Tom Bevan on Dem Reaction to Latest Narco-Boat Strike: ‘We’ve Seen This Movie a Dozen Times’
“The problem is, my problem is, is that Congress is so dysfunctional that we can’t seem to have adult debates”
Tom Bevan, the co-founder of Real Clear Politics, appeared on FOX News last night and spoke about the Democrat reaction to the ‘second strike’ on a narco-terrorist boat by the Trump administration. This has become the latest shiny object for the left and they are, in some cases, even trying to brand it as a war crime.
Bevan said that while this could be a legitimate question, he believes that Pete Hegseth, the military commander who authorized the strike, and the Trump administration are in the clear. More importantly, however, Bevan points out that this will likely be gone by next week and replaced by some new outrage as the Democrats just move from thing to thing.
Transcript via Real Clear Politics:
JOHN ROBERTS, FOX NEWS: He said he did not see the second strike because he was at a meeting at the time. Is he off the hook, Tom?
TOM BEVAN, REAL CLEAR POLITICS: I don’t know. It certainly seems from what the New York Times reported, contradicting the Washington Post with five sources instead of two, saying that Hegseth gave the initial order and didn’t give anything after that. So that would seem to indicate that he is off the hook on that.
And then the question is, well, is Bradley on the hook? And by everything that I’ve heard and read about him, he is a stellar officer and has been doing this for quite some time. And within that context, there’s a lot of gray area.
He has a lot of authority within the chain of command to make these kinds of decisions. And so I agree with Mary Catherine, though. I think these are important questions.
They should be debated. The problem is, my problem is, is that Congress is so dysfunctional that we can’t seem to have adult debates about these. You know, we’ve seen this movie a dozen times already.
This video is cued to start at the 2:18 mark, so just press play:
Democrats are falling all over themselves to declare this a war crime. Even Obama Defense Secretary Leon Panetta pushed this narrative on more than one cable news outlet. Funny, no one brought up Obama’s drone strike on an American citizen in 2011.
From The Hill:
Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Monday he doesn’t “think there’s any question” a reported second U.S. strike on an alleged Caribbean drug boat was a war crime.
“I don’t think there’s any question that that’s a war crime, if it happened in that way. I think the best thing that’s happening now is that the Armed Services Committee in both the Senate and the House have indicated that they’re going to do a full investigation of this issue,” Panetta said on CNN’s “The Situation Room.”
“And I think that’s what’s needed, because, there’s obviously going to be a lot of different viewpoints, you heard what the president said. But, I think, ultimately it’s up to those committees to find out exactly what happened. And if it was a war crime, to make sure we hold people accountable,” he added.
Leon Panetta has already determined that war crimes have been committed, and that accountability is due.
"As far as I'm concerned, there is a war crime involved here."
The fmr CIA Dir/Sec Def's last appearance of note was as a signatory to the Hunter Laptop “51 Intelligence… pic.twitter.com/vEZEmLJmwR
— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) December 2, 2025
For Democrats, this will be ancient history in ten days, replaced by a new outrage they will use to stoke division.
That is all this is about.
Featured image via YouTube.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
And meanwhile that complete moron lolbertarian Rand Paul actually went out today and said, ‘Coast Guard records show that prior to the reign of “blow-them-to-smithereens” 21 percent of boats stopped off the coast of Venezuela possessed NO drugs!’
So…. 79% of them DID have drugs. And the rest of them just dumped them before being boarded.
And that was just with Coast Guard standard operations. Not the careful long-term surveillance they’re using before blowing these drug smugglers up.
Lolbertarians are truly just a joke.
FWIW I would redirect the entire US military and intelligence apparatus towards eliminating the entire chain of trafficking from dropping napalm on the crops to dropping cluster bombs on their homes in addition to blowing up any vessel private or commercial transporting it (so choose your airline based on screening b/c if there’s a mule on board a Delta flight I’d shoot it down, tough cookies) to assassination of Foreign leaders who refuse to crack down in their own Nation (and if that means a missile blows them up at their Granddaughter’s quinceanera party along with everyone present, tough cookies) it seems to me there’s room for voices arguing
restraint.
Yes, but he’s not ‘arguing restraint’. He’s just demanding they not do it at all, for any reason, and when he does BS like that with emphasizing 21% HAD NO DRUGS, all he does is confirm that it is a very real, very big problem, and he doesn’t actually want it solved. He has no actual solution to present, he’s just whining ‘NO YOU CAN’T BLOW THEM UP FOR ANY REASON, HAVEN’T YOU READ TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD’.
Everybody is mocking him for a reason, because it was SO stupid.
TBH if we don’t do it along the lines I laid out vigorously and ruthlessly without mercy, restraint, regret or remorse then we are only temporarily inconveniencing the narcoterrorist/traffickers. Sure the current ops are making some impact but it ain’t curtailing the drug trade. They will change tactics, take a lower profile and wait out the impact until the we stop.
suppose there IS a narcomule abord a Delta heading towad the US. Don’t blow that one up in th air. Upin approach at the scheduled destination airport, direct it into quarantine and carry out your inpection. The drug mue WILL be discoveed and identiphied.
then take THAT one and do what is appropriate.
