By Matt Underwood In Announcing Pardon of Drug Trafficker While Threatening Venezuela, Trump Displays Contradictions: The audacity of it all, right? Framing this as mere “contradictions” feels like a gross understatement, a polite tap on the wrist for behavior that deserves far more condemnation. It’s not just a few inconsistencies; it’s a fundamental disregard for principles, ethics, and frankly, common decency.
It’s truly difficult to not feel a sense of disgust. To see someone in a position of power make such a mockery of justice, pardoning a drug trafficker while simultaneously threatening a foreign nation under the guise of fighting drugs, is frankly appalling. It’s amoral, it’s corrupt, and it’s a slap in the face to every person whose life has been impacted by the scourge of the drug trade. The language surrounding this should be stronger than “contradiction” or even “hypocrisy”.
The reality is that this is corruption, pure and simple. It’s about personal gain, about rewarding those who support him, and punishing those who don’t. The fact that the New York Times might use a more tempered tone in their reporting seems to be the greater issue. We’re talking about someone who facilitated the trafficking of hundreds of tons of cocaine into the United States, yet they receive a pardon. Meanwhile, the rhetoric escalates against another nation, possibly using the same pretext of drug control.
It’s really all about the money. That’s the compass that guides the decisions. Who is paying and who isn’t? Who is offering support and who isn’t? The answer dictates the narrative and the actions. And let’s be clear, this isn’t some complex mystery. It’s a straightforward case of self-enrichment, prioritizing personal wealth and power above all else. This isn’t a secret; it’s the open playbook.
Consider the statement that the pardon was granted because of “friends” requesting it. It’s an admission that the presidency is a tool to be used for personal favors. The “you can do this to any president” comment further underscores the lack of accountability, the sense of being above the law. If you donate, you get a pardon. If you don’t, you get threats.
What’s also important to understand is the underlying context. The focus on Venezuela is hardly about drug control; it’s about strategic interests, potentially the control of oil. In a world of realpolitik, such interests may exist but the hypocrisy of using drug control as a false flag is a clear pattern.
The use of the word “contradictions” also implies a level of complexity or a misguided effort to find some grand strategic vision. This isn’t that. It’s a pattern of rewarding those who serve his interests, and punishing those who don’t. It’s always been about personal enrichment and that fact isn’t new.
The actions do not match the message. The tough-on-crime talk is hollow when a convicted drug trafficker walks free. The hypocrisy is staggering. There is no moral high ground when the actions are so obviously self-serving and corrupt.
This is a recurring theme. The same person who claims to be tough on crime is now giving a pass to someone who has done serious damage to society. How does the rest of the world see it? It’s about the cash, it’s about the resources, and it’s about expanding his personal wealth and power.
The truth is, he is what he has always been. The pardons, the threats, the rhetoric, all are just tools of the trade. If it’s about the dollar, it’s not rocket science. It’s always been about the money and the resources. Don’t expect any real surprises.