YIKES: Indicted Dem Hits New Low Taking Aim At A Public Servant’s Faith

Imagine if someone with an (R) after their name asked such openly hostile religious questions to a Muslim or a Sikh. The left’s apoplectic allegations of bigotry would echo until the End of Days.

Speaking of the Day of Judgment, that’s exactly where Democrat LaMonica McIver went in her time of questioning Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons.

Unlike other Dems who were content to use the threadbare ‘fascist’ accusation Dems have thrown at every Republican since Goldwater, McIver took direct aim at the man’s personal religious beliefs.

She asked him about the condition of his soul on Judgement Day.

Rep. LaMonica McIver asks Acting ICE Director Lyons:

“How do you think Judgement Day will work for you with so much blood on your hands?”

Lyons: “I’m not going to entertain that question.”

“Of course not. Do you think you’re going to hell?”

When called out by Chairman… pic.twitter.com/jnNsDiH1sd

— Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) February 10, 2026

She can hardly be dismissed as ‘impartial’ on this issue, seeing as only a month ago, a judge refused to dismiss the criminal case against LaMonica herself involving — you guessed it — charges of assaulting a federal officer.

A federal judge on Monday declined to dismiss one of three criminal charges facing Rep. LaMonica McIver, a Democratic congresswoman who is accused of assaulting federal agents outside a Newark immigration detention facility last year.

The decision comes nearly two months after the same judge denied McIver’s pretrial motions to dismiss the other two charges. McIver has filed notice that she is appealing the earlier order.

In the new, eight-page decision, U.S. District Court Judge Jamel K. Semper rejects McIver’s arguments that her actions are shielded by the U.S. Constitution’s speech or debate clause, which protects lawmakers from prosecution for official legislative actions. McIver has argued that she was at migrant jail Delaney Hall on the day in question to perform oversight duties and cannot be charged with a crime for what transpired during the visit.

“The Court cannot find that Defendant’s alleged conduct was legislative in nature,” Semper wrote. “Her conduct was not tied to potential legislation or any other policy-making purpose.” — NewJerseyMonitor

Maybe a legislator with a pending criminal case should have the self-awareness to be at least minimally circumspect when it comes to questions of objective morality.

But then again, she’s from New Jersey, where even after a sitting senator was caught with the gold bars he had been bribed with to use his committee role to benefit foreign governments was allowed to continue forming laws right up until the day the verdict was delivered.

Maybe she thinks the voters there don’t really care if she has any capacity for shame or not.