General

Is Israel a motive for a regime-change war with Venezuela?

/8 Comments/in /by

From Tucker Carlson’s daily email:

“Since Hugo Chávez’s rise to power, Venezuela has become one of the most hostile countries to Israel and Zionism in Latin America,” Machado complained. “His successor continued the anti-Israeli line with even more intensity… thus, Venezuela, which previously maintained warm relations with Israel and even purchased security technologies from it, became a center of hostile propaganda toward Zionism,” she added.

We’re totally against a Venezuelan regime change war.

America’s storied history of similar failed endeavors gives little reason for confidence that the mission would prove a success, and even if that wasn’t true, Washington has plenty of pressing domestic issues to focus on rather than violently meddling in foreign politics. U.S. soldiers should not die fighting Nicolas Maduro. Believing this does not make us communist stooges.

With that being said, this looming story initially served as a breath of fresh air for one specific reason: finally, a debate on war that doesn’t involve Israel. The Israeli government’s influence in Washington has been at the center of every recent foreign policy issue, including obvious examples like Gaza and Iran, and a more subtle one like Russia. This isn’t reported much, but Israel’s desire to weaken Moscow’s Iran support is among neocons’ primary reasons for supporting Ukraine. Sorry if that’s offensive, but it’s true.

Venezuela must be different, right? How could Washington’s urge to overthrow the South American country’s government possibly relate to America’s “special ally” in the Middle East? Surely it couldn’t. Unless, of course, it does.

The Israeli news site Israel Hayom published an interview with Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado on Saturday, revealing that yes, Israel does tie into the Venezuela story.

“Since Hugo Chávez’s rise to power, Venezuela has become one of the most hostile countries to Israel and Zionism in Latin America,” Machado complained. “His successor continued the anti-Israeli line with even more intensity… thus, Venezuela, which previously maintained warm relations with Israel and even purchased security technologies from it, became a center of hostile propaganda toward Zionism,” she added.

Pause for a moment. Why are Machado’s words significant? The answer is simple. If the U.S. ousts Maduro, Machado would take his place. The regime change fantasy would benefit her the most, as well as the causes she and her handlers champion. And one of those causes is Israel.

“Certainly,” she said when asked if she would restore her country’s diplomatic relations with the Israelis. “Venezuela will be Israel’s closest ally in Latin America… The Venezuelan people deeply admire Israel and will always defend its right to live in peace without threat to its existence.”

What the hell is going on here? Maduro has been in power for well over a decade, and the U.S. has never appeared all that serious about forcing him out. Then, pro-Israel Machado comes along, and thousands of American troops suddenly find themselves positioned to invade Caracas.

Like an Iranian regime change, replacing Venezuela’s government would definitely benefit Israel. Venezuela possesses nearly one-fifth of the world’s proven crude oil reserves, and the Israelis would doubtlessly love to gain access. But that doesn’t mean the U.S. military should have to facilitate the coup on their behalf.

If Israel wants Maduro gone, then good for them. They’re allowed to hold whatever ambitions they choose. The Israeli government does what it believes is best for Israel; it puts Israel First.

Washington is allowed to do the same by putting America First, and fighting a regime change war in Venezuela, Iran, or any other country on which Benjamin Netanyahu sets his sights does not fit the bill. This shouldn’t be controversial. It’s common-sense nationalism. Enough dead Americans in the name of foreign interests. Israel’s wants do not matter.

Nick Griffin: Bondi Beach — “Don’t Look Back in Anger”?

/1 Comment/in /by

Bondi Beach — “Don’t Look Back in Anger”?

Netanyahui Leads the Charge to Exploit Mass Murder
The ghastly terrorist atrocity in Bondi must be condemned. The idea that defenceless Jewish civilians in Australia should be slaughtered in ‘revenge’ for the IDF’s ongoing genocide in Palestine is monstrous, although that is presumably the motive for the mass shooting.

