As more and more US cities face the prospect of federal police and military patrolling their streets, the New York Times (10/10/25) began a recent article on the fight over sending National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, with the following passage:
Democratic leaders in the city and state have pleaded with President Trump and the courts to trust law enforcement records, both local and federal, that describe the demonstrations as small and comparatively calm.
But in the bifurcated media world of 2025, one side’s comparative calm is the other’s “hellscape.”
By “both-sidesing” its description of the protests in Portland, the Times fails to inform its readers that one of these descriptions is true and the other is simply fabricated. Instead, it tells readers the situation reflects “dueling versions of reality.”
Compare this to Michael Tomasky’s reporting in the New Republic (10/13/25), which aptly notes in the kicker that “the disturbances in Portland are basically limited to a single block about two miles from the city center.”
Or the snarky factcheck website Is Portland Burning? which shows images of the serene city and video of a calm, small protest.
Elsewhere, the Times (10/11/25) has written about the funny animal costumes worn by protesters in Portland, reporting that could have been used to debunk MAGA claims that the city is a “hellscape.”
‘Both officials disagree’
Taking a “closer look” at Trump’s claim that “in Portland, Oregon, antifa thugs have repeatedly attacked our offices and laid siege to federal property in an attempt to violently stop the execution of federal law,” AP (via Washington Post, 10/9/25) began its response, “There have been nightly protests outside the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in Portland for months, peaking in June when police declared one demonstration a riot.”
In an Associated Press factchecking piece (reprinted in the Washington Post, 10/9/25), promising to take “a closer look at the facts” about Portland, only one of Trump’s claims (that in Portland, “you don’t even have sewers anymore”) is met with a forthright “this is false.” Other times, the AP struggles to find a kernel of truth in the Trump administration’s bizarre claims:
TRUMP: “The amazing thing is, you look at Portland and you see fires all over the place. You see fights, and I mean just violence. It’s just so crazy. And then you talk to the governor and she acts like everything is totally normal, there’s nothing wrong.”
THE FACTS: Fires outside the building have been seen on a handful of occasions.
Or, like the Times, it resorts to both-sidesing it:
KRISTI NOEM, Homeland Security Secretary: “I was in Portland yesterday and had the chance to visit with the governor of Oregon, and also the mayor there in town, and they are absolutely covering up the terrorism that is hitting their streets.”
THE FACTS: Noem did visit Portland on Tuesday and met with Kotek and Mayor Keith Wilson. Both officials disagree with Noem’s narrative.
These failings by the media leave the reader or viewer at the mercy of what are posed as competing narratives, rather than with an understanding of what’s real and what’s fake. This is particularly important now, given that right-wing influencers and media are ginning up false claims for the administration to consume and rebroadcast, and even instigating real incidents (Oregon Public Broadcasting, 10/11/25).
When corporate media refuse to call a lie a lie, and to stand unequivocally on the side of reality, they enable the Trump administration’s growing authoritarianism. If Trump can claim that a major US city is “burning to the ground,” what’s to stop him from asserting that the Constitution allows him to run for a third term—or that, once again, he’s won an election that he actually lost?
Featured Image: Detail from New York Times photo (10/11/25) of Portland protests (photo: Jordan Gale).
Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an obviously insane, xenophobic Fascist.Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.
On September 13, 2023, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Maduro held historic talks in Beijing at the Great Hall of the People (Photo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China via Twitter)
This week, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs formally expressed its opposition to US military operations in the Caribbean, following an attack on October 15 that left six people dead on Venezuelan vessels. Spokesperson Lin Jian stated that Beijing “opposes the use or threat of force in international relations” and rejects external interference in Venezuela’s internal affairs.
In response to questions from reporters, Lin Jian criticized Washington’s unilateral actions, which mobilized warships and a nuclear submarine in the region under the pretext of combating drug cartels. The October 15 attack brings the total number of deaths in five recent US military actions against Venezuelan vessels to 27.
China also expressed support for the declaration by 33 Latin American countries on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone on the continent.
