Another Day, Another Trump Administration Crime

Stop me if you've heard this one before.

The Trump Administration, in an effort to appear strong on terror, has committed a likely crime by killing innocent civilians. From The Washington Post:

The longer the U.S. surveillance aircraft followed the boat, the more confident intelligence analysts watching from command centers became that the 11 people on board were ferrying drugs.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a spoken directive, according to two people with direct knowledge of the operation. “The order was to kill everybody,” one of them said.

A missile screamed off the Trinidad coast, striking the vessel and igniting a blaze from bow to stern. For minutes, commanders watched the boat burning on a live drone feed. As the smoke cleared, they got a jolt: Two survivors were clinging to the smoldering wreck.

The Special Operations commander overseeing the Sept. 2 attack — the opening salvo in the Trump administration’s war on suspected drug traffickers in the Western Hemisphere — ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth’s instructions, two people familiar with the matter said. The two men were blown apart in the water.

Hegseth’s order, which has not been previously reported, adds another dimension to the campaign against suspected drug traffickers. Some current and former U.S. officials and law-of-war experts have said that the Pentagon’s lethal campaign — which has killed more than 80 people to date — is unlawful and may expose those most directly involved to future prosecution.

From the moment Trump triumphantly announced the results of the initial strike back in September, there has been widespread skepticism from those who still believe the United States should follow international law. This group, naturally, does not include the "party of law and order" but does include those who still believe that not even suspected surviving terrorists should be brutally murdered without the opportunity to defend themselves in the court of law. The United States has always pushed the envelope when it comes to international intervention, but never before has an administration so blatantly ignored the rule of law. This is what happens when you have a drunk dotard heading the Department of Defense and an ignoramus heading the executive branch. 

Now, let's be clear. While there is temptation to call this a war crime, the United States is not technically at war with Venezuela (yet). However, targeting unarmed survivors who are no longer a threat would be a violation of the law of armed conflict, a set of international law designed to govern such an incident. When the initial report came out last week, it reminded many of us of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's previous thoughts on rules of engagement, which he discussed in his 2024 memoir, The War on Warriors. Among those thoughts was a passage where Hegseth claimed the United States shouldn't follow rules set forth by the Geneva Convention because our enemies weren't. Hegseth wrote, "If our warriors are forced to follow rules arbitrarily and asked to sacrifice more lives so that international tribunals feel better about themselves, aren't we better off winning our wars according to our own rules?!" Given that Hegseth found himself in this exact situation in early September, it should come as no surprise that he illegally ordered a follow up on an initial strike on supposed terrorists to take out the remaining survivors.

Naturally, Hegseth is dismissing the story. But this latest action is perfectly in line with an administration pushing the United States toward the brink of authoritarianism. For an authoritarian to remain in power, he has to assert that he alone can protect his people. The series of extrajudicial attacks on supposed narcoterrorists in the Caribbean is designed to expand American influence beyond its borders and to create the illusion that our country won't be safe unless the Trump Administration is in charge. Of course, we know this to be false, but the administration has committed to this narrative and is now hellbent on selling that narrative to its fearful voting base. Suppose they happen to illegally kill a few dozen innocent fishermen in the process. In that case, it's a small price to pay to keep pounding their chests and proclaiming themselves protectors of the homeland. 

The Post's article is simply the latest in a series of actions that call into question the legality of the administration's Caribbean drug war. Three weeks ago, the United Kingdom suspended its intelligence sharing with the United States after it expressed serious concerns about the legality of the strikes. When a longtime ally wants to dissociate itself from your counterterrorism efforts, that should have been a huge red flag for the Trump Administration to scale back its tactics. But the Trump Administration is pot-committed to its current strategy and is unable to veer off course. They know that there will not be any repercussions from this current Republican Congress for the likely illegality of the killing of innocent civilians they claim are terrorists. If an ally like the United Kingdom wants no part of it, fine. Trump, Hegseth, and the rest see no reason to stop now, not with a campaign that they feel strengthens American borders and perpetuates the myth that the Republican Party is the only party standing up to the dangerous narcoterrorists.

The 2028 election will not be about Caribbean fishermen. But it will be about the rule of law, both foreign and domestic. The murder of innocent civilians under the guise of counterterrorism is part of a larger conversation that Democrats should welcome. Never before have we had an entire Republican Party support such egregious violations of international law. Never before have we had such a dangerous, deranged, and drunk Secretary of Defense. And never before have we had a president so willing to sacrifice innocent civilian lives for the purely symbolic killing of alleged terrorists, all so that he can appear strong on terror while ignoring real threats to our country from enemies like Russia. The 2028 election won't be won or lost on foreign policy alone, but Democrats can and should return to the most basic of arguments, and something that should never, ever be controversial: No one is above the law. 

Hammering Republicans on this point alone gives Democrats credibility. It brings the discussion back to the role of the executive branch. It reintroduces the idea that a president's cabinet can and should be qualified for the role in which they've been appointed. We all know the border will be a topic in 2028. But whether it's U.S. citizens being detained by ICE or Caribbean fishermen being murdered, Americans of all backgrounds should be concerned about Republicans' increasing disregard for personal liberty at the expense of so-called protection. Framing in this way, in a way that asks if we truly want to go down this path, is a compelling way for Democrats to make the argument that they, not Republicans, are the party of law and order. That they are the ones honoring the Constitution. That they are the ones who will still adhere to international law. If done correctly, the 2028 Democratic nominee for president can shift the tide and finally establish the party as the one best equipped to take on all threats, both foreign and domestic, over the following 4 years. 

And in doing so, would completely deflate the 2028 Republican nominee.