But, before the dead are even cold, the blood-stained thug Netanyahu leapt into action to exploit the killings. Rather than sending his condolences to the families of the dead and to a shocked Australia, he launched into a cynical attack on the Australian government and screamed about the “antisemitism” of recongising the right of Palestinians to a state of their own.

Netanyahu exploits the ghastly massacre — Sunday Telegraph headline

The Zionist lobby more generally was also quick to jump on the killings to condemn the authorities for having resisted their calls to ban anti-genocide protests and to further clamp down on peaceful and free expression.

The Israel lobby’s auxiliaries too were quick to try to exploit the death of innocent Jewish men, women and children. Tommy Robinson was among those who plastered his social media accounts with a fake news post claiming that Hamas had praised the killings. Similar posts sought to spread the idea that Iran – which has consistently condemned terror attacks against civilians – was to blame.

Tommy quickly took down his post claiming that Hamas had praised the Bondi attack

 

Robinson and others quickly took down their posts as it emerged that they were lies. David Atherton, however, wasn’t quick enough:

Apart, however, from the initial rantings of the Counter-Jihad crew, however, the official response to the Bondi Massacre is in very marked contrast to what happens every time Islamist terrorists or another psychotic immigrant murder innocent people anywhere in the West.

When the victims are British, French, German, American or whatever, the names and photos of the killers are hidden from us for as long as possible. Why is it so different this time?

When the victims are from our communities, the political elite and the mass media go instantly into a chorus of “Don’t Look Back in Anger”. The whole apparatus of the liberal state/media/security complex instantly gets to work to manipulate public opinion, with calls for ‘unity’, ‘tolerance’ and ‘forgiveness’.

As I explained here:

How the State tries to Manipulate YOU

Nick Griffin
·
Sep 22
How the State tries to Manipulate YOU

“We want controlled spontaneity” – the cynical control techniques of a desperate regime on show in Britain

Read full story

 

So what’s the difference this time? Well, we saw the same thing after the despicable attack on a Manchester synagogue, as I pointed out here:

Manchester Killings — No More “Don’t Look Back in Anger”?

Nick Griffin
·
Oct 4
Manchester Killings - No More "Don't Look Back in Anger"?

What’s the one phrase you’ve not heard in connection with the disgusting attack in Manchester on Thursday? “Don’t look back in anger”. There’s no sign of tealights and #Together posters either. Instead, the post-attack photos now emphasise banners calling for ‘Action’.

Read full story

I repeat: I condemn without reservation this latest atrocity, as I condemn all terrorist atrocities.

But I also condemn the grotesque double standards to which the people of the world – including my own, and the long-suffering Palestinians – are subjected by a mass media and political elite which are dominated by Zionist sympathies, bribes or blackmail (Epstein was not alone, you may be sure of that).

The whole revolting spectacle, far from preventing antisemitism, actually tends to incite it. Most normal people, myself included, would have no problem at all with Zionists and Political Judaists standing up for their own people – if they weren’t so eager to deny the same right to all the rest of us.

Where do these double-standards come from?

Racism and Supremacism

They shamelessly impose a narrative which comes from Talmudic racism and Jewish supremacism, twisted beliefs which hold that only they are human, while the rest of us are beasts in human form. See, for example, Madeleine Albright on the murder of 500,000 innocent Iraqi children:
It is vital to realise that very large numbers of ordinary Jews – including those who commendably play a disproportionate role in opposition to the Gaza genocide and the more general oppression of the Palestinians – do not subscribe to this racist poison.

To ignore or to deny this is as wrong as to blame all Muslims for the actions of ISIS and similar useful idiot Wahabbis, or to blame all Christians for the dangerous pro-nuclear war tendencies of the heretics who believe in the Rapture.

But it is also wrong to pretend that the world does not have a problem with the intense racism and anti-goyish bias which persists within a significant strand of Judaism. Particularly when it oozes out into the real world, fuelling the crazed ambitions of the Zionists and the cynical manipulations of the Political Judaists, it is a shame on decent Jews and a curse on Humanity.