China supports strengthening international cooperation to combat transnational crimes and opposes unilateral law enforcement actions by the United States against vessels from other countries that exceed reasonable and necessary limits,” said the Chinese spokesman.
Venezuelan diplomatic mobilization
This week, the Venezuelan Embassy in Beijing also summoned diplomatic representatives from various countries and international media outlets to denounce what it classifies as a risk of military invasion. Ambassador Remigio Ceballos Ichaso told Brasil de Fato that Washington is conducting “a disinformation campaign aimed at justifying an intervention.”
“Accusing Venezuela of being a drug cartel is completely false, a fiction that they have been trying to impose on the international community for decades,” said Ceballos Ichaso.
The Venezuelan government has received expressions of solidarity from Nicaragua, Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba, and Mexico. Humberto Collado, commercial attaché at the Nicaraguan embassy in China, said that “what the US is doing is threatening a democratic country, its president, and its entire people, undermining the socio-political stability of the region.”
Russian and UN position
Russia criticized US military actions through statements by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Russian ambassador to the United Nations, Vasily Nebenzia, stating that such operations “represent an escalation in the region, violate international law and Venezuelan sovereignty.”
The World Drug Report 2025 from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) recognizes Venezuela’s efforts to combat drug trafficking and points out that the country is not among the main international drug corridors. The UN has emphasized that any military or coercive intervention that violates the sovereignty of a member state is contrary to the United Nations Charter.
US sanctions against Venezuela began in 2006, during Hugo Chávez’s administration, intensifying after 2013 with Nicolás Maduro, totaling about a thousand restrictive measures by 2019. These measures resulted in food and medicine shortages, restrictions on access to essential resources, and impacts on the Venezuelan economy.
Internal mobilization
President Nicolás Maduro ordered national defense military exercises with the participation of Bolivarian militias and volunteers, including fishermen and rural residents. The government characterized the mobilization as defensive and voluntary, aimed at ensuring national sovereignty.
In a letter to UN Secretary-General António Guterres, Maduro reiterated Venezuela’s commitment to peace and international law. Foreign Minister Samuel Moncada stated that “the real threat to regional peace is the presence of US military and nuclear weapons in the Caribbean.”
This article was translated from an article originally published in Portuguese on Brasil de Fato.
Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an obviously insane, xenophobic Fascist.
US President Donald Trump looks on as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivers remarks during a joint news conference at the White House on September 29, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)
The Venezuelan ambassador accused the Trump administration of “killing everyone who is on the sea working.”
Venezuelan United Nations Ambassador Samuel Moncada on Thursday delivered a scathing denunciation of US President Donald Trump’s drone attacks on purported drug boats off the coast of his country.
While holding up a copy of Thursday’s edition of the Trinidad and Tobago Guardian, which highlighted two Trinidadian citizens who were killed by a US drone strike while on a boat, Moncada lambasted the Trump administration and compared it to a serial killer.
“There is a killer roaming around the Caribbean!” he declared. “He’s bloodthirsty! He’s killing everyone who is on the sea working! And people from different countries—Colombia, Trinidad, etc.—are suffering the effects of these massacres!”
🇻🇪 At the UN, Venezuela alerts of “a killer roaming around the Caribbean” committing massacres@SMoncada_VEN displays today's @GuardianTT newspaper, which reported that two Trinbagonians were murdered in the latest U.S. strike on a boat in the Caribbean pic.twitter.com/ztIBxawWQk
According to Reuters, Moncada this week also sent a letter to the United Nations Security Council asking it to rule on the legality of the US strikes, while also releasing a statement affirming Venezuela’s sovereignty.
The two Trinidadian citizens mentioned by Moncada were killed in a Tuesday drone strike that also reportedly took the lives of four other men.
In interviews with the Trinidad and Tobago Guardian, friends and relatives of 26-year-old Chad Joseph, one of the men killed in the strike, denied that he was involved with any drug trafficking.
“I find it wrong because it have—people will be innocent and they will still do and say otherwise,” Joseph’s mother, Lenore Burnley, told the Trinidad and Tobago Guardian. “The sea law is they supposed to stop the boat and intercept it, not blow it up like that.”
