Democratic Sen.
Dick Durbin of Illinois has managed to turn himself into the poster child for the very AI problem he claims to be fighting.
According to Western Journal, Durbin the Senate majority whip and therefore one of the most powerful Democrats in Washington took to the Senate floor on Wednesday to denounce the shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, using what he insisted was a real photograph of the incident.
He solemnly warned colleagues, Im going to show a photo of that scene, which is graphic, adding, But Im afraid its necessary to appreciate the horror of the moment. The image, displayed behind him as he spoke, purported to show the final seconds before Prettis death at the hands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
Durbin described the image in detail as if it were an authentic record of events. This photo shows the last seconds before the ICE agent killed Alex Pretti on the streets of Minneapolis, he said, pointing to a picture of Pretti kneeling on the ground, surrounded by three ICE agents, one of whom appeared to be aiming a gun at him. He continued, In [Prettis] right hand is his camera, the left hand holding the ground. No gun obvious, no effort to resist obvious.
For more than seven minutes, Durbin spoke with the image behind him, using it as a visual anchor for his argument about federal immigration enforcement and the conduct of ICE. Yet he appeared not to notice what any reasonably attentive observer could see at a glance: The photograph was so obviously AI-generated that one of the ICE agents in the frame did not even have a head. The grotesque error a hallmark of sloppy AI image generation was not subtle, not hidden, and not difficult to detect.
Durbin was not alone in relying on manipulated or fabricated imagery to shape the narrative around Prettis death. Others on the left, including media figures, have circulated altered or misleading visuals to advance a broader political storyline about immigration enforcement. Nicolle Wallace, for instance, showcased manipulated images on MS NOW, further blurring the line between fact and fiction in the public debate.
Yet Durbins use of the fake image stands out precisely because of his position and his purpose. As the second-most powerful Democrat in the Senate, he was not merely another activist or commentator; he was using the prestige of the Senate floor to lend weight to a narrative built, in part, on a fabrication. That choice did not just weaken his argument; it undercut the credibility of his broader campaign against alleged abuses by immigration authorities.
The headless ICE agent in the AI-generated image is not a trivial detail or a mere punchline. It highlights the recklessness of using unverified, synthetic media to frame a contentious and still-evolving case. The shooting of Alex Pretti is under intense scrutiny, and the facts are still being sorted out; this is not a clear-cut use-of-force incident like the Renee Good shooting, where the circumstances were more straightforward. Yet Democrats have rushed to pounce, as the old media clich goes, using the tragedy as a vehicle to condemn immigration enforcement more broadly.
In that context, presenting Prettis final moments through an AI deepfake is not only foolish but morally suspect. It suggests that Durbin was willing to rely on a fabricated image rather than the extensive video evidence already available to anyone willing to conduct a basic search on social media. For a man in his position, with access to far more information than the average citizen, the failure to review authentic footage or, worse, the possibility that he saw it and chose the fake anyway raises serious questions about honesty and diligence.
Durbins floor speech was not an isolated moral appeal; it was tied directly to an ongoing budget fight with significant policy implications. Democrats are now using Prettis death as leverage to oppose funding for the Department of Homeland Security, effectively seeking to strip money from a carefully negotiated House compromise designed to restore some semblance of regular order to federal budgeting. Instead of responsibly funding core government functions, they are once again threatening to hold spending bills hostage to ideological demands.
Prettis death, in this telling, becomes a convenient wedge issue. If the shooting can be portrayed as an obvious, unambiguous atrocity, then Democrats can claim a moral imperative to vote against DHS funding and, by extension, against immigration enforcement itself. But the facts do not support such a simplistic narrative, and Durbin, of all people, should have known better than to pretend they do especially by leaning on a counterfeit image.
The irony is even sharper when one considers Durbins recent role as a leading voice in the push to regulate AI-generated content. Less than a month before his deepfake debacle on the Senate floor, he was championing legislation to crack down on precisely the kind of synthetic imagery he ended up using. From Axios on Jan. 13: Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) on Tuesday will call for unanimous consent to pass the bipartisan DEFIANCE Act, a bill to protect people from image-based sexual abuse online, Axios has learned.
The Axios report continued, Chatbots are coming under fire for producing child sexual abuse material and non-consensual intimate imagery of adults, and people are eager for legal recourse. It added, Durbins move comes in the wake of public outcry over Elon Musks X, which hasnt been able to keep up with the images its Grok chatbot has been producing. [Emphasis in original.] In other words, Durbin positioned himself as the sober, technologically literate guardian standing between the public and the dangers of AI abuse.
No serious person defends image-based sexual abuse, and conservatives have long supported strong action against child exploitation and genuine criminal misuse of technology. But the public outcry highlighted by Democrats has often seemed less about the underlying problem and more about the opportunity to attack political enemies such as Elon Musk and his platform X. Against that backdrop, Durbins self-appointment as the face of responsible AI regulation looks increasingly hollow.
Durbin himself warned, The AI boom is fully underway. Leaving it unregulated puts us all at risk. That statement, delivered with the gravitas of a senior senator, was meant to underscore the urgency of federal intervention in the AI space. Yet his own conduct demonstrates a different, more immediate risk: powerful officials who do not understand the technology they are regulating, but are eager to weaponize it or fall for it when it suits their political aims.
The spectacle of a senior Democrat using a headless, AI-generated ICE agent to dramatize a contested shooting, then posturing as a guardian against deepfakes, encapsulates a broader problem in Washington. Those who demand sweeping new controls over speech and technology often show the least competence in discerning truth from fabrication, while simultaneously exploiting public fear to expand government power. If anything needs regulating here, it is not the free flow of information but the reckless use of misinformation by those entrusted with public office.
Durbins misstep should prompt more than late-night jokes about Uncle Dick from Springfield who never quite moved past AOL and Keyword: PBS. It should force a serious reassessment of who is driving the AI panic, what their real motives are, and how easily their crusades can be undermined by their own ignorance. Before Congress rushes to clamp down on emerging technologies in the name of protecting the public, perhaps it should first ensure that its own leaders can tell the difference between a real photograph and a headless AI fantasy.
Login