Trump's Anti-Crime Agenda Contradicts His Criticism of Biden's Legislative Record
Since he favors aggressive drug law enforcement, severe penalties, and impunity for abusive police officers, he may have trouble persuading black voters that he is on their side.

During his 2020 presidential campaign, Donald Trump attacked Joe Biden from the left on drug policy and criminal justice, slamming him for pushing harsh laws that had disproportionately hurt black people. Trump is trying that same tack again this time around, portraying Biden as a racist eager to lock up African Americans. "We must not forget that it was Joe Biden who was a key figure in passing the 1994 Crime Bill, which disproportionately harmed Black communities through harsh sentencing laws and increased incarceration rates," Janiyah Thomas, the Trump campaign's "black media director," said in an emailed press release on Thursday.
That stance is consistent with aspects of Trump's record as president, including his support for the FIRST STEP Act, a package of sentencing and prison reforms that he signed into law in December 2018. But it is blatantly inconsistent with Trump's current drug policy and criminal justice agenda, which favors aggressive enforcement, severe penalties, and impunity for abusive police officers.
Like Biden, who in 2022 promised to "beat the opioid epidemic" by "stop[ping] the flow of illicit drugs," Trump indulges in the familiar fantasy that interdiction can prevent Americans from consuming politically disfavored intoxicants. But Trump goes bigger, imagining "a full naval embargo on the drug cartels" and deployment of "military assets" to "inflict maximum damage" on them. If the U.S. does not get "the full cooperation of other governments to stop this menace," he warns, "we will expose every bribe, every kickback, every payoff, and every bit of corruption that is allowing the cartels to preserve their brutal reign."
Trump's insistence that he is a tougher drug warrior than Biden is hard to reconcile with his portrayal of Biden as an overzealous drug warrior who was heedless of the damage his legislation did. And Trump does not offer much evidence from his own record as president that determination and violence can defeat the economics of prohibition. "For three decades before my election," he says, "drug overdose deaths increased every single year. We took the drug and fentanyl crisis head on, and we achieved the first reduction in overdose deaths in more than 30 years."
Trump is referring to a slight decrease in drug-related deaths between 2017 and 2018. He neglects to mention that the number went back up again in 2019 and 2020, reaching record levels during his administration—a trend that continued after he left office. Contrary to Trump's spin, the 1.7 percent drop in opioid-related deaths he highlights does not suggest his ideas for "Ending the Scourge of Drug Addiction in America" are any better than Biden's.

In addition to deploying America's military might against drug cartels, Trump promises to "take down the gangs" that "distribute these deadly narcotics on a local level." That will entail a lot of arrests and a lot of prison sentences, producing the "increased incarceration rates" that Trump decries. Just as the policies that Biden supported as a senator "disproportionately harmed Black communities," so will the crackdown that Trump has in mind.
Trump says he also will "ask Congress to ensure that drug dealers, kingpins and human traffickers receive the death penalty." Executing drug dealers is not a new idea for Trump, who has repeatedly recommended that policy over the years. But it is inconsistent with with his criticism of Biden's legislative record, his condemnation of "very unfair" drug penalties, his commutations for nonviolent drug offenders who had received those penalties, and his support for sentencing reform.
The most famous beneficiary of Trump's clemency was Alice Johnson, a first-time offender who had received a life sentence for participating in a Memphis cocaine trafficking operation. "You have many people like Mrs. Johnson," Trump told Fox News in 2018. "There are people in jail for really long terms." Trump highlighted Johnson's case during his 2019 State of the Union address, in a 2020 Super Bowl ad, and at the 2020 Republican National Convention, where Johnson gave a grateful speech.
As a black woman hit with a draconian sentence under inflexible drug laws, Johnson was a useful exhibit in Trump's case that African-American voters should be grateful to him and wary of Biden. But after Trump re-upped his death penalty proposal in a 2023 interview with Fox News, his mercy collided with his blood lust.
When Bret Baier pointed out that someone like Johnson would have been "killed under your plan," Trump was flummoxed. "No, no, no," he said. "It would depend on the severity," he added. He also noted that the death penalty he imagined would not apply retroactively to Johnson herself and suggested that, had it been the law at the time, it would have deterred her from getting involved in drug dealing.