It is important that this issue is debated, and particularly that anti-Zionists – especially those on the left – understand that the root of the problem long predates 1948 or Herzl. So please SHARE this post and help to spread the awareness which is the only thing that can move us on to a better, fairer and more peaceful future. Thank you!

Trump administration denies existence of leaked strategy that calls for pulling EU states away from Brussels

/7 Comments/in /by

It’s a great idea to try to get the more traditional, patriotic countries out of the EU, and even though the proposal was rejected in the end, at least some in the Trump administration have some very good ideas.

The White House rejected claims about an unpublished National Security Strategy after a report alleged a plan to use Italy, Austria, Hungary, and Poland to challenge the EU’s cohesion

ByThomas Brooke

The Trump administration’s new National Security Strategy was published last week, setting out the U.S.’s broad foreign policy direction for the remainder of his term. It focused on ending what it calls a “perpetually expanding NATO,” establishing “conditions of stability within Europe,” and encouraging European allies to “stand on [their] own feet” in security matters.

The document also warned that Europe faces “civilizational erasure,” citing migration, censorship of speech, declining birthrates, and what it described as a loss of national identity and self-confidence.

Days after the official release, however, the Defense One website reported that a longer, unreleased version of the NSS had circulated in Washington. According to the site, the unpublished version contained far more explicit political goals for reshaping Europe’s future and reducing the influence of the European Union. Defense One wrote that the extended draft urged the United States to “Make Europe Great Again,” proposing that Washington realign its attention toward a select group of governments ideologically closer to the Trump administration.

The unpublished version, Defense One reported, stated that Austria, Hungary, Italy, and Poland were countries the United States should “work more with… with the goal of pulling them away from the [European Union].” It also said the United States should support “parties, movements, and intellectual and cultural figures who seek sovereignty and preservation/restoration of traditional European ways of life… while remaining pro-American.”

None of this language appears in the officially released NSS, which focuses instead on broader themes of strategic stability with Russia, the need for Europe to regain its self-confidence, and continued American support for democracy and free expression. The official document argues that Europe’s loss of confidence is particularly visible in its approach to Russia. It states, “Managing European relations with Russia will require significant U.S. diplomatic engagement, both to reestablish conditions of strategic stability across the Eurasian landmass, and to mitigate the risk of conflict between Russia and European states.” It adds that stabilizing the continent will require “an expeditious cessation of hostilities in Ukraine” to prevent escalation, restore stability, and support Ukraine’s survival as a viable state.

The text also warns that the war has increased Europe’s exposure to external dependencies, particularly Germany’s, and criticizes what it describes as unrealistic expectations held by some European officials. It concludes that despite Europe’s internal crises, the continent remains strategically and culturally vital to the United States. America, it says, “encourages its political allies in Europe to promote this revival of spirit,” asserting that the growing influence of patriotic European parties “gives cause for great optimism.”

After the Defense One report appeared, the White House moved quickly to deny the existence of any longer or alternative NSS. Spokeswoman Anna Kelly said, “No alternative, private, or classified version exists. President Trump is transparent and put his signature on one NSS that clearly instructs the U.S. government to execute on his defined principles and priorities.” She added that “any other so-called ‘versions’ are leaked by people distant from the President who, like this ‘reporter,’ have no idea what they are talking about.” Her reference to leaks suggests that other versions of the report may have been discussed, albeit not endorsed or included in the final publication.

Speaking to the American Conservative website about the strategy report, Krzysztof Bosak, a Polish MP, leader of the right-wing Confederation, and deputy speaker of the Sejm — Poland’s lower parliamentary chamber — said, “I can’t say that I disagree with anything there. It’s a continuation of Vice President J.D. Vance’s Munich [Security Conference] speech, which I agreed with completely.

