Blog

Trump’s Expanded Drug War Will Make Overdose Crisis Worse, Experts Say

As President Donald Trump exploits fear about fentanyl to justify military aggression in Latin America, experts warn that his administration’s choice to slash federal support for public health programs threatens to erode progress in reducing fatal overdoses linked to synthetic opioids.

Trump issued an executive order on Monday declaring fentanyl a “weapon of mass destruction” that could be weaponized for “concentrated, large-scale terror attacks by organized adversaries.” Experts say fentanyl is not used as a weapon and dismissed the order as a public relations ploy as the administration struggles to explain its legal justification for waging a deadly international drug war without approval from Congress.

The order is the latest line in a series of massive escalations in Trump’s drug war. Trump and his “Secretary of War” Pete Hegseth are engaged military adventurism in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean, building up significant U.S. naval forces near Venezuela and blowing up boats the administration accuses of ferrying drugs in a campaign experts have classified as extrajudicial killings. Trump has ordered a naval blockade around Venezuela while threatening to oust President Nicolas Maduro.

The administration has spent months attempting to tie Maduro, and Venezuelans more broadly, to drug crimes in the U.S. while labeling such crimes as terrorism. After taking office, Trump declared the Venezuelan prison gang Tren de Aragua a “foreign terrorist organization” and called Maduro a “narco-terrorist” while rounding up Venezuelan immigrants and removing them to a notorious El Salvadoran prison. Most had no criminal convictions.

U.S. airstrikes have sunk at least 28 boats and killed more than 100 people since September, according to reports and to Zeteo’s strike tracker. The administration claims the boats are engaged in “narco-terrorist” activity, but the White House and Pentagon have not publicly released evidence that the victims are drug traffickers. The family of one man killed in a September 15 strike has said that the U.S. illegally murdered a law-abiding fisherman from Colombia, not a drug smuggler.

If any of the boats destroyed from the sky were ferrying drugs, it would most likely be cocaine, which is primarily produced in northwestern South America. Overdoses often involve multiple substances, but the overdose crisis is generally fueled by powerful synthetic stimulants, opioids, and tranquilizers — not cocaine, which is derived from the coca plant and is used by only a fragment of the population. Cocaine is typically more expensive than synthetics.

Maritza Perez Medina, director of federal affairs at the Drug Policy Alliance, said bullying Venezuela and attacking small boats will do nothing to prevent people from using fentanyl in the U.S. and could make the overdose crisis worse.

“This administration is not thinking in terms of solutions,” Medina said in an interview. “They are clearly using people’s fear of fentanyl as a pretext for implementing the president’s agenda, which includes taking away our civil liberties and actually putting us in more danger by potentially creating conflicts in other parts of the world.”

Keep reading

Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna Announce Plans to Bring Inherent Contempt Charges Against Attorney General Pam Bondi Over Epstein Files – “We’re Building a Bipartisan Coalition”

During a joint Sunday appearance on Face the Nation, Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Ro Khanna (D-CA), the authors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, signed into law by President Trump last month, announced their intention to bring charges for inherent contempt against Attorney General Pam Bondi. 

Under the rarely used congressional power, “the House or Senate has its Sergeant-At-Arms, or deputy, take a person into custody for proceedings to be held in Congress,” according to the National Constitution Center. However, it is unclear how effective this would be in the face of legal challenges and the executive branch’s power.

This is the latest in an escalating saga of threats, with Massie and Khanna claiming the DOJ has not complied fully with the law due to redactions in the files and not releasing every document available.

Khanna told CNN on Friday that he and Massie are currently drafting articles of impeachment or inherent contempt against Attorney General Pam Bondi, The Gateway Pundit reported.

“Massey and I aren’t going to just do something for the show of it, but my sense is, just looking at the initial reactions from people in MAGA, from survivors, is that this release is going to cause as much grief for Pam Bondi as the earlier releases,” Khanna told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins in reference to Bondi’s dumpsterfire release with MAGA influencers earlier this year. “The issue for her is not are there going to be 212 Democrats who would support it. The issue for her is how many Republicans and MAGA supporters would support it?”

