U.S. Congressman Backtracks On Social Media Post Claiming He Fired Weapons At Nuclear-Armed Russia
U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., wants you to know that while “a lot of people talk a big game about supporting Ukraine,” he cares enough to take a taxpayer-funded trip there to make a series of potentially dangerous political blunders.
Fitzpatrick is a former federal prosecutor and was stationed in Ukraine when he worked as an FBI special agent. Now in Congress, he is chairman of the CIA Subcommittee of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and he is a delegate to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.
In a social media post, Fitzpatrick assured Ukraine, “We will always have their back.” It is a view President Donald Trump’s Administration does not necessarily hold.
Trump has been in negotiations with Russia and Ukraine, and it seems unlikely that the administration asked Fitzpatrick for help with negotiations.
Yet last week Fitzpatrick met for talks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. He let him know that the voting margins are “tight” in Congress, as if he were discussing strategy with a teammate.
When negotiating, it is not helpful to promise one party you are on their side. It kills any motivation for that party to be flexible. They are more likely to dig their heels in until things go their way, as long as you have their back.
The Federalist asked Fitzpatrick’s office, the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the White House if the Trump administration gave its blessing to Fitzpatrick’s meeting. None answered the query.
More egregious than meeting with Zelensky, Fitzpatrick posted photos and video that appeared to show him shooting weapons into Russia.
“It was my profound honor to deliver a very ‘personal’ message to Vladimir Putin today, from the front lines of the war near the Russian border, on behalf of our PA-1 community. The only permissible details to share are that ‘the message was delivered on target,’” the post reads.
The “personal” message was scrawled on one or more pictured artillery shells. It said, “To: Putin From PA-1 [Fitzpatrick’s district near Philadelphia] #PeaceThroughStrength.”
Ostensibly taken near the Russian border, the video shows Fitzpatrick firing two projectiles. “The message was delivered on target,” but the congressman said could not give any more details. Security, you know.
The post leaves little room for interpretation. It sure looks like a sitting U.S. congressman fired shots into Russia, ratcheting up tensions. That is what he communicated, and it is how the shocked responses to his post understood it.
The Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the White House did not respond to a request for comment about Fitzpatrick’s post and how it might draw the United States closer to war with Russia.
The Federalist asked Fitzpatrick’s office about the post, and an email exchange took place that made things less clear.
The Federalist contacted Casey-Lee Waldron, Fitzpatrick’s communications director.
I am a reporter at The Federalist, filing a piece today about Rep. Fitzpatrick’s commitment to Ukraine.
I see he has the support of some defense contractors. Surely there are American jobs tied to the continuation of the war. Can you/he speak to that?
Is he concerned that having a sitting U.S. Congressman personally send munitions into Russia is an American act of aggression, drawing us closer to a direct war with Russia?
Did the Trump administration bless this trip as it works on negotiating with the two countries?
She responded with a terse, single sentence.
The Congressman did not fire any munitions at or into Russia — he was at a controlled Ukrainian training facility. Your claim is completely and maliciously false and defamatory.
Did all the posters responding to Fitzpatrick’s post miss something? He didn’t offer any online clarification.
The Federalist asked for clarification, and sent the spokeswoman Fitzpatrick’s post, highlighting the phrases “very ‘personal’ message to Vladimir Putin” “from the front lines of the war” and “the message was delivered on target.”
Please help me be accurate. … None of his posts — that I have seen — mention a training facility. It overtly appears he sent something directly into Russia. Please advise.
She sent another single sentence: “By ‘target’ — we meant that literally — an actual target on a training range.”
The Federalist asked for further clarification.
So, he wrote personal messages for Putin, with the intention of firing them on a training range? Why didn’t he make that clear in his posts? Also, you didn’t answer my other questions.
One more sentence came back.
Because the Ukrainians specifically asked that we not disclose the existence, let alone the location, of their training facility.
Apparently now that his post is politically awkward, it is OK to mention the existence of a training facility.
Another way to keep it on the downlow, since lives may be at stake, would have been for Fitzpatrick (a trained former FBI agent) to simply not post about it. But for some reason, he needed folks back home to know he does more than “talk a big game.”
Who would need to know that? Why did he appear on Face the Nation on Sunday to promote continued support for Ukraine through his visit? Could it be the many defense contractors who regularly donate to his campaign coffers?
In the 2023-2024 campaign cycle, Fitzpatrick received more than $35,000 combined in campaign donations from Employees of Northrop Grumman Corporation PAC; General Dynamics Corporation PAC; L3 Technologies, Inc. PAC; Employees of RTX Corporation PAC; and Lockheed Martin Employees PAC — all defense contractors with a financial stake that improves as long as the U.S. government has Ukraine’s back.
In the days before Fitzpatrick left for Ukraine, he received an additional $5,000 in payments from these defense PACs that have business in Ukraine — Lockheed Martin Employees PAC, General Dynamics Corporation PAC, Employees of RTX Corporation PAC, and Parsons Corporation PAC — Federal Election Commission filings show.
Perhaps the campaign donations, and the billions of dollars in contracts, have nothing to do with Fitzpatrick’s actions. But those actions didn’t bring us any closer to the peace he claims to want.
Beth Brelje is an elections correspondent for The Federalist. She is an award-winning investigative journalist with decades of media experience.
Jesus Christ is King
