Bill Wilson

Democratic Party Fundraising Off a Drug Kingpin’s Capture :: By Bill Wilson

Published on: by RR10

The news should have landed with near-universal relief. A foreign drug kingpin, whose cartel activity has fueled death, addiction, and instability that spills directly into American communities, was captured in a swift, precise operation ordered by the President of the United States.

The arrest of Nicolás Maduro, long accused of turning a sovereign nation into a narco-state, represents one of the most efficient law-enforcement actions against a cartel-linked regime in modern history.

Regardless of party, most Americans instinctively understand that this means fewer drugs crossing borders. Fewer criminal networks. Fewer lives destroyed by fentanyl and cocaine that originate far from bad actors and end up in our streets.

What followed, however, should trouble anyone paying attention. Instead of bipartisan recognition that removing a cartel leader is a net good for public safety, the Democratic Party responded with outrage and protest.

Even more disturbing, party committees and aligned groups used their opposition to the capture as a fundraising tool. Emails and appeals were sent asking supporters to donate in protest of the operation.

That choice turns a national security victory into a political grievance and treats the dismantling of a criminal enterprise as a campaign opportunity. For families who have buried loved ones lost to drugs tied to international cartels, this response feels a terrible slap in the face.

This moment reveals something deeper about the modern Democratic Party. Opposition to Donald Trump has become so central that even actions which weaken violent criminal networks are framed as unacceptable if they produce a political win for the wrong man.

Oversight questions and constitutional concerns can be raised without reflexively condemning the outcome. Yet that balance was largely absent. Instead, partisan posture replaced moral clarity. When the capture of a drug kingpin is not celebrated but monetized as a grievance, it suggests a party more committed to resistance than to results, and more invested in narrative control than in public safety.

Scripture offers a steady lens for moments like this. Government exists, in part, to restrain evil and protect the innocent. When evil is confronted and justice advanced, the response should be sober approval, not opportunistic outrage.

Americans should ask hard questions about what it means when one of our two major political parties reacts to the removal of a violent criminal figure by rallying donors against it.

Politics will always be with us. But justice, the kind that defends communities from destruction and holds the wicked to account, should never be treated as a fundraising tactic.

Proverbs 21:15 says, “When justice is done, it is a joy to the righteous, but terror to evildoers.”

So many layers of this play out with Maduro and the Democrats trying to raise money like his capture is the poster child for some sort of injustice.

Sources

 

Stupidocrisy: Winking At Fraud :: By Bill Wilson

Published on: by RR10

The Minnesota welfare and childcare scandal stands as a case study in large-scale fraud with government complicity. Far from a paperwork mix-up or a handful of bad actors slipping through cracks, this was a sustained operation involving shell nonprofits, empty daycare centers, and millions in taxpayer dollars flowing to places that did not serve children.

Surveillance footage, internal warnings, and whistleblower reports repeatedly pointed to the same conclusion—ongoing fraud. Yet payments continued. When a scheme reaches this size and lasts this long, responsibility no longer stops with the perpetrators. It lands squarely on those tasked with oversight who allowed the pipeline to stay open.

The political response tells its own story. Instead of confronting the facts head-on, leading Democrats and aligned media figures shifted the narrative. Investigators, journalists, and concerned lawmakers were accused of racial or ideological motives rather than answered with evidence. By recasting financial crime as social grievance, the focus moved away from stolen funds and ignored warnings. The result was predictable. Fraudsters gained time, taxpayers lost money, and honest families depending on legitimate services were left with a broken system and fewer resources.

But now we know why: The New York Post reports that tens of thousands of dollars were funneled into Democrat campaign coffers, including the top law enforcement officer of Minnesota, Attorney General Keith Ellison, a confirmed Islamist.

Oversight responsibility during the height of this scandal rested with Minnesota leadership, including Democrat Governor Tim Walz, also the failed vice-presidential nominee. His administration oversaw the agencies that dismissed whistleblowers and failed to act on red flags for years.

The picture grows more troubling with reports involving figures tied to the Democratic political network, including scrutiny surrounding US Rep. Ilhan Omar and her associates connected to entities under investigation. These facts raise unavoidable questions. How deeply was the Democratic Party apparatus entangled in the redistribution of taxpayer funds? Where did that money ultimately land, and how much oversight was deliberately relaxed along the way, even as concerns surfaced about funds flowing toward terrorist causes?

Think about what would have happened under a national administration led by Kamala Harris and Tim Walz reflecting the same governing instincts displayed here—systemic corruption, delay, deflection, and damage control over disclosure. Without outside pressure, this fraud likely would have remained buried under audits that never came forward and warnings that went unanswered.

Proverbs 10:10 offers a sober warning: “He who winks with his eye causes trouble, but a prating fool will fall.”

When leaders ignore wrongdoing and signal tolerance through inaction, the consequences multiply. Allowing the same pattern to repeat year after year is not compassion or competence; it’s… say it with me, Stupidocrisy.

Sources

Posted in the Daily Jot