By that point, Trump had become disenchanted with sentencing reform. In a 2022 interview with New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman, he bitterly complained that he had not reaped the political reward he expected from backing the FIRST STEP Act. "Did it for African Americans," he told her. "Nobody else could have gotten it done. Got zero credit."
Despite that disappointing experience, Trump is trying again, and his drug war enthusiasm is not the only reason to be skeptical of his pitch. His anti-crime agenda, which reflects his authoritarian instincts, includes a promise to "strengthen qualified immunity and other protections for police officers."
As critics across the political spectrum have been pointing out for years, the doctrine of qualified immunity, which bars federal civil rights claims unless they allege violations of "clearly established" law, often shields police officers (and other government officials) from liability for outrageous misconduct. But as Trump sees it, that shield is not big and strong enough.
Trump has promised to "indemnify" cops "against any and all liability." He apparently does not realize that police officers already are routinely indemnified in the rare cases when they are held liable for abuse, and he implausibly argues that the threat of liability has a paralyzing impact, discouraging cops from doing their jobs. In case beefing up qualified immunity does not do the trick, Trump also promises to give police "immunity from prosecution" for violating people's rights.
Trump thinks total impunity for abusive cops is necessary to "reclaim safety, dignity, and peace for law-abiding Americans." In his view, remedies for police abuse, such as insisting that officers obey the Constitution or authorizing criminal charges and civil rights lawsuits when they don't, are dangerous to public order. He believes police officers should not have to worry that they could face charges or litigation simply because they broke the law, and maybe a few heads, while doing their jobs.
Given that position, Trump may have a hard time persuading black voters that he is on their side. As Reason's Billy Binion notes, survey data suggest those voters want the law and order that Trump promises, but not at the cost of giving free rein to armed agents of the state.
Trump's positions on drug policy and criminal justice are utterly incoherent. Mass incarceration is bad, he says, even as he recommends policies that would imprison more people for conduct that violates no one's rights. Drug laws that disproportionately hurt African Americans are troubling, he thinks, but they should be enforced more aggressively. A life sentence for Alice Johnson was plainly unjust, he says, but a death sentence would have been appropriate. Biden was mindlessly punitive, he argues, but Trump is preferable because he is even tougher. Trump cannot logically have it both ways, but that will not stop him from trying.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Something needs to be done here. Like 3 times as many men are dying as women. We have to ramp up the female deaths in the name of equity.
AOC has died at least 6 times since J6. She is doing her best.
Do you mean brain death? She’s currently in a persistent vegetative state. The walking and the talking are just muscle spams and gas escaping.
Trump? Inconsistent in his rhetoric? Naw. Not possible. He's always been so level headed and consistent. Clearly fake news.
Good afternoon sarc
Look, being paid 50 cents a post is a hard way to make a living, so he needs multiple accounts.
Hey. You came back dummy. So happy to see you.
A sarc puppet makes an appearance. Perhaps he was one of the aforementioned five buddies at the lake house. Maybe they were all socks.
This is dopey sarc.
MrMxyzptlk is Sarckles?
I missed the reveal. What happened?
Me too. But I imagine an IQ test would make it clear.
Svetlana figured it out and messaged me. Next time she is in the group, ask her about it.
They are wrong. But that never stopped them from doing things before, why stop now.
Again, I ask, really looking for an answer- in what way is Biden better than Trump from a libertarian perspective? Several writers said they would pick Biden over Trump- I would like to hear a defense.
.
Trump is better on
the 2nd amendment
public schools
deregulation
federalism
court nominations
stairs
He's still not even close to a libertarian and a is narcissistic asshole though.
narcissistic asshole
So what.
I think it makes him fickle. It seems to me he makes decisions based on what he thinks will gain him praise rather than on principle.
Yes, and unlike some politicians he takes little trouble to hide it.
Most politicians also have a desire for popularity, combined with resentments and hurt feelings when that popularity is thwarted, and those attitudes lead them into saying what the public wants to hear at a particular time - but they pretend to be dedicated public servants with a single-minded dedication to the public weal and a willingness to courageously do the right thing even if it loses them votes.