With the Tuesday strike, the total number of people killed by the Trump administration’s attacks on suspected drug boats totaled at least 27.
The administration carried out yet another boat strike on Thursday, and Reutersreported that at least two crew members had survived the attack, marking the first time that an attack on suspected drug vessels had left any survivors.
Reuters noted that “the development raises new questions, including whether the US military rendered aid to the survivors and whether they are now in US military custody, possibly as prisoners of war.”
The Trump administration so far has provided no legal justification for the strikes on boats, nor has it provided any evidence that any of the boats it has targeted were involved in the trafficking of illegal drugs.
Many legal experts believe that the strikes on the boats would be illegal even if they were found to have been carrying drugs, however, and some criticshave accused the Trump administration of extrajudicial murder.
Moncada said Thursday that the Trump administration, which has also reportedly approved “lethal operations” by the CIA in Venezuela, is “looking for wars.”
“Everybody knows what’s going on here,” he said. “They are fabricating a war. The emperor is naked. Stop pretending this is complicated.”
Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
President Donald J. Trump and President of Argentina Javier Milei at the White House on Oct 14. Photo: White House
The Milei-Trump meeting secured a USD 20 billion financial bailout for Argentina’s unstable economy. Trump made future aid conditional on Milei winning the upcoming elections.
On October 14, Argentina’s right-wing president, Javier Milei, met with his US counterpart, Donald Trump in Washington. Milei, who arrived in the US capital in the early hours of the morning, hoped to secure a strategic financial bailout of almost USD 20 billion that Trump would sponsor to stabilize the economy, which has been struggling under Argentina’s libertarian government.
Traveling alongside Milei were Karina Milei, the president’s sister and secretary general of the presidency; Patricia Bullrich, minister of security; and Santiago Bausili, head of the Central Bank. Among the topics discussed were the trade relationship between the two countries and China’s influence in Argentina.
He described Argentina’s economic crisis as a “moment of acute illiquidity” in an otherwise “prudent financial strategy” that only the United States can and must save from collapse.
The South American nation has “strong economic fundamentals” and the structural reforms already underway will “generate significant dollar-denominated exports and foreign exchange reserves,” Bessent said.
The treasury secretary noted that the IMF also supports Milei’s economic policy.
Additionally, Bessent affirmed: “We have finalized a USD 20 billion currency swap framework with Argentina’s central bank. The US Treasury is prepared, immediately, to take whatever exceptional measures are warranted to provide stability to markets. I emphasized to Minister Caputo that President Donald Trump’s America First economic leadership is committed to strengthening our allies who welcome fair trade and American investment … The Trump administration is resolute in our support for allies of the United States, and to that end, we also discussed Argentina’s investment incentives and US tools to powerfully support investment in our strategic partners.”
Thus, the United States hopes to save the Argentine economy, which – despite the promises of Milei, an economist who for years has become an ideologue of the most radical neoliberalism – is faltering due to a lack of dollars. The orthodox program of reducing the size of the state, privatizing public companies, and cutting back on public policies has managed to improve certain economic indicators, such as the fiscal deficit, but for now it has run into a snag that, apparently, only the prodigious help of the United States can save.
Argentina has lost a large amount of money, causing several investors to begin selling their assets and, consequently, triggering a crisis of monetary illiquidity. With the agreement, Milei secures a historic injection of dollars that the IMF could not have offered him so quickly, considering that last April it already loaned Buenos Aires several billion.
This is of particular interest in view of the upcoming elections in Argentina on October 26; it should not be forgotten that Milei’s party already lost the last elections to Peronism (likely the most significant political force in Argentina over the last 70 years based on social justice, nationalism, and sovereignty) by a landslide. This was acknowledged by President Trump himself at a bilateral press conference, who made future economic aid conditional on Milei’s election victory: “The elections are coming very soon, and it is a very big election that will be watched by the world because [Milei] has done an incredible job, and with that comes some pain. I think the victory is very important … If a socialist, or in the case of New York City, a communist, wins, you feel a lot different about making an investment … If Milei doesn’t win … we will not be generous with Argentina if that happens.”