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press this morning, where he dared Massie and Khanna to “bring it on,” maintaining that the DOJ is simply following the law and taking the necessary time to make redactions before releasing all of the files.

Blanche told NBC’s Kristen Welker that ensuring victim information is redacted “very much Trumps some deadline in the statute,” and he dared Khanna and Massie to file Articles of Impeachment. “We are complying with the statute, we will continue to comply with the statute, and if by complying with the statute, we don’t produce everything on Friday, we produce things next week, and the week after, that’s still compliance with the statute,” Blanche added.

Keep reading

Dave Chappelle Mocks People Comparing Charlie Kirk to MLK Jr: ‘That’s a Reach’

Comedian Dave Chappelle has addressed the September murder of the Turning Point USA founder and conservative media personality Charlie Kirk in his new stand-up comedy special, The Unstoppable, saying “that’s a reach” to any comparison between the fate of Kirk and the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968.

The performer specifically took umbrage at the move by some to call Kirk, “this generation’s Martin Luther King.”

“If you talk for a living and see Charlie Kirk get murdered that way, Imma be honest, n—-: I was shook,” Chappelle said in the Netflix stand-up show. “I mean, Charlie Kirk was the wholesome white guy. And they killed this motherf—er? I said, ‘These whites…never seen ’em like this. They’re playing for keeps!’”

The comedian outlined he doesn’t know what to make of Kirk’s death. “I’m not making light of Charlie Kirk dying, but I’m not sure what it means, and I’m not sure I believe what they say it means,” he said on the special.

“I’ll tell you what I don’t believe, and the whites were quick to say this. They said, ‘Charlie Kirk is this generation’s Martin Luther King [Jr.]’ No, he’s not! Yeah, that’s a reach.”

Keep reading

WHOA! Dave Chappelle SLAMS Bill Maher and Israel in Defense of Saudi Arabia Comedy Show: “F*ck That Guy”

Comedian Dave Chappelle came out guns blazing against critics of his appearance at the Riyadh Comedy Festival, in late September and early October, explicitly calling out Bill Maher and taking a shot at Israel. 

The strongly worded set was featured during his Netflix comedy special, “The Unstoppable,” which premiered on December 19.

Maher had criticized Chapelle last month for claiming that he is freer to make jokes in Saudi Arabia. “It’s easier to talk here than it is in America,”  Chapelle told an audience during a late September appearance. It can be recalled that Chapelle was nearly murdered for his jokes about trans people.

“Dave Chapelle was in the press today, saying that you can speak more freely over here than in America,” to which Louis C.K. responded, “I don’t know if that’s true.”

“Oh, it’s not true. Do your honk on Mohammed, Dave.”

Chapelle responded during the show, saying, “I didn’t tell them to put this in the paper. I just said it on stage. I said, ‘It’s easier to talk in Saudi Arabia for me than it is in America,’”

“I’ve known Bill since I was like 18/19, years old, and I’ve never said this publicly, but f*ck that guy,” Chappelle said. “I’m so f*cking tired of his little smug cracker ass commentary. These motherf*ckers act like because I did a comedy festival in Saudi Arabia, I somehow betrayed my principles.”

“They said, well, Saudi Arabia killed a journalist. And rest in peace, Jamal Khashoggi. I’m sorry that he got murdered in such a heinous fashion,” he continued in a nod to Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, who was killed by Saudi agents in Istanbul.

“I mean, look, bro, Israel’s killed 240 journalists in the last three months, so I didn’t know y’all was still counting.”