It seems that some voters are tired of such crap, and they don’t mind Trump giving unfiltered expression to What He Really Thinks.
Good point.
As opposed to your average politician whose vote can be bought behind closed doors? At least Trump's changes are out in public with fairly obvious reasons.
Also good point.
You prefer the lawmakers who have huge unexplainable stashes of cash and gold bars hidden in their house.
No. I prefer stashes of cash and gold bars in my house.
He was fickle when he let Kim Kardashian come to the White House and convince him to pass the First Step Act.
I'm not sure why he appointed people like Bolton, but I doubt it was him being fickle. I'd guess Barron's future plays more of a role than his fickleness in these kinds of decisions.
Fair enough. Sometimes Trump surprises me pleasantly and sometimes not (Bolton was a very unpleasant surprise), but whatever the reason, I don't feel confident Trump will maintain anything he says other than a few key issues like immigration or China tariffs.
It took Trump like 3 years to realize he should not appoint Bushies to any positions. In the meantime, we got Sessions, Wray, Bolton, Barr, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and (ugh) Pompeo.
Oh. I just realized I read and answered the question backwards above.
I’m struggling to save face by thinking of a way Biden is better now…. uhhh ummm…I’ll get back to you.
Oh. Biden was born in Scranton. So was I so that's definitely better.
If that factoid came from Biden, it’s probably a lie.
No. no man. He remembers it vividly. It was a beautiful summer's day. His grandpop had just died in the very same hospital.
No, my mom is the one that told me I was born in Scranton.
I thought he was Puerto Rican.
Yeah, he’s better on personal liberties, but worse on letting companies pollute the groundwater. I’d say that’s a wash, but I have a personal adversion to getting cancer.
Biden got my vote a couple months in when he withdrew troops from Afghanistan. I was sickened by GWB’s wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan and the carnage caused by this country’s unprovoked aggression against a bunch of poor peasants. This, any person that got us out of that fucking shit was someone I would support.
Trump arranged that withdrawing from Afghanistan.
Them Biden extended by months botching the shit out of it costing even more lives for the war that Biden voted for as senator and helped oversee for 8 years as VP.
All so he could appear heroic on the 20th anniversary of 9/11.
Complete asshole.
Trump talked about it for 4 years and ended up with his thumb up his arse.
Fuck off.
Please keep your Trump fanfic to yourself. And may god have mercy on your keyboard.
Yiu don’t make any sense. Trump made the deal to get them out, not Biden. Or is this some weak attempt to rationalize a really shitty decision after the fact?
Hitler, too, SAID that wanted to stop wars and make peace... For MANY years!
Hitler quote benevolent spirit of Europe... Can't find it right now, but it is out there...
There's an important difference there in that Trump didn't start any wars.
I totally get not liking Trump. But the Hitler comparisons are just retarded.
“Biden got my vote a couple months in when he withdrew troops from Afghanistan.”
Biden voted them in. Trump withdrew them, and Biden screwed it up.
“I was sickened by GWB’s wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan and the carnage caused by this country’s unprovoked aggression against a bunch of poor peasants.”
Biden was chair of the senate committee and the Iraq war’s biggest cheerleader.
Was he POTUS in 2003 or was that someone else, asshole? Really, the ability of you guys to shill for Republicans is fucking amazing.
Give it up, loser.
Bush and Biden say eye to eye on warboner foreign policy. Both assholes just like the 50 centers that defend either of them.
"Was he POTUS in 2003"
No, he was a senator. I'm beginning to think you might be a parody.
Wow, Smack-Head answered a question accurately once! Wooo-Hoooo!!!!
Biden was the Iraq war's biggest cheerleader.
Trump publicly denounced it.
GWB is irrelevant to what the 2024 candidates did back then. You can't twist this Buttplug. If you were genuinely antiwar you'd support anyone but Biden.
Joe Biden championed the Iraq war. Will that come back to haunt him now?
"Biggest cheerleader" is a stretch. But the fact remains he's been pro war in every instance for half a decade. And pro war on drugs in every instance for half a decade. Where there's innocent people bombed to death or thrown in a cage by our government, he's behind it.