“Maybe Europe needs a shock from our good old friend America to start a true debate, because there was no debate in the European mainstream. In America, you have both sides of the political spectrum. In Western Europe, there’s only one side. If you have politically incorrect views, you can find yourself in prison, because you said too much, for example, in England or sometimes in Germany,” he added.

Italian newspaper La Repubblica also reported on the Defense One findings, highlighting the claim that the United States planned to use Italy, Austria, Hungary, and Poland “as tools to dismantle the European Union” by drawing them into a broader, ideologically aligned group. It noted Defense One’s summary that the unpublished draft viewed Europe’s immigration policies as driving an “erasure of its civilization,” and that Washington should engage with European actors seeking “sovereignty” and the restoration of traditional ways of life.

La Repubblica separately noted that Matt Schlapp, chairman of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), recently expressed interest in holding a major CPAC event in Italy to promote a sovereignist agenda. While government sources suggested a lack of enthusiasm, Schlapp told the newspaper, “We will get it done.”

CPAC has grown in stature among European conservatives in recent years, most notably in Hungary, where its annual event in Budapest now attracts major players, both from Europe and across the Atlantic.

White Papers Policy Institute: Reforming (and Replacing) the European Union for Nationalist Purposes (Part 1)

/6 Comments/in /by

Reforming (and Replacing) the European Union for Nationalist Purposes (Part 1)

By James K.

In the last week Elon Musk has kicked off an astonishing row over the European Union issuing a fine to X and himself. The fine is clearly politically motivated. The European elite want to silence critics of their project and especially do away with criticism of multiculturalism, secularism, and the great plethora of other post-war progressive dogmas that define their crumbling worldview. Don’t believe me? The European Union has pushed for years to pass “chat control“ legislation that would allow EU and subsidiary national authorities to scan your private texts, including encrypted texts, as well as scan all of the photos on your phone.

Significantly and perhaps purposefully, Musk’s call to abolish the European Union comes on the heels of the Trump administration’s newly released national security strategy. The new strategy essentially called the European Union a failed project which had led to economic sclerosis and demographic disaster. The administration’s interpretation of this is correct, perhaps even more than they realize. West of what used to be the Iron Curtain Europe is failing Europeans quite substantially and in almost every way. Economies are de-industrializing, energy is remarkably expensive, housing is scare, and migration levels are sky high despite the European public constantly begging their national and EU officials to stop the inflow of strangers.

The ideological pro-EU opposition will and does point out that much of what Musk is saying is in pursuit of his business interests and that he does not care about Europeans, perhaps this is true, and perhaps it isn’t, but that does not spare the European Union from deserved criticism any more than the rampant accusations of “Russian disinformation” spare the Democrats in America from massive unpopularity.

Then, on December 11th 2025, a leaked classified, leaked, version of the US national security strategy went wide on the internet. Reported by The Times, The Telegraph, The Guardian, and other outlets, the leaked version of the American plan purportedly shows that the United States plans to pull Austria, Hungary, Italy and Poland away from the European Union and into a new “patriotic” orbit that remains aligned with pro-American interests. It’s abundantly clear that the United States views the European Union as a serious threat to Western civilization and to its long-term strategic interests on the European side of the Atlantic. The American document floated the idea of creating a forum type organization (like the G7 etc.) where these countries would cooperate with the United States, but I can tell you now this will be woefully insufficient.

Western political discourse is entering a time of reevaluation of the core concepts and institutions that have ruled us since the 1950s. The European Union is not above this kind of reevaluation and the ideological battles over its nature and future are not going to abate any time soon. These ideological battles over the success or failure of the European project specifically have led to the emergence of three distinct camps of commentators:

  1. Europhiles/EU Shills
  2. Euroskeptics/Reformists
  3. EU abolitionists

The first camp is entirely self-explanatory. EU shills are blindly dedicated to the European project as created by Jean Monnet and his various vassals such as Paul-Henri Spaak. Today’s Europhiles believe that the European project is wildly successful and ignore all evidence to the contrary and never almost never address the concerns of their skeptics. I have noticed that most EU shills are not particularly upset about the Trump administration calling out the economic and defense failures of their project and this is because Europhiles have long chased and are still chasing grand ideas about a single European economy and a European Union army to enforce the will of an increasingly imperious Brussels via the barrel of a gun.

