The United States Continues Its Attempt to Overthrow Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution

With rapid military escalation and a redeployed ‘War on Drugs’ narrative, the Trump administration appears to be laying the groundwork for an attack on the Venezuelan people.

by Vijay Prashad / November 8th, 2025

Children play on the beach during a security deployment in Anzoátegui, Venezuela, 19 September 2025. Credit: Rosana Silva R.

Since early September, the United States has given every indication that it could be preparing for a military assault on Venezuela. Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research partnered with ALBA Movimientos, the International Peoples’ Assembly, No Cold War, and the Simón Bolívar Institute to produce red alert no. 20, ‘The Empire’s Dogs Are Barking at Venezuela’, on the potential scenarios and implications of US intervention.

In February 2006, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez travelled to Havana to receive the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation’s José Martí Prize from Fidel Castro. In his speech, he likened Washington’s threats against Venezuela to dogs barking, saying, ‘Let the dogs bark, because it is a sign that we are on the move. ’ Chávez added, ‘Let the dogs of the empire bark. That is their role: to bark. Our role is to fight to achieve in this century – now, at last – the true liberation of our people.’ Almost two decades later, the empire’s dogs continue to bark. But will they bite? That is the question that this red alert seeks to answer.

The Sound of Barking

In February 2025, the US State Department designated a criminal network called Tren de Aragua (Aragua Train) as a ‘foreign terrorist organisation’. Then, in July, the US Treasury Department added the so-called Cartel de los Soles (Cartel of the Suns) to the Office of Foreign Assets Control’s sanctions list as a ‘transnational terrorist group’. No previous US government report, either from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) or the State Department, had identified these organisations as a threat, and no publicly verifiable evidence has been offered to substantiate the claimed scale or coordination of either group. There is no evidence that Tren de Aragua is a coherent international operation. As for the Cartel de los Soles, the first time the name appeared was in 1993 in Venezuelan reporting on investigations of two National Guard generals – a reference to the ‘sun’ insignia on their uniforms – years before Hugo Chávez’s 1998 presidential victory. The Trump administration has alleged that these groups, working with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s government, are the primary traffickers of drugs into the US – while providing zero evidence for the connection. Moreover, reports from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the DEA itself have consistently found Venezuelan groups to be marginal in global drug trafficking. Even so, the US State Department has offered a $50 million reward for information leading to Maduro’s arrest – the largest in the programme’s history.

Members of the first cohort of the Tactical Method of Revolutionary Resistance (Método Táctico de Resistencia Revolucionaria, MTRR) course smile after completing training at the Commando Actions Group in Caracas, Venezuela, October 2025—credit: Miguel Ángel García Ojeda.

The US has revived the blunt instrument of the ‘War on Drugs’ to pressure countries that are not yielding to its threats or that stubbornly refuse to elect right-wing governments. Recently, Trump has targeted Mexico and Colombia and has invoked their difficulties with the narcotics trade to attack their presidents. Though Venezuela does not have a significant domestic drug problem, that has not stopped Trump from attacking Maduro’s government with much more venom. In October 2025, the Venezuelan politician María Corina Machado of the Vente Venezuela (Come Venezuela) movement won the Nobel Peace Prize. Machado was ineligible to run for president in 2024 largely because she had made a series of treasonous statements, accepted a diplomatic post from another country in order to plead for intervention in Venezuela (in violation of Article 149 of the Constitution), and supported guarimbas (violent street actions in which people were beaten, burned alive, and beheaded). She has also championed unilateral US sanctions that have devastated the economy. The Nobel Prize was secured through the work of the Inspire America Foundation (based in Miami, Florida, and led by Cuban American lawyer Marcell Felipe) and by the intervention of four US politicians, three of whom are Cuban Americans (Marco Rubio, María Elvira Salazar, and Mario Díaz-Balart). The Cuban American connection is key, showing how this political network that is focused on the overthrow by any means of the Cuban Revolution now sees a US military intervention in Venezuela as a way to advance regime change in Cuba. This is, therefore, not just an intervention against Venezuela, but one against all those governments that the US would like to overthrow.

A woman holds a rifle during a security deployment in the Petare neighbourhood of Caracas, Venezuela, 15 October 2025. Credit: Rosana Silva R.

The Bite

In August 2025, the US military began to amass naval forces in the southern Caribbean, including Aegis-class destroyers and nuclear-powered attack submarines. In September, it began a campaign of extrajudicial strikes on small motorboats in Caribbean waters, bombing at least thirteen vessels and killing at least fifty-seven people – without offering evidence of any drug trafficking links. By mid-October, the US had deployed more than four thousand troops off Venezuela’s coast and five thousand on standby in Puerto Rico (including F-35 fighter jets and MQ-9 Reaper drones), authorised covert operations inside the country, and flown B-52 ‘demonstration missions’ over Caracas. In late October, the USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group was deployed to the region. Meanwhile, Venezuela’s government has mobilised the population to defend the country.

