legislation. Passage in the Senate, which would require Democratic votes, continues to appear unlikely. But Republicans from Donald Trump on down are clearly interested in finding ways to enhance election security – although critics contend the SAVE America Act would unfairly disenfranchise millions of citizens.

The SAVE America Act would require anyone registering to vote in federal elections to first “provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship” in person, such as a passport or birth certificate.

The new version goes further than its predecessor by requiring many individuals voting in federal elections to present photo identification at the polls indicating proof of U.S. citizenship.

Voting rights experts and advocacy organizations have detailed how the legislation could suppress voting. In part, they say it would particularly create barriers in low-income and minority communities. People in such communities often lack the forms of ID acceptable under the SAVE America Act for a variety of reasons, including socioeconomic factors.

As of now, at least 9% of voting-age American citizens – approximately 21 million people – do not even have driver’s licenses, let alone proof of citizenship. In spite of this, many legislators support the bill as a means of eliminating noncitizen voting in elections.

As a legal scholar who studies, among other things, foreign interference in elections, I find considerations about the potential effects of the SAVE America Act important, especially given how rare it is that a noncitizen actually votes in federal elections.

Yet, it is equally crucial to consider a more fundamental question: Is the SAVE America Act even constitutional?