How to Support White Papers:

We keep our policy analysis free because we’re dedicated to the independence and prosperity of our people. But we rely on our paid subscribers to grow and thrive!

White Papers is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Consider giving to our mission using one of the methods below.

Zelle: whitepapersinstitute@protonmail.com

Linktree: https://linktr.ee/wppi

Snail Mail: White Papers Policy, PO Box 192, Hancock, MD 21750

Jewish convert Tony Dokoupil gets promoted by pro-Israel fanatic Bari Weiss

/4 Comments/in /by

Bari Weiss names Tony Dokoupil, who defended Israel on-air in closely scrutinized interview, to top CBS News anchor job

Dokoupil’s sparring match with Ta-Nahisi Coates divided CBS leadership at the time.

A morning show book interview
CBS Mornings co-anchor Tony Dokoupil (r) challenges author Ta-Nehisi Coates about Israel in a controversial on-air interview, September 30, 2024. On December 10, 2025, Dokoupil was named the new CBS News evenings anchor. (Screenshot)
By Andrew Lapin 

Bari Weiss, the polarizing new editor-in-chief of CBS News, has named the longtime network personality Tony Dokoupil to anchor the evening news chair, in a potential sign of how Weiss’ pro-Israel views may be reshaping the network’s news priorities.

The move came amid a rash of prominent vacancies at the venerable network since new Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison, who is also Jewish and pro-Israel, appointed Weiss top editor earlier this year.

The elevation of Dokoupil is notable in the aftermath of his debate with bestselling author Ta-Nehisi Coates about Israel in a viral interview last fall that was rebuked by CBS top brass at the time, prior to Ellison’s appointment.

“We live in a time in which many people have lost trust in the media. Tony Dokoupil is the person to win it back,” Weiss said in a statement announcing the move. “That’s because he believes in old school journalistic values: asking the hard questions, following the facts wherever they lead and holding power to account. Americans hungry for fairness will see that on display night after night.”

The release touts Dokoupil’s CBS experience with particular emphasis on his Israel coverage, noting that he “reported from Israel on the Oct. 7 terror attack and hostage release deal” and has interviewed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Dokoupil is a convert to Judaism and is married to Jewish MS NOW anchor Katy Tur.

Interviewing Coates about his pro-Palestinian essay book “The Message” in September 2024, Dokoupil accused him of writing passages that “would not be out of place in the backpack of an extremist” and asked him whether he objected to “the existence of a Jewish state that is a Jewish safe place.” He concluded the interview by jokingly inviting Coates to High Holiday services.

In the fallout from the Coates interview, Dokoupil faced internal pushback from some CBS News staff who felt his questions betrayed a pro-Israel bias. He also faced a disciplinary meeting with executives who cautioned him about the tone and body language he displayed during the interview.

Leaked records of those meetings were published by The Free Press, Weiss’s outlet, months prior to Paramount’s $150 million acquisition of her business. The Coates interview continued to be a sticking point prior to CBS’s ownership transition to the Ellisons, as Paramount’s former chair Shari Redstone — also Jewish and avowedly pro-Israel — reportedly supported Dokoupil and heightened her own scrutiny of CBS News’ Israel coverage as a result.