Keep reading

How Washington’s Syrian Caper Debunks the Case for Empire

Sometimes a microcosm sheds a powerful light on large-scale macro issues. That was surely the case with respect to last weekend’s news that five US military personnel were involved in an ambush in Syria, which resulted in three deaths and three wounded. The incident apparently was caused by a member of the Syrian security forces, according to the Syrian Interior Ministry, who opened fire on a joint US-Syrian military patrol near the ancient ruins of Palmyra in central Syria (about 134 miles northeast of Damascus).

Needless to say, this news ignited a chorus of WTFs among the non-drinkers of the Deep State Kool Aid who post on X and elsewhere. After all, what other response was there when it became clear that these five servicemen were among more than 2,000 acknowledged US military personnel operating in the no count cipher of Syria; and that there are likely hundreds more covert forces working for the CIA and other US black operations there, as well.

And, yes, we do mean a spec of a country. After all, the tiny orange dot below is the essentially land-locked location of Syria on a representation of the global map. Relatively speaking, it has no economy, no technology, no military, no nukes, no oil, no minerals and, well, no nuthin’ that could possibly bear on the Homeland Security of America, way over here 6,000 miles away on the far side of the Atlantic.

Keep reading

The Day PETA Looked Right, and Heads Exploded

Something happens every once in a while that makes you stop mid-sip and stare at the wall. Not because you’re stifling a burp; it’s not anything dramatic or historical. You need that second for your brain to catch up.

For me, that moment arrived when PETA praised work tied to RFK Jr. that aimed to end certain forms of monkey testing and limit the importation of primates for laboratory use.

Yes, that PETA.

The same group better known for shouting at people passing by, while wearing costumes, and drifting so far into odd territory that parody stopped trying to keep pace.

For a brief moment, reality tilted.

A Group Known for Noise

For years, PETA made noise and loud protests, sharing extreme claims, statements that felt designed to shock rather than persuade. Somewhere along the way, insects entered the conversation, and public patience quietly showed itself.

The organization that the legendary El Rushbo called “four people and a fax machine” — people of a certain age, do an internet search for “fax machine” — trained people to expect outrage on demand, where agreement never felt possible. People assumed punchlines when PETA supported something.

Which made praise tied to a Trump administration effort feel like discovering your smoke detector offers calm life advice — for free!

What Actually Drew Praise

What Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy pushed was an initiative to reduce reliance on primate testing by limiting imports and encouraging agencies to adopt alternative research methods.

Science, computer modeling, simulation, and non-animal testing have moved forward, already handling many tasks once assigned to live subjects.

Modern approaches promise less-to-no suffering, better data, and lower costs, which improve research and ethics and make red tape-loving bureaucrats lose ground. That proved to be a combination strong enough to break through any political reflex.

When Politics Trips Over Results

In this case, the humor sits in the source, not the policy, where PETA cheering a Trump-era move feels like cats endorsing vacuum cleaners, and somewhere in the distance, a megaphone hits the floor.

Once the dust settled, nothing collapsed, nobody combusted, and the planet kept spinning. Results mattered more than labels.

This moment feels so rare because modern politics trains people to react first and think later, where support follows teams, and opposition becomes a habit.

It’s a case where breaking that pattern seems awfully suspicious.

Regardless, outcomes don’t care who signs the paperwork.

Why Heads Really Exploded

PETA isn’t changing; there’s no grand shift taking place. The group simply approved something that aligned with its stated goals, even with an inconvenient source.

That moment alone shocked people; agreement, however brief, cut against years of predictable behavior.

Under all the settled dust, an uncomfortable truth was revealed: Good ideas survive bad company. Ethical progress doesn’t need perfect messengers. Sometimes it sneaks through cracks nobody expects.

That was a realization that unsettled people more than the policy itself.

Keep reading

Volodymyr Zelensky’s Non-Compromise NATO Compromise

A key reason that Russia went to war in Ukraine was to prevent Ukraine from ever joining NATO; a key reason that Ukraine went to war with Russia was to defend their right to join NATO. On December 14, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky gave up Ukraine’s right to join NATO. He presented the concession as a compromise. But it is not really a compromise. Zelensky may intend the non-compromise to leverage concessions from Russia, but it may not really change anything.