Trump has received heavy criticism for sponsoring Milei’s bailout, especially from some of his supporters who hoped that the slogan “America First” would materializein an opposite scenario. In addition, several US farmers have complained about Trump’s support, as Argentine soybeans compete with their production and, with this agreement, large landowners based in Argentina could benefit.
For his part, Milei, who has aligned his foreign policy almost mimically behind Washington’s, posted on X: “Thank you very much, President Trump, for receiving me at the White House. Since before becoming president, I have maintained that the Argentine Republic should be a strategic ally of the United States of America, and now that the Argentine people have entrusted me to guide the destiny of our country, fulfilling that promise is another step in the direction we set out on December 10, 2023: Make Argentina Great Again (MAGA). The support that you and your great country have given us is vitally important for the continuity of the long road of reforms we have embarked upon. Argentines know that the world’s leading power will continue to support us unless we return to populism. The situation is crystal clear: if the country strays from the path of freedom and returns to populism, the United States will cease to support our country. Otherwise, they will continue to stand by us.
Without a doubt, Milei’s hope is that long-awaited economic stability will translate into political stability that will allow him to get through the upcoming elections. However, this will be difficult for the government, given the latest polls showing growing discontent among the population over the rising cost of living, the latest corruption scandals (involving Milei’s own sister), and spending cuts that are already affecting millions of students, retirees, single mothers, etc.
Thus, Milei has bet big on Washington, just as Trump and his administration have bet big on the libertarian president. It will soon become clear whether this bet will allow Washington to maintain a totally loyal ally in South America or whether, on the contrary, Milei’s neoliberal project will be undermined by Argentina’s social and economic reality.
Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an obviously insane, xenophobic Fascist.
A US Army soldier watching a burning oil well at Rumaila oil field in Iraq in April 2003. Photo: US Navy
With the suspension of dialogue between the US and Venezuela, the sighting of US B-52 bombers in Venezuelan airspace, and the further lethal US strikes in the Caribbean, the US seems to be accelerating its drive towards war with Venezuela
The mood in the Caribbean grows increasingly tense, as the United States intensifies its military threats. Beneath the deceptive shroud of the “war on drugs,” the United States is actively executing a blueprint for military intervention in Venezuela, employing lethal force and projecting power in a manner that legal institutions and regional leaders have condemned as a profound threat to international order. This aggression is not a law enforcement operation; it is the negation of law, a neocolonial revival of the Monroe Doctrine, designed to shatter the sovereignty of Venezuela, seize control of the world’s largest oil reserves, and install a compliant regime.
A license to kill: the precedent of state murder
A chilling adoption of extrajudicial violence has marked the current escalation. The Trump administration has ordered unilateral military strikes against private vessels near the Venezuelan coast, allegedly to stop drug trafficking. To launch these alarming attacks, the US military has deployed a massive naval force of warships, drones, and special operations forces.
These strikes have resulted in the summary execution of at least 27 people as of recent reports. The most recent lethal strike in the Caribbean resulted in the “elimination” of 6 more people. This is not law enforcement; it is extrajudicial murder and a campaign that now stands as part of a war plan against Venezuela. The administration has characterized the victims, without credible proof, as drug traffickers and “terrorists,” a claim that, even if true, provides no legal authority for the US president to execute whomever it decides.
Legal and human rights organizations have been unequivocal in their condemnation of this profound and dangerous policy, which replaces established law enforcement procedures with premeditated lethal force. The New York City Bar Association (NYCBA), a key voice on international legal ethics, has strongly denounced these actions. The NYCBA stated explicitly that “Because the recent attacks on Venezuelan vessels and their crews were unauthorized by US law and in violation of binding international law, they were illegal summary executions – murders.” They further argued that these actions violate the fundamental international principle that “No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life” under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The US government possesses ample legal authority for the Coast Guard to interdict and search vessels suspected of carrying narcotics, followed by prosecution in US courts according to due process requirements. However, in the case of the Venezuelan vessels, the Coast Guard’s Congressionally authorized police function was bypassed; instead, the crews were simply targeted and executed by overwhelming military force. Regional leaders, including Colombian President Gustavo Petro, have condemned the extrajudicial killings, highlighting the profound anxiety across Latin America over a return to unilateral US military action under the cover of anti-narcotics policy.