On September 30, 2024, Dokoupil discussed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with author Ta-Nehisi Coates during the latter’s appearance on CBS Mornings to promote the book The Message. Dokoupil implied that the book “reads like the work of an extremist” and questioned Coates about Coates’ view regarding Israel‘s right to exist. Some CBS staffers were angered by the interview and CBS executive Adrienne Roarke said that an internal review found that it did not meet network standards.[19][20][21] Dokoupil was defended by Paramount chair Shari Redstone and other CBS staffers, including chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford, who said that a journalist is obliged to ask tough questions when interviewing someone presenting a one-sided view.[22][23][24]

From Wikipedia: Dokoupil was born in Connecticut on December 24, 1980. He is of Czech descent.[2][3] … Dokoupil has two children with his ex-wife, who live in Israel.[26][27][28][29] Dokoupil married fellow broadcast journalist Katy Tur  (of Jewish and Greek descent) in October 2017;[30] they have two children together.[31] 

In 2014, Dokoupil wrote about his conversion to Judaism.[32]

Somali Immigrants in Minnesota: Profile of a Struggling Group

/2 Comments/in /by

Tim Walz thinks they’re great and wants to recruit more for Minnesota.

Somali Immigrants in Minnesota:
Profile of a Struggling Group
Nearly every Somali household with children (89%) receives some form of welfare

Washington, D.C. (December 10, 2025) — A new report from the Center for Immigration Studies, Somali Immigrants in Minnesota: Profile of a Struggling Group, by Jason Richwine, documents the profound socioeconomic disparities between native Minnesotans and the state’s rapidly growing Somali population, now exceeding 75,000. In a state long known for its Scandinavian-style prosperity and high human-development indicators, the contrast “could hardly be greater.”

The findings reveal a community facing deep hardship —and burdening Minnesota’s social-service systems.

Key Findings:

  • Severe child poverty
    • 52% of children in Somali households live in poverty
    • Only 8% of children in native-headed homes are poor
    • One in eight poor children in Minnesota lives in a Somali household
  • Low education and limited English
    • 39% of working-age Somalis lack a high school diploma (vs. 5% of natives)
    • Half of long-term resident Somali adults still cannot speak English “very well”
  • Extensive welfare use
    • 54% of Somali households receive food stamps (vs. 7% of native households)
    • 73% are on Medicaid (vs. 18% of natives)
    • 89% of Somali households with children receive welfare
  • Overcrowding and public-health concerns
    • Somali households represent 10% of all overcrowded homes in Minnesota, despite making up less than 1% of all households.

Richwine notes that although recent fraud cases have drawn attention, welfare usage would remain extremely high even without fraud because poverty rates among Somalis are so elevated. “The way to reduce immigrant reliance on welfare,” he states, “is not only to tighten enforcement, but to reduce the number of new arrivals with very low earning power.”

The report underscores how a small but disadvantaged immigrant population can reshape the social landscape of a state once celebrated for its low poverty and high social trust.

Innocent Venezuelan Fishermen: ‘Hands Up! Don’t Shoot!’

/2 Comments/in /by

The ones that (almost) got away.

No matter how much I try to ignore the Democrats’ latest “The Walls Are Closing In” spectacle, it has come to my attention that liberals are hopping mad about our military killing two Venezuelan drug traffickers.

Cocaine has killed 100,000 Americans in the last 20 years. Venezuela is a major player in the supply chain that brings it here. But Democrats are concerned with the safety and well-being of the narco-terrorists. Of course, Democrats also root for cop-killers, serial rapists, wife-beaters, drug kingpins, cold-blooded killers and Ana Navarro.

Liberals are OK with killing people unless it’s good for America. They want our military sticking its nose into every bar fight around the globe, while leaving the bad guys in our hemisphere alone.

That’s how we remain a “great power” that is “engaged in the world,” and, at the same time, create opportunities for Council on Foreign Relations types to go on TV and explain the differences between Sunni and Shia Muslims (no one cares), the strategic importance of the Donbas (no one cares), and the history of ethnic hatreds in the Balkans (no one cares).

Democrats have presented a scrolling series of defenses for the narco banditos that will surely be abandoned for all-new idiotic arguments next week, but these are the current favorites:

  1. The two (briefly) surviving narco-terrorists should have been “rescued” as soon as they were “unable to continue their mission.”

