Andrew Walter Sandvik, a 47‑year‑old man from North Dakota, has pleaded guilty to making a true threat against President Donald Trump, admitting he wrote a Facebook post that a reasonable person would understand as a serious threat to Trump’s life and safety. The case was prosecuted as a federal offense because threats against the president are treated as a distinct crime under U.S. law.
What he posted and admitted
- On August 30, 2025, Sandvik posted on Facebook:
“Trump I am threatening your entire existence! Your SS cannot protect you from me!” - In his plea agreement, he admitted that the message was intended to be seen as a true threat and that he knew a reasonable person would interpret it that way.
- Because of his guilty plea, prosecutors agreed to dismiss the remaining counts in the original November 2025 indictment, which had charged him with three counts of threats against the president and one count of threats against the vice president.
His broader online activity
- Earlier in September 2025, a Fargo police detective referred Sandvik to federal authorities over more “concerning” posts calling for violence against Trump and law enforcement.
- Investigators say he wrote lines such as:
- “Secret Service it is no secret I am your biggest threat you better get here fast.”
- “Trump, Can You Feel My Footsteps Coming? Death is now marching towards the failed and weak Donald Trump!”
- “Patel I’m waiting for you,” referring to FBI Director Kash Patel.
- Family members told the FBI that Sandvik claimed he was “directly communicating with God” and had been given divine “tasks,” which investigators said aligned with the tone and content of his posts.
Mental‑health concerns and legal status
- After his arrest, prosecutors argued Sandvik was mentally unstable and a potential danger to others, asking the court to detain him and order a psychiatric evaluation.
- Under the terms of his plea deal, Sandvik could face up to five years in federal prison, three years of supervised release, and a $250,000 fine, though prosecutors have said they will recommend a sentence at the low end of the applicable guideline range.
- A specific sentencing date has not yet been listed publicly, and the agreement warns that if he violates its terms or commits further crimes, prosecutors can reinstate the previously dismissed charges.
The case fits a pattern of federal prosecutions in which online threats against top officials—even if no immediate plot can be proven—are treated as serious crimes, especially when the language is clear, specific, and repeated.