That blocking Ukraine accession to NATO was Moscow’s primary motivation has been confirmed by NATO, by Ukraine and by the United States. Jens Stoltenberg, NATO Secretary General at the start of the war, says that “no more NATO enlargement… was a pre-condition for not invade Ukraine… [Putin] went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders.”

Davyd Arakhamiia, who led the Ukrainian negotiating team in Istanbul, says that an assurance that Ukraine would not join NATO was the “key point” for Russia. “It was the most important thing for them… They were prepared to end the war if we agreed to… neutrality, and committed that we would not join NATO.”  Zelensky said, in his first interview after the invasion, “As far as I remember, they started the war because of this.”

Amanda Sloat, the former Special assistant to President Biden and Senior Director for Europe at the National Security Council, was recently caught suggesting that a guarantee that Ukraine not join NATO could have prevented the war. “We had some conversations even before the war started about, what if Ukraine comes out and just says to Russia, ‘Fine, you know, we won’t go into NATO, you know, if that stops the war, if that stops the invasion’ – which at that point it may well have done,” she said. “There is certainly a question, three years on now, you know, would that have been better to do before the war started, would that have been better to do in Istanbul talks? It certainly would have prevented the destruction and loss of life… If you wanna do an alternative version of history, you know, one option would have just been for Ukraine to say in January 2022, ‘Fine, you know, we won’t go into NATO, we’ll stay neutral. Ukraine could’ve made a deal, I guess, in, what, March, April 2022 around the time of the Istanbul talks.”

But Ukraine did not make that deal because the United States, the U.K., Poland and their partners pushed them not to. They promised Ukraine whatever they need for as long as they need it to fight Russia in defense of the “core principle” that Ukraine has the right to choose its alliances and that NATO has the right to expand.

Nearly four years and hundreds of thousands of deaths later, Ukraine has surrendered the right to join NATO. On December 14, Zelensky said that he is ready to give up the demand for NATO membership in exchange for “bilateral security guarantees between Ukraine and the United States – namely, Article 5–like guarantees… as well as security guarantees for us from our European partners and from other countries such as Canada, Japan and others.”

Zelensky presented this concession as “a compromise on our part.” But it is not really a compromise for three reasons.

The first is that the retraction of the promise that Ukraine would join NATO was already a done deal. Ukraine’s accession to NATO was never going to happen.

That reality was implicitly stated by Biden and explicitly stated by Trump. It is point number 7 in Trump’s 28-point peace plan. The reality has been recognized by Zelensky who has “understood that NATO is not prepared to accept Ukraine” since the start of the war. He has, since that time, “acknowledged” that Ukraine “cannot enter” the “supposedly open” NATO door and that, though “publicly, the doors remain open,” in reality, Ukraine is “not going to be a NATO member.” Any hope of resuscitating that dream died in the recently released 2025 National Security Strategy of the United States of America that states the policy priority of “Ending the perception, and preventing the reality, of NATO as a perpetually expanding alliance.”

Keep reading

Flushing Chicago’s Future When Rhetoric Replaces Revenue

It’s a sound we all dread: the toilet keeps running long after the handle drops. Water drains, money slips away, and the bill still comes. Anyone standing there nodding, pretending the noise signals progress, must live in Chicago politics—ignoring the damage quietly spreading beneath the floor.

A Mayor at War With Arithmetic

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson keeps insisting he likes business while governing as though payroll offends his values, despite policies that act like our running toilet: employers leave, investment slows, and taxes rise to plug holes, all while policies are openly hostile to growth.

Revenue is treated as an abstraction by leaders rather than wages earned by people who can still pack up and go. Budgets never care about slogans, because when employers exit, residents pay the difference. No matter how well-written, no speech fixes arithmetic.