Which still causes me amazement that so many Reason writers supported him in 2020. Oh wait, sorry, forgot he was going to throw open our southern border for hordes of welfare recipients and cheap under the table labor. Never mind, carry on.
Was Trump in Government in ANY capacity in 2003?
Goddamn, you’re a pathetic butthole.
Now you're just floundering. Stop embarrassing yourself.
States facts not in evidence.
federalism
Just because you favor having your local government jam its dick up your arse (as you would with abortion and immigration) doesn’t make you a libertarian. Rather, it makes you seem like an insufferable jacksss that is ok with having your local government restrict your behavior and mystifyingly arriving at the conclusion that that is somehow a better outcome.
Yep, parody.
Or dumb enough we should treat it as such.
I’m going with stupid here.
Not gonna lie, stairs being included made me literally laugh out loud.
If we weren't laughing, we'd be crying.
They voted for Biden reluctantly and strategically. Perhaps the same excuse Biden uses when he sniffs, gropes, kisses, and fondles children.
Biden was supposed to be better than Trump on trade and immigration. Turned out to be worse. And now Trump is promising to be even more worse.
You still remain retarded. How was Joe supposed to be better one either?
Have you had a chance to research Brigham and Joseph’s polygamy yet? They were both sex predators. It wasn’t just to “take care of widows” (although there were some cases of that). 11 of Joseph’s marriages broke up existing marriages. Many of them were young girls who worked for him, so their livelihood(and family’s salvation) were at stake if they didn’t marry him. He told a 12 year old god wanted him to take her as a plural wife.
Even if the Mormon god was real(it’s not. The Book of Mormon has been disproven) I wouldn’t want to worship a god that would choose a sexual predator to restore his church. And frankly I believe people that do worship the Mormon god need to be ostracized.
Hey bigot, what's your opinion of brandon, since you're so concerned with young ladies?
I am bigoted toward people who CHOOSE to hold patently false, racist, homophobic, and perverse beliefs.
I think Biden is a senile piece of shit who’s unfit for office. I feel the same way about Trump.
Cool story bigot.
You’re the one defending a racist church that promotes, protects, and enables sex abuse.
You’re a supporter of a political party that does the same, and is incrementally enshrining those principles into law.
Just because I don’t like Trump and call traitors like you out doesn’t make me a democrat you backwards rube.
For those that care, KARtikeya is TheReEncogitationer's sock. He gave himself away a couple of times accidentally using those two creepy emojis on KARtikeya posts, and occasionally replying as KARtikeya when the other poster was addressing ReEncog.
Said the pederast.
No, see, you want to worship a god that openly endorses pedophilia. That’s literally your rainbow cult in a nutshell. It’s why you’re so eager to get it into schools, it’s why you’re so eager to get it into pop culture, it’s why you’re so eager to raise a generation of children on the idea that it’s somehow normal, it's why you're so eager to divide parents from their children. Heck, it’s the whole reason you’re even on Reason. Every post they make about sex workers and free range parenting and drug proliferation – these ALL work to your benefit. It's ALL about making children susceptible, malleable, and "consenting."
Because your ultimate goal is to rape children. THAT is the LGBT. Always has been, always will be.
And people – parents most likely – are going to make a trophy out of your skull for it.
And nobody is going to stop them. I will not be even in the least surprised when, sometime in the near future, “Pride Month” will be a bloodbath. You are a dead man walking, Kar. And the worst part is you know it, and you don’t make the slightest effort to course correct.
God help you.
I look forward to the democrats getting what they’ve earned.
I look forward to traitors like you and your buddy Matt Shea receiving justice for your treason.
There is no reasoning with you backwards social conservatives. I am speaking out against child sex abuse, but you label me a pederast because I don’t hate the gays like you.
Do you realize how ridiculously out of touch you are? Please go to your place of employment and spout the hate you do on here and see what happens.
The good news is backwards trash like you are becoming a smaller and smaller minority. Soon you will be mostly dead and those that remain will be so insignificant as to not cause problems anymore.
