Jeffrey Epstein or Beating Up on Venezuela

Donald Trump, America’s peace-loving, peace-making president, is acting presidential again. No, he has not got the war in Ukraine settled after almost nine months of overtures, empty threats, and broken promises, one of which was that he would stop it in twenty-four hours as soon as he took office. Nor has he reined in the Insane Beast of the Middle East, Bibi Netanyahu and the Israeli State, on their wild, murderous rampage through Gaza. Neither has he stopped threatening Iran over its refusal to bow down and worship “the god that be”, that is, the puppet-masters and heavyweight policy-makers of the Western realm.

Instead, probably with the blessings and direction of his controllers (whoever they might be), he has virtually, unilaterally, declared war on Venezuela, a small, oil-rich country on the northern coast of South America. In fact, on Tuesday, September 2, following Trump’s direct order, a boat was fired upon by the US Navy off the coast of Venezuela in international waters, killing eleven crew members. This was done without warning, without any attempt to stop the vessel, any effort to arrest the crew and bring them to a court in the US where they could be tried and convicted of their crimes against humanity and receive “justice”. Note the quotation marks.

All on Trump’s say-so. Yes, very presidential, if I may say so myself. In this, at least, he was consistent with his own words, “I’m the president. I can do whatever I want.” Well, now he’s a murderer…on several counts, as are the men and women who colluded with him and those who actually pulled the triggers. Now, in response to Venezuela’s response in which two of its warplanes buzzed a US destroyer, Trump has just issued another threat. “Don’t do that anymore or I will shoot you down.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/trump-warns-any-venezuelan-plane-threatening-us-ships-will-be-shot-down

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/trump-deploys-f-35s-puerto-rico-airfield-after-pair-venezuelan-jets-buzz-us-warship

Supposedly, the boat which was fired upon was running drugs from Venezuela to…somewhere, and those drugs were guaranteed to find their way onto the streets of Miami, Baltimore, and Philadelphia, or points between and further afield. Supposedly, the drug runners were members of the “notorious” gang known as Tren de Aragua, vicious rapists and killers all, whose only goal was to degrade and destroy the fine, upstanding citizens of the above-named communities and points between and further afield. Yes, it is certain that, if Trump had not acted “presidentially”, the streets of America would have been thrown into chaos, confusion, degradation, and death, but today the people who live there can sleep peacefully at night, knowing that a heavily-armed SWAT team is not going to smash their front door in and shoot up the place, because there are no drugs inside. What a relief!

Yeah, we have to fight them over there, so that we don’t have to fight them over here.

OK, let’s cut to the chase here. This is America, the land of the free and the home of the brave. The land of innate human rights backed up by the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights. All of us know this and we repeat it monotonously and mindlessly whenever the government, represented by the president (currently Trump), overrides The Supreme Law of the Land and tramples and abuses the citizenry. But, but, but…that’s not constitutional. That’s not allowed. That’s illegal. OK, tell that to your Congressperson or Senator the next time you see them…if you ever get a chance to see them, which isn’t likely unless they’re in your district stumping for re-election, at which time they will tell you anything to get you off their back AND get your vote in the upcoming election.

  1. Donald Trump, representing the US government, declared the crew members “criminal” and not worthy of life.
  2. Donald Trump, taking matters into his own hands, ordered them killed without recourse to any of the legalities which Make America Great.
  3. The boat was destroyed in international waters, on the high seas. This makes Trump a pirate, a modern-day one, to be sure, but absolutely no different in principle than other pirates throughout the ages.
  4. Trump has, in effect, declared war on Venezuela and its people, some of whom probably are vicious rapists, killers, and drug-runners. However, the highly-revered and worshipped Constitution insists that Congress must declare war and the president is bound by it. Despite this impediment, none of America’s wars since WW2 have been lawfully declared, they just somehow happened, usually because the president and his henchmen decided that they could do anything they wanted…and did, to the detriment of an enormous number of people world-wide, including Americans. Oh, and BTW, Congress which should have stepped in and stopped it, did nothing at all.

If Trump sends the troops and gunboats into Venezuela to “arrest and neutralize” the drug-runners, especially the top dog, Nicholas Maduro, it is likely to immediately resemble the situation in Viet Nam during the “war” (undeclared) there. Venezuela is an ideal spot for a protracted guerilla war with rough, mountainous terrain, steaming rain forests, huge rivers, and a poverty-stricken population which might conclude they have nothing to lose except their lives in the battle against an invading hegemonic power. Even though the US would quickly gain air superiority and maintain control of the coast with its warships, the place is not suited for tank warfare nor would it be easily overrun by large armies, which the US cannot afford to lose.