Their boat was hit. How’re you going to traffic drugs when your boat has a hole in it? As put by the Former JAGs Working Group (JAGs who were summarily fired by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth back in February), the Venezuelans “were rendered unable to continue their mission” after the first strike, and therefore it was a “war crime” for our troops not to rescue them. (Killing them, I gather, was absolutely off the table.)

I’m just glad the Former JAGs Working Group wasn’t advising SEAL Team Six when they burst into Osama bin Laden’s lair.

Can’t you just blind him? How about shooting him in the leg? No jihadist will take seriously a one-legged mastermind who can’t even see that he’s boring everyone with his “Great Satan” speeches.

In 2001, al-Qaida killed 3,000 Americans. In response, we went to war with two countries for the next 20 years. In 2023, cocaine killed nearly 30,000 Americans, and liberals are convening war trials because Trump is doing something about it.

  1. Venezuela’s drug boats aren’t even coming to the U.S.!

As NBC News exulted, so much for “the administration’s stated rationale for its strikes against suspected drug-smuggling boats.”

Yes, that’s true. Venezuelan drug traffickers aren’t shipping cocaine to the U.S. They’re shipping it to Mexico, where it will be trucked into the U.S.

The entire government of Venezuela is a drug cartel. Their No. 1 export is cocaine. Their No. 2 export is cocaine boats. The national coat of arms is a coke spoon and two straws.

Under President Barack Obama, U.S. attorneys in Miami and New York indicted some of that country’s top military and law enforcement officials, accusing them of working with Colombian drug kingpins to move drugs through Venezuela to the United States.

Nothing changed. Venezuela continued working with the Colombian cartels, and virtually the same indictments were handed up during the first Trump administration, charging government officials with enriching themselves by flooding “the United States with cocaine and inflict[ing] the drug’s harmful and addictive effects on users in this country.”

It’s pretty clear by now — to borrow one of liberals’ favorite locutions — we’re not going to indict our way out of this.

  1. Venezuela doesn’t even manufacture fentanyl!

Nobody said it did. OK — Trump said it, but he also said American employers need hundreds of thousands more H-1B visa holders and universities need 200,000 more Chinese communist spies — I mean “students.”

Sorry to mess with your head, but the president often lacks precision in his thinking.

This is what Secretary Hegseth said about the operation being commanded by him and run out of his department:

“Today, I’m announcing Operation SOUTHERN SPEAR. … [T]his mission defends our Homeland, removes narco-terrorists from our Hemisphere, and secures our Homeland from the drugs that are killing our people. The Western Hemisphere is America’s neighborhood — and we will protect it.”

He said it on X. You can look it up.

  1. Just before our military vaporized them, the two Venezuelan drug traffickers shouted, “Hands up! Don’t shoot!” — or something to that effect.

I’m suspicious of this one, but let’s pretend it’s true.

How many innocent civilians died in U.S.-led NATO bombing of the Balkans? (500 to 5,000.) How about Hillary’s great idea to launch bombing raids on Libya? (At least 72.) And those were true innocents, not guilty-as-hell drug traffickers one moment, then, 10 seconds later, CIVILIANS!

I guess those other civilian deaths were just the price of being a great power engaging with the world.

You’re welcome, Council on Foreign Relations.

What do liberals come up with next? Some suggestions: The Venezuelans come from impoverished backgrounds, they have low IQs, they ate too much processed food as children, they had no idea it was cocaine, they fell in with a bad crowd, they were only the lookouts, their defense lawyer screwed them, and “systemic racism.”

Also, it’s Trump’s fault. Those cholos never would have been trafficking drugs in the first place if Trump hadn’t shut down President Joe Biden’s conveyor belt from the shantytowns of Caracas into the warm bath of the American welfare state. Instead, they would have been staging armed takeovers of apartment complexes in Colorado.

COPYRIGHT 2025 ANN COULTER