It’s funny how these bigots will refuse to acknowledge or straight up lie(Red Rocks) about two of the biggest child sex abuse institutions in this country’s history. The Boy Scouts and the Catholic Church. Neither allowed LGTB members. Can’t let facts get in the way of their hatred and bigotry.
Strategically Biden is likely to destroy the economy faster than Trump. If a collapse happens fast enough and it's clear that the Democrats were in charge and can't blame anyone else with any credibility it could destroy the party and get more people to understand the real enemy is government no matter who is running it. Trump won't be able to get anything done since both parties hate him. Thus the economy gets 4 years of time to recover a bit and the collapse happens later and isn't as abrupt. People don't learn their lesson as well.
Better a fast drop into financial hell than a slow fall.
Drugs, prostitution, cutting dicks off kids, funding illegal immigration. The 4 pillars of liberaltarianism.
Drugs, prostitution, cutting dicks off kids, ass sex, funding illegal immigration. The
45 pillars of liberaltarianism.The ass sex issue is partially solved. Up next compulsory ass sex. At least 10 times in six months.
It is better to give than to receive.
Pffft. He only meant the good parts.
There is a difference from victims/consumers of drugs as compared to the producers/sellers of drugs. First step act was the former, stopping importation the latter. Dont think Trump has ever been pro drug importing. So not really a conflict.
I accept your clarification. I still don't like his drug war rhetoric, especially the military, death penalty and police immunity stuff. I doubt he could/would do any of that, but I'd be more comfortable if he shut up about it.
Why would he shut up about it when it gets people who want those policies to vote for him, and the people who defend him to attack people who are critical of those policies?
Poor sarc.
Pour Sarc indeed.
You're not wrong.
Trump is a populist seeking a platform made up of what he thinks people will vote for. There's no central ideal guiding his plan, just what must he say to get back into the white house. Who knows if he will even try to do any of that stuff. It's not like he will be able to run for a third term. He could fuck his voter base over and govern hard left. He is a New York Democrat after all.
Here he is largely referencing cartels and organized crime. They aren't exactly respectful of the NAP.
It's Quicktown Brix with his low-key TDS.
Biden babbles about air striking law-abiding American gun owners on U.S. soil and that's just a no-nevermind but Trump talking about using the military to go after cartels and foreign terrorists organizations using bribes, payoffs, and kickbacks to thwart local and federal government, specifically citing violence as part of the motivation, and Smartasasacka Brix gets uncomfortable.
It’s Quicktown Brix with his low-key TDS.
I think we're making progress here. Adding "low-key" was almost a compliment.
It is possible and reasonable to criticize Trump without reference to Biden. Aren’t we always complaining about Reason always inserting some "to be sure" jab at Trump in any article critical of Biden?
The fact that one candidate is preferable doesn’t mean you have to like him or tone down criticisms.
There is a difference from victims/consumers of drugs as compared to the producers/sellers of drugs.
Yeah, the latter are providing a valuable service and the former are just customers. What makes you think people who take drugs are victims? Not my experience at all— and I’m somewhat of a connoisseur.
What makes you think people who take drugs are victims?
Just give it to some girls, LOL.
Judge Trump by what h does, not says. His statements are his inner thoughts designed to generate a reaction. Take him seriously not literally.
This is fucking retarded. Trump is a grown ass old man. He can speak clearly what his intent is. If he says he wants the death penalty for drug dealers, why do we have to sugar coat his words and run interference to say 'he didn't really mean DEATH PENALTY."
What the fuck else does "drug dealers should get the death penalty" mean? Quit carrying water for this bullshit.
Trump won't be able to do it because Congress will never pass a bill to do it and the Sup Ct would likely strike down the death penalty for non violent crimes under the 8th amendment. Trump is too stupid to realize this. But it makes him sound tough and we know how much he likes to pretend he is some geriatric masculine super athlete. His ridiculously homo erotic NFT's showed us everything we need to know about that.
Jacob the racist arguing that punishing criminals targets black Ameticans. Gotta keep the leftist lies flowing don't you Jacob. How's that national security risk of a documents case going you marxist twat.
He Sold Nuclear Secrets To Putin!
Did he get a good price?