The best that Trump, representing the government, could hope for is that the Maduro regime (don’t you love that word, always used against our enemies, never our friends) would be destabilized and run out of town (or, better yet, into a maximum security prison in El Salvador), giving the US the opportunity to install a puppet government to its own liking, a proxy which would act as it was told to and would speedily sign over Venezuela’s vast mineral rights (oil) to ExxonMobil, Shell, and the like.

It would be wise, however, to remember that Venezuela’s neighboring country, Colombia, suffered from a decades-long struggle which pitted a weak, centralized government against dedicated opposing guerillas, until they finally were able to come to an agreement and end the fighting. Would Venezuela be any different? Would ExxonMobil or Shell care? Would The Powers That Be who have unleashed Trump and sicced him onto a “crappy little country” which is only fit to be picked up and thrown against a wall? Would Trump himself care?


What is really going on? I can think of three things without ever breaking a sweat.

  1. Trump and the West have lost the war (excuse me, Special Military Operation) in Ukraine. The Russians have won it. There is no stopping it without submitting to Vlad Putin’s demands, all of which have been known publicly for years.
  2. The war in Gaza (excuse me, Special Military Operation) is going badly for Israel and its constantly attentive, muscular, sycophantic groupie, the US State. Every day that Israel beats up, shoots down, tortures, rapes, and starves innocent people, mainly women and children, is another day in which world opinion increasingly turns against it. Like Ukraine, the war is lost but it cannot be admitted and will not be quit nor surrendered until the bitter end.
  3. Jeffrey Epstein. Ahhhhh! You thought I would never get there, didn’t you? It’s OK, you can exhale now. Yep, good ole Jeff is reaching out from beyond the grave (if he is actually dead which is not certain for sure) and causing havoc, panic, and consternation among the power-brokers who think that they had control of the narrative on this sordid affair. Do you believe that there is no list? Do you believe that Donald Trump is on that list? Do you believe that Ghislaine Maxwell is telling the truth? Do you believe that all the young girls who were supposedly seduced and manipulated willingly cooperated and that there were absolutely no victims among them? Do you believe that Thomas Massie is going to give up on his efforts to expose ALL the records held by the government?

What is more probable is that Trump and the cronies around, beneath, and over him are scared to death, terrified of being exposed, and doing what they do best to distract the public by creating a diversion, the best diversion, the one most guaranteed to turn the attention of the public away from the issue–war. A war which will accomplish its purpose, meant to take the heat off the current crisis which is threatening severe consequences on people who have acted with impunity for decades, believing like Trump, that they can do whatever they want.

Psalms 2 tells what happens when kings, rulers, and nations get too big for their britches. It’s not a good place to be.

The Death of Due Process: Mahmoud Khalil

What in the world? This is America, after all, The Land of the Free and the Home of Constitutionally Protected Freedoms as delineated in the first ten amendments, commonly known as the Bill of Rights.

Chances are pretty good that if you were to ask any average American about Mahmoud Khalil, he or she would respond with one word. “Who?” If this person derived their politics from the right side of the ledger who vigorously supports Donald Trump, then the odds go up that, on learning about the status of Mahmoud Khalil, the answer would immediately come back with double the quantity of words and heightened intensity. “Good riddance!” In this, they will echo the words of Kristi Noem, who could not let a good opportunity go to waste.


A week ago, I posted an article in which I explored the issue of Tren de Aragua, a notorious, violent, criminal gang from Venezuela which operates internationally (including the United States), and was designated by Donald Trump as a Foreign Terrorist Organization via an Executive Order on his very first day in office, second term. Since then, the administration has been active in rounding up and deporting alleged gang members back to Venezuela or shipping them off to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador, whichever is easier, more effective, and less costly.

Let’s get one thing perfectly clear right now. I do not support the importation and keeping of violent criminals into this country. Undoubtedly, there are people here who ought to be removed from American society–violently, if necessary. Nevertheless, there are rules to follow in the process, the foremost among them being the 5th Amendment to the Constitution:

“No person shall be…deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” .

Now, of course, this brings up the question of whether or not the government is operating according to the 5th Amendment. I cannot say. I don’t know. If it is, well and good. If not, then we have a problem which will only get worse as social, economic, and political circumstances worsen and degrade. In order to maintain the trust of the American people, it is incumbent on the administration to make sure it works within the law whether it advances the political agenda or not.

Which brings us to Mahmoud Khalil. Born in Syria of Palestinian origin and a citizen of Algeria, legally admitted to the US with Green Card and permanent resident status, Columbia University student, married to an American woman, soon to be a father. He was arrested in the lobby of his apartment complex in New York City, on March 08, then shipped without notice to Jena, LA, where he was held incommunicado without notice to his attorney or pregnant wife. He was the first person arrested after Trump had promised to crack down on university student protests over the conflict in Gaza.