A City Built on Strength, Undermined by Control

Once, in a time that seems like a galaxy far, far away, Chicago once stood for grit, industry, and upward mobility. Railroads, stockyards, steel, and trade rewarded their leaders’ effort and risk. Governance, consolidated power, and narrow decision-making did something that should never happen: they flushed that spirited grit away, leaving a political structure that rewards insiders and punishes independence.

It’s a script that never changes: predictable election outcomes, concentrated turnout that allows the machines to endure. Leaders hostile to growth arrive preselected rather than challenged.

When Rhetoric Replaces Revenue

The latest version of leadership talks endlessly about equity while ignoring flight. Taxes increase not by choice but by necessity after revenue leaves. Businesses respond to pressure the same way families respond when their neighborhoods become dangerous.

They move.

When each person or entity leaves, their departure tightens the vise on those left behind. Leadership talks endlessly about equity while ignoring flight. Taxes rise not by choice, but by necessity after revenue leaves. 

Businesses respond to pressure the same way families respond to unsafe neighborhoods. They move. Each departure tightens the vise on those left behind. With rising property taxes, multiplying fees, and already-weakened services, officials scold rather than adjust, blaming greed rather than reading the trail they’re leaving.

Keep reading

Chuck Todd: Big Tech, Algorithms to Blame for Public Mistrust of Press

During an appearance on Saturday’s broadcast of Newsmax TV’s “America Right Now,” political commentator and former moderator of NBC’s “Meet the Press” Chuck Todd addressed the public’s apparent decline in trust in the media.

Todd attributed it to Big Tech and algorithms.

“Well, I think the short answer is yes, and I think, look, we haven’t had reliable political leadership,” he said. “And I think one of the things I like to remind people is one of the reasons I think trust in media has fallen to so low is remember what the media is. It’s a reflection of — I say I’m as good as the sources I have, not necessarily the sources I want at times, to borrow a phrase from the late Donald Rumsfeld, meaning, if you’re getting untrustworthy sources, you may be reporting untrustworthy information right? You get my drift here. And so, I think that the collapse of trust in overall institutions, the media in some ways is a reflection of that distrust and so that we may be reporting what the quote, unquote ‘experts’ tell us.”

Todd continued, “But if the public doesn’t trust those experts and then we in the media, are quoting those experts, they don’t trust us, too. It’s sort of across the board. And what you have now, I would argue, Tom, is essentially the left doesn’t trust the media now and the right doesn’t trust the media. We are in this siloed world. I put the blame on Big Tech and algorithms that sort of, I think, make it too easy for too many people to live in a bubble, a filter bubble. And I do think in some ways, there’s too many people — I always say we have too many journalists in Washington and New York, and not enough everywhere else.”

Keep reading

Art dealer who told FBI about Epstein’s child porn affinity in 1996 says he threatened to BURN her house down

An art dealer who sounded the alarm on Jeffrey Epstein‘s sickening affinity for child pornography a decade before the FBI investigated the disgraced financier said he scared her into silence by threatening to set her home ablaze. 

Maria Farmer, who Epstein once hired to help him buy artwork, has long asserted that she filed a complaint against the sex offender in September 1996. 

On Friday, the FBI finally released a copy of the document – solidifying what Farmer has been arguing for years. 

‘I’ve waited 30 years,’ Farmer told The New York Times. ‘I can’t believe it. They can’t call me a liar anymore.’

But she said it does not negate the fact that investigators ‘harmed all of these little girls’ by not taking her concerns seriously. 

In the released complaint, which has Farmer’s name redacted, authorities wrote that she had taken photos of her 12 and 16-year-old sisters for her personal portfolio that Epstein stole. 

Farmer, who was 25 at the time, claimed that Epstein ‘sold the pictures to potential buyers’ and told her ‘that if she tells anyone about the photos, he will burn her house down,’ as per the document. 

The now 56-year-old visual artist clarified in an interview that the photos Epstein stole included nude images, according to the NY Times. 

Keep reading