Funny enough, Clinton did sell them to China.
Reason comments are the only assurance that I'm not losing my mind. This is in direct contrast to the actual publication, which is a fucking shitrag.
I would love to go to a Reason convention in Vegas. It would be so much fun for all of us to meet the Reasom staff, and tell them how impressed we are with their ‘libertarian’ analysis. It would also be fun to meet Jeffy, Sarc, Shrike, and the rest of the pinko platoon.
Most of us would be at the casinos. Jeff, shrike, and others would be at Circus Circus.
Does this mean true libertarians now support the drug war and unaccountable police?
Reason does when they backed the guy that is the top cop, sicced the FBI on an adversary with special instructions, spent a career being tough on drug users, and still has marijuana scheduled. It would be cute if you logged in using Mr. M to give you a “right on man” post.
Poor sarc. Keep throwing shit at the wall.
I think it's more a choice of which violates the non-aggression principle more: not punishing people for violent crime, or punishing non-violent crime.
Normally I would fall in the former camp, but someone might not be punished for attacking or mugging someone, but sure as hell that victim will get prosecuted for defending themself. The rules are not being applied fairly. Violence is good to progressives, as long as it's not in self defense.
You ain’t black if you don’t like violent felons, smash and grabs, stores closing, pedos and rapes in the hood~Cato
Since he favors aggressive drug law enforcement, severe penalties, and impunity for abusive police officers, he may have trouble persuading black voters that he is on their side.
Which black voters? The black voters who are the victims of the crime in their neighborhoods that have thrown him a 500% increase of support, or the black voters with carefully manicured dreads that work as interns at NPR and consult with DC think tanks on how to best diversify their media rooms?
Sullum: Unlike you, Mr. James, I RESARCHED this issue!
Me: Really? Who did you call?
Sullum: The Black Community, I’ve got its number, right here in my rolodex!
Me: And when you called that number, who picked up?
Sullum: The Black community!
Me: Did she have a name?
Sullum: Yes, Claudine Gay!
Look. Joe was very clear. If you dont vote for him you ain't black. Sullum agrees.
There was really nothing wrong with this article-- at least from a beltway libertarian point of view. But that 'but black people' in the subhead? Does ANYONE pay attention over there?
Trump, no matter WHAT you think of him, is the highest scoring Republican in modern history when it comes to Black voters. Biden is having record declines in polling with black people. So why on earth with Trump get MORE Biden-ey?
He called the Emperor of Black People.
Sullum: Yes, Claudine Gay!
Me: Are you sure it wasn't Ketanji Brown Jackson or Karine Jean-Pierre?
Sullum: I'm sure it wasn't Thomas.
[hoist tumbler of whisky overhead then dumps it down the hatch]
+100
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that surveys pretty consistently that blacks largely want to see more police presence and stricter law enforcement. Particularly those who live in the high crime urban areas. I really don't think "tough on crime" is a big loser overall with regular working class black people.
Eh, Biden is basically running on a "Crime is good, if you don't like it tough, suckers" ticket so it's not surprising Trump is going with the opposite.
But I think there is a fallacy that if you are black that you must support criminal activity. Most black people are not criminals and indeed, are the main victims of crime. Being soft on crime might help those criminals who are black, but also hurts non-criminals who are black.
Ideally we would have a realistic option between the anarchy of Biden and progressive prosecutors and the police state wanted by Trump and his MAGA types, but we don't, and most people prefer security over freedom
There are two groups of black people that support soft-on-crime measures:
Criminals (who probably aren't politically engaged)
Black Harvard administrators, who will never vote for Tump anyway.
Yeah, generally, black people have never been supportive of cutting the cops. They want their behavior dealt with, but they overwhelmingly would prefer having more cops to fewer, according to virtually every poll I've ever seen on the topic.
>Since he favors aggressive drug law enforcement, severe penalties, and impunity for abusive police officers, he may have trouble persuading black voters that he is on their side.
You can hope, Sullum.
'Cause you know what else he supports? Controlling the border and stopping the massive influx of immigration. Because you know who's really fucking fed up with Venezualans having knife fights in the streets? Black people. You know who's not happy that they're not the favored consituency in their Blue cities? Black people. You know who's pissed that Hondurans are getting free money here in the US while they get nothing? Black people.