I would support laws prescribing a death sentence to anyone attempting such smuggling into our nation. Consider the death toll attributed to such drugs at present.
Nope. In order to align the incentives of EVERY person to not only refuse to participate in drug trade but stay the hell away from any physical proximity to participants it would be necessary. You can’t convince me that in the post 9/11 age that someone at Delta/airport/LEO/ground crew/catering didn’t know what was going on with that flight. Taking out a few commercial flights would provide huge incentive for airline industry to be much more proactive about screening personnel and reporting before planes leave the ground.
When the fear of consequences for participating and/or turning a blind eye or other ‘neutral’ stance outweighs the threat posed by narcoterrorist cartels demanding participation or to turn a blind eye then and only then will we be able to ‘win’.
As a limiting principle on the proposed ‘strike anyone/anywhere and tough cookies for bystanders policy’ we could rule out dropping napalm on a crowded stadium where a ‘drug lord’ was in attendance to view a soccer match or a concert. Even for me, taking out tens of thousands of people to hit a single HVT is too much.
There is a huge difference between spotting a boat from a USCG cutter and from the air. The cutter can’t see over a boat’s gunwales, so stopping them to inspect their cargo accounts for the 21% with no drugs. Before the USAF engages a drug boat they confirm that it is full of what their training tells them is a drug cargo. Fishermen don’t carry hundreds of what look like baled packages, then carry nets and lines. In addition, poor fishermen don’t have four $20,000 outboards on their fishing boat. They have one well used 100 horsepower outboard. And one more thing, drug boats are always heading north at top speed. Hint hint.
I am happy that they are destroying these narco boats before they get anywhere close to the USA. Anything Trump does the Left and Dems will hate even if it helps Americans because they do not care for the American people.
ESPECIALLY if it helps Americans.
I wonder how many bootleggers were killed by the government during prohibition? At least a couple of thousand.
It was fine when Obama drone-killed wedding parties.
Same ol’ same ol’ with liberals: do as I say and not as I do.
Sure, Leon, we believe you.
/
Panetta is a tool. He has no credibility outside democrat circles. The only reason why he became CIA director and SOD was he was a reliable democratic hack, He had little expertise be either.
The liberal peral clutching never happened when the BUYden regime ran from Afghanistan.
I don’t know if Leon Panetta has bothered to see that we’re not at war with the Caribbean (Venezuela).
These aren’t soldiers, sailors, or marines engaged in warfare: these were criminals engaged in a criminaql activity.
And what’s more, they are unflagged vessels operating in international waters and refusing to respond to radio hailing or other communication efforts asking for identification. In other words, they are pirates and fully outside the laws of war. The US has been taking out pirates since President Jefferson dispatched the Marines to the shores of Tripoli. Carry on.
Shiny Object of the Minute? Machts nichts.
The issue is not the issue. The issue is the Revolution.
Obama’s entire war against Qaddafi was illegal and unconstitutional. He had stopped being a threat to us in the last millennium.
Not only was he not a threat, he actually was trying to assist against the Islamists. Qaddafi was a secularist, and not a fan of the creeping Wahabism in North and West Africa.
The two laws referenced, with virtually identical wording, authorize firing upon vessels when they refuse to heave to. One refers to pirates, the other to smugglers. And a stateless vessel is one or the other until proved otherwise. Law of the sea, practiced since time immemorial, doesn’t have a constitutional presumption of innocence.
14 USC 637: Stopping vessels; immunity for firing at or into vessel
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-2000-title14-section637&num=0&edition=2000
14 U.S. Code § 526 – Stopping vessels; indemnity for firing at or into vessel
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/14/526
Firing upon them is clearly authorized by existing law.
When Admiral Bradley testifies today behind closed doors that will be the end of this. Bradley is not a stupid man, in fact not only has he been involved with Naval Special Forces for years, he holds a patent related to quantum physics and semiconductors. He also has a Masters in Physics.
Hey Grok, how many times did President Obama authorize drone strikes during his administration?
Answer: President Barak Obama authorized 563 drone strikes during his eight years in office. These strikes killed an estimated 3,797 people including 807 civilians.
Thank you Grok.
Would someone please explain to me how these actions of the military constitute a “war crime” when apparently Congress has not officially declared a state of war exists between Venezuela and the United States nor officially declared a state of war exists between the United States and the drug cartels. If Congress hasn’t officially declared war then how can these be “war crimes”.
Yeah, might not be good form for the U.S, military to behave in this manner but a “war crime” prosecutable under military law? Just more hysterical nonsense from democrats during the run up to the midterm elections that can be easily and safely ignored.
We’re destroying a drug boat and the drugs on it.
Does it make a difference whether the voluntarily-present human facilitators are eating lunch or playing cards while chugging along during a first strike, or doing something else during a second strike?
When will we get to the point where we can simply ignore these idiots? Do they actually have any influence beyond the 30% hard core leftist Dem base that will always believe as instructed? They won’t ever stop lying, and anyone who believes them is not reachable by logic, so why even bother to respond at all?