Obviously, Khalil had broken some law or committed a crime, right? After all, if you haven’t done anything wrong, you have nothing to be afraid of. Right? Why else would the government go after him if he was innocent? As it turns out, he had been involved in the protests at Columbia, acting as an intermediary between the university and the main body of participants. He had been open and cooperative with the university and the media and refused to mask his face, becoming widely known to the public and giving the administration a clear target to aim at in the battle against “anti-semitism”, a term no one can define well but which is politically useful. Sort of like “freedom-fighters” and “democracy”.

Marco Rubio, the current Secretary of State has alleged that Khalil engaged in “antisemitic protests and disruptive activities, which fosters a hostile environment for Jewish students in the United States”, but he produced no evidence to this effect and did not accuse Khalil of committing any crime whatsoever. In a court case before Jamee Conans, an immigration judge in Louisiana, Rubio brought out an arcane law as precedent to prove that he could legally deport Khalil, whether he was guilty of any wrong-doing or not. CNN described it this way.

“The administration previously said it based its deportation order for Khalil on an obscure provision from the Immigration and Nationality Act – which provides broad authority to the Secretary of State to revoke a person’s immigration status if their “activities in the United States would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences” to the country.”

““For cases in which the basis for this determination is the alien’s past, current, or expected beliefs, statements, or associations that are otherwise lawful, the Secretary of State must personally determine that the alien’s presence or activities would compromise a compelling U.S. foreign policy interest,” the memo from the secretary reads.”

OK, let’s get this straight. Marco Rubio has applied an obscure regulation from 1952 to justify his action against Khalil, who has not had any criminal charges filed against him. According to the memo seen above, Khalil’s “past, current, or expected beliefs, statements, or associations that are otherwise lawful” are sufficient to require his deportation. His beliefs? His words? The company he keeps? Not only in the past and currently, but also those to happen at some time in the future?

What is this if not a full-throated assault on free speech in America, a guaranteed right covered by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution? If any Secretary of State (there are many, they change all the time) can determine arbitrarily that a person is a “threat to national security” at any time and for any reason, and use the overwhelming power of the federal government against them, does this not rip the guts out of the 1st Amendment? Since the powers-that-be today will not be those in charge tomorrow, how can anyone be certain that what he says or believes today will not be held against him tomorrow when the politics have shifted? The fact is that he cannot and this type of action by Rubio and Trump will only have a chilling effect on what is said and done in this country.

The 5th Amendment is toast. The 1st Amendment is almost gone. With those out of the way, who can guarantee that the 2nd Amendment, the so-called Right to bear Arms, will not be targeted next? When the Goon Squad breaks down your front door to confiscate your guns, what authority can you appeal to for deliverance, especially if you have refused to stand up for those who were taken out and beaten in the War against Free Speech, Beliefs, and Friendships?

Where is Martin Niemoeller when you need him?

The Trump administration has been given the green light to deport Khalil by Jamee Comans, an immigration law judge in Louisiana, who justified her ruling based on Rubio’s statement. Khalil’s lawyers have until April 23 to appeal the decision and it is quite possible that this case will be heard all the way to the Supreme Court.

An ironic twist to this saga is that the Leftists who were so keen to cancel, censor, and silence their critics a few years ago are now howling loudly on behalf of Mahmoud Khalil, while the Rightists who complained loudly and bitterly about being told to sit down and shut up are now advocating that Khalil be treated in exactly the same way. Or worse.

Fairness, integrity, and consistency. I guess it all depends on which version of justice you subscribe to. Go figure.

Weep, Our Beloved Country

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2025/03/no_author/international-law-is-now-suspended-if-not-eliminated/

“A law cannot exist if there are individuals or organizations that fall within its scope but which stand “above the law” — can’t be prosecuted no matter how flagrantly they violate it. EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW IS THE FOUNDATION-STONE OF LAW, and if any exceptions can be allowed, those are ONLY the ones that are stated IN the law as being NOT within its scope — and, thus, the fundamental principle of law is that a law exists ONLY if all individuals or organizations that fall within its scope are subject to investigation and prosecution if they violate it. Otherwise, it’s NOT a “law.” To call it a law is false. The United States Government and its colonies such as Israel can’t be prosecuted for violating international law no matter how flagrantly they violate it. Consequently, international law no longer exists. What DOES exist, then? The traditional ethic does: Might makes right.”