To Sullum, the news coming out of Chicago must be a psyop.
^THIS^.
There shouldn't need to be an *excuse* to defend the nation against invaders. Trump is obviously pandering the "drug cartels" as the excuse to defend the nation against endless invasions against the "No-Borders" actions of the left.
That said; Trump has publicly stated he believes drug regulation should be left to the States. He put that stance into action during COVID and I sincerely hope he stays that path.
Well, since Trump is a criminal it’ll be easier for the Black community to understand him and vote for him. Or so I’ve heard from the right wing on Twitter.
Blacks relate to Trump b/c they know what it’s like to be railroaded by the corrupt justice system.
He neglects to mention that the number went back up again in 2019 and 2020, reaching record levels during his administration—a trend that continued after he left office.
Gee, what couple of things happened right around that time that might account for the sudden increase? Gosh, they're right on the tip of my tongue. HOVID? ROVID? Something... and something happened with the southern border, didn't it. Like it was there one minute and then it wasn't.
Think AT, think... I know it'll come to me.
Reason comments are the only assurance that I'm not losing my mind. This is in direct contrast to the actual publication, which is a fucking shitrag.
When Trump is talking about executing drug dealers, he has someone like El Chapo or a ms13 gang members in mind. His envisions using the might of the military to confront a vast criminal empire. He’s not going to send soldiers to Memphis to crack down on neighborhood dealers.
One can debate whether his plan will work, but it’s not especially incoherent. Sullum tends to have a broad definition of “drug warrior”. A president declaring war on cartels is the same thing as a a city declaring that any athletes who smoked dope would be banned from college sports - which would affect more blacks. Is the latter what Trump wants?
Note that even in pot legal states, blacks are still arrested at higher rate than whites for drug offense. Black dealers tend to operate on the streets of more crime prone areas and tend to be repeat offenders, leading to tougher penalties. The left ignore context and allege uneven enforcement despite whites using drugs at a similar rate. If trump’s plan actually leads to more nonwhite incarceration, it would be logical. The drug cartel and human traffickers in this hemisphere are Latinos, and most dangerous on street dealers would be blacks.
The war on drugs has failed miserably. It has not prevented a single death or a single case of drug addiction. Instead it has provided an excuse for a massive militarization of the law enforcement agencies at all levels of American government, resulting in thousands of deaths of innocent people at the "wrong address" and even wars on foreign soil undeclared by Congress. The corruption of law enforcement by drug cartels alone would have justified the termination of the drug wars with extreme prejudice long before now. Give it a rest - please! Not even the power-hungry politicians who support this idiocy actually believe in what they're touting any more.
It has not prevented a single death
Hyperbole like this shows you are a virtue-signaling fool.
Certainly some deaths were prevented, but on balance it has caused far more bad than good.
Holy Fuck.
What Sullum selectively reports:
What the Trump campaign actually says:
Jesus Fuck! Are you retards *trying* to make yourselves look like lying scumbags supporting the villains?
I mean, I get that as libertarians, non-interventionism is a bit of closely-held belief, if not a core tenet, but arguing, dishonestly, that we shouldn't expose bribery, kickbacks, payoffs, and corruption in our own or other governments? WTF is wrong with you sick fucks?
expose bribery, kickbacks, payoffs, and corruption in our own or other governments?
According to my Narative-Xlator-2000, the above means: promoting vaccine hesitancy wasting time pointing out that a CIA asset was paying Hunter Biden's bills for years.
Trump indulges in the familiar fantasy that interdiction can prevent Americans from consuming politically disfavored intoxicants.
I was wrong, I shouldn't have read the article. Where on the scale of 'politically disfavored' is Xylazine mixed with fentanyl?
This just in! Trump and RFK Jr. to speak at Libertarian Party Convention!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4683041-donald-trump-rfk-jr-robert-f-kennedy-jr-libertarian-national-convention-joe-biden/
And this:
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4646637-donald-trump-rfk-jr-robert-f-kennedy-jr-joe-biden-2024/