Beyond the lethal strikes, the US government has engaged in significant military posturing that amounts to a direct challenge to Venezuelan sovereignty. The sighting of US B-52 bombers in Venezuelan airspace, flying in close range, is a significant escalation. This warmongering has nothing to do with the “war on drugs” and everything to do with regime change to plunder Venezuela’s oil. This reckless push for war is a criminal act of international aggression.
The Trump Administration’s unilateral drone strikes in the Caribbean, combined with the White House’s termination of all negotiations with Venezuela, appear as a precursor for a full-scale regime change operation. This is a critical moment. We must sound the alarm: there is a risk of a new, catastrophic conflict in the region.
The US government’s own officials continue to escalate the crisis with bellicose rhetoric and actions. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a key architect of the regime-change policy, has consistently refused to rule out a military option, asserting that the Maduro regime has become a “threat to the region and even to the United States.”
Venezuela’s response has been one of principled defense of its sovereignty. Ambassador to the UN, Samuel Moncada has repeatedly sounded the alarm on the global stage, arguing that the US military deployment in the Caribbean is a massive propaganda operation that seeks “excuses to fabricate a conflict” to seize the country’s oil wealth. Moncada affirmed that, “The United States believes that the Caribbean belongs to it because it has been using the expansionist Monroe Doctrine for over 100 years, which is nothing more than a remnant of colonialism.”
President Nicolás Maduro has called on Washington to resume dialogue, stating, “Our diplomacy isn’t the diplomacy of cannons, of threats, because the world cannot be the world of 100 years ago,” while simultaneously mobilizing national defense exercises to ensure the country is prepared for any direct assault. The NYCBA warned that attacks against Venezuelan vessels and reported threats against the Venezuelan government violate the nation’s obligations under the United Nations Charter, with the risk of escalating to open hostilities.
Parallels with the Iraq War: oil, ideology, and deception
The current situation is chillingly reminiscent of the lead-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. In that case, the Bush administration justified unilateral action on the basis of “weapons of mass destruction,” but this was a pretext. The true objectives were not limited to oil, but also included achieving profound ideological and political goals – overthrowing a government to reshape Middle Eastern politics and assert dominance.
Washington must learn the lessons of this history. The Bush administration promised a quick victory in Iraq. Instead, the invasions and occupation claimed countless Iraqi lives, resulted in tens of thousands of American soldiers killed or wounded, and destabilized the region. The notion that the US can carry out military invasions into the heart of Latin America without a massive blowback is outlandish.
In the case of Venezuela, the “war on drugs” and the labeling of the government as a “threat” serve as the new rhetorical pretexts. The US interest is multifaceted: it involves securing the world’s largest proven oil reserves and achieving the ideological and political goal of overthrowing a socialist government to assert dominance and reshape Latin American politics. The US seeks to dismantle the Bolivarian Revolution and eliminate a major center of anti-imperialist politics in the hemisphere.
The current escalation is not about law enforcement or counter-narcotics; it is about regime change and plunder. While members of Congress from both Democratic and Republican parties, as well as key voices of public opinion, are increasingly speaking up about the illegality of these strikes and the absence of credible information from the administration, this situation requires much more urgency, once the escalation ladder is climbed, there may be no going back. The international community must recognize this aggressive campaign for what it is: a criminal act of international aggression. The world must stand against this threat of a new, catastrophic conflict.
Manolo De Los Santos is Executive Director of The People’s Forum and a researcher at Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. His writing appears regularly in Monthly Review, Peoples Dispatch, CounterPunch, La Jornada, and other progressive media. He coedited, most recently, Viviremos: Venezuela vs. Hybrid War (LeftWord, 2020), Comrade of the Revolution: Selected Speeches of Fidel Castro (LeftWord, 2021), and Our Own Path to Socialism: Selected Speeches of Hugo Chávez (LeftWord, 2023).
Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an obviously insane, xenophobic Fascist.