Might makes right. More than anything else, this philosophy is the one which most people subscribe to and practice, regardless of what they privately espouse. It is the order of modern American politics which stands for holding to a particular model of government until power is seized, at which point all the “true” points are discarded in favor of raw power. Because we can, and the foot-soldiers in the trenches cheer and applaud everything which the top command is doing, whether it adheres to the principles espoused or not. Because the “war” must be won. By fair means or foul, and it doesn’t matter who gets hurt in the process. War is painful, after all, and the Dastardly Democrats or the Rascally Republicans must be beaten down, never to rise again, in order to usher in the Golden Age of Utopia for All Humanity. Er, I mean, all persons because it’s forbidden to create a label which includes the letters written as “…man…” Mankind, humanity, humankind, human beings, human rights, etc. All gone. All outlawed. All discarded. Because…discrimination, you know, which simply is nothing more than making a choice between different options and possibilities. There ought to be a law.

But seriously, folks.

I don’t follow Eric Zuesse. I do read his articles from time to time and I am never disappointed, even though I may disagree with him vehemently. In this case, I think he is spot on and his argument can be applied directly to what is happening today in American jurisprudence. Namely, the idea that the Executive Branch of federal government can do anything it wishes and no one will complain. Because…they can. Might makes right, indeed!

A law is not a law IF the people who administer the Law are above the Law and are not held accountable by the Law IF they transgress the Law. Can it be put more plainly than that? In other words, if Donald Trump, and Co., decide to move in a certain direction regardless of the Law, who is going to hold him (them) accountable? After all, they are the Power and, as everyone knows, Might makes Right.

Right? Of course, right.

OK, enough of beating around the bush. Let’s bring this in for a landing.

We hear all the time from “Conservatives” that we must “return” (as if we ever left it) to The Constitution (the highest law which cannot be transcended), yet the Constitution declares these rights (of the individual) to be inviolate. Meaning that they cannot be superseded by any law, whether Congressional, Judicial, or Executive, or regardless as to whether they are popular, conservatively speaking.

  1. The 5th Amendment to the Constitution. “No person shall be…deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” .

Pretty plain, right? Cut and dried, right? No person, right? Unless, of course, this applies to an “illegal immigrant” who also happens to be a member of a “terrorist” gang (designated by the Executive Branch, i.e., the President) as a threat to the “national interest”. In that case, those who are guilty (whether they are charged or not is irrelevant) of this “crime” (violation of law) are subject to immediate deportation to their country of origin OR removal to a prison system run by the El Salvadoran government, which we pay buku bucks for, generously provided by the US taxpayer.

This does not appear to be any different than the “war” waged on La Cosa Nostra, i.e., Mafia, which has been ongoing for decades and does not appear to have an end point. Except that the action against Tren de Aragua has the support and vociferous backing of half the population of the US, which Donald Trump is counting on to allow him to completely circumvent the 5th Amendment to the Constitution, which all his supporters depend on to keep the country safe from the depredations of a tyrannical government. We MUST get back to the Constitution, right? Except when it is convenient to discard it, of course.

Whatever happened to “Innocent, until Proven Guilty”? Does this mean anything, anymore?

I admit that Tren de Aragua probably is criminal. It is probably based on force, violent in nature, to achieve its ends, i.e., the compliance of those it seeks to subjugate. That being said, is there any realistic, theoretical, philosophical, difference between this one specific gang and others which are larger and have much more power, e.g., the United States of America, which can be said to impose its power and influence around the world? As far as I can see, the only difference is one of size and scope.

I could applaud the current administration for its stance and actions, except for one niggling reminder. First, they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out because I wasn’t a socialist. Yes, I said nothing when those in power came for Tren de Aragua because I was not a member of the group and, besides, I liked what Trump & Co. was doing. Never mind that the end of this is that when they came for me, there was no one left to speak up for me.

Should we be concerned? Absolutely, yes, we should, but not necessarily in the manner so prevalent in conservative circles today. If the government can arrest and punish anyone at all based solely on an accusation, then who is safe? Am I safe? Are you? How do you know?

“By their works, you shall know them.”

What is most interesting about the article by Eric Zuesse is that he mentions the Peasant’s Revolt of 1525, which resulted in the deaths of perhaps as many as 100, 000 common, ordinary, everyday, persons who simply wanted an end to the abuses perpetrated on them by those more powerful, and which can be summarized as follows:

“Laws should be made more equitable so that all are equal before it and no one gets harsher or more lenient treatment for the same crime.” — https://www.worldhistory.org/Twelve_Articles/

Imagine that! The Law applied equally and without discrimination! No one, not even Donald Trump, Elon Musk, nor Chuck Schumer above it!

We have a long way to go.