A woman from the Peasant Militia (Milicia Campesina) holds a machete during her graduation as a combatant from the MTRR course, October 2025. Credit: Rosana Silva R.

Five Scenarios for US Intervention

Scenario no. 1: the Brother Sam option. In 1964, the US deployed several warships off the coast of Brazil. Their presence emboldened General Humberto de Alencar Castelo Branco, chief of the Army General Staff, and his allies to stage a coup that ushered in a twenty-one-year dictatorship. But Venezuela is a different terrain. In his first term, Chávez strengthened political education in the military academies and anchored officer training in defence of the 1999 Constitution. A Castelo Branco figure is therefore unlikely to save the day for Washington.

Scenario no. 2: the Panama option. In 1989, the US bombed Panama City and sent in special operations troops to capture Manuel Noriega, Panama’s military leader, and bring him to a US prison while US-backed politicians took over the country. Such an operation would be harder to replicate in Venezuela: its military is far stronger, trained for protracted, asymmetric conflicts, and the country boasts sophisticated air defence systems (notably the Russian S-300VM and Buk-M2E surface-to-air systems). Any US air campaign would face sustained defence, making the prospect of downed aircraft – a major loss of face – one Washington is unlikely to risk.

Scenario no. 3: the Iraq option. A ‘Shock and Awe’ bombing campaign against Caracas and other cities to rattle the population and demoralise the state and military, followed by attempts to assassinate senior Venezuelan leadership and seize key infrastructure. After such an assault, Nobel Peace Prize winner Machado would likely declare herself ready to take charge and align Venezuela closely with the US. The inadequacy of this manoeuvre is that the Bolivarian leadership runs deep: the roots of the defence of the Bolivarian project run through working-class barrios, and the military would not be immediately demoralised – unlike in Iraq. As the interior minister of Venezuela, Diosdado Cabello, recently noted, ‘Anyone who wants to can remember Vietnam… when a small but united people with an iron will were able to teach US imperialism a lesson’.

The commander general of the Bolivarian National Police, Brigadier General Rubén Santiago, holds a rifle with a sticker of Chávez’s eyes during a security deployment in Petare. Credit: Rosana Silva R.

Scenario no. 4: the Gulf of Tonkin option. In 1964, the US escalated its military engagement in the Vietnam War after an incident framed as an unprovoked attack on US destroyers off the country’s coast. Later disclosures revealed that the National Security Agency (NSA) fabricated intelligence to manufacture a pretext for escalation. The US claims it is now conducting naval and air ‘training exercises’ near Venezuelan territorial waters and airspace. On 26 October, the Venezuelan government said it had received information about a covert CIA plan to stage a false-flag attack on US vessels near Trinidad and Tobago to elicit a US response. Venezuelan authorities warned of US manoeuvres and said they will not give in to provocations or intimidation.

Scenario no. 5: the Qasem Soleimani option. In January 2020, a US drone strike ordered by Trump killed Major General Qasem Soleimani, head of Iran’s Quds Force. Soleimani was one of Iran’s most senior officials and was responsible for its regional defence strategy across Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza, and Afghanistan. In an interview on 60 Minutes, former US chargé d’affaires for Venezuela James Story said, ‘The assets are there to do everything up to and including decapitation of [the] government’ – a plain statement of intent to assassinate the president. After the death of President Hugo Chávez in 2013, US officials predicted that the project would collapse. Twelve years have now passed, and Venezuela continues along the path set forth under Chávez, advancing its communal model whose resilience rests not only on the revolution’s collective leadership but also on strong popular organisation. The Bolivarian project has never been a one-person show.

China and Russia are unlikely to permit a strike on Venezuela without pressing for immediate UN Security Council resolutions, and both routinely operate in the Caribbean, including joint exercises with Cuba and global missions such as China’s Mission Harmony 2025.

A member of the Juventud Socialista de Venezuela (Socialist Youth of Venezuela) shows a coin given to graduates of the MTRR course during a security deployment in La Guaira, Venezuela, October 2025. Based on the methods of Vietnamese General Võ Nguyên Giáp, the MTRR course is designed to train people with no prior military experience for possible guerrilla warfare. Credit: Rosana Silva R.

We hope that none of these scenarios come to pass and that the United States takes its military options off the table. But hope alone is not enough – we must work to expand the camp of peace.

Originally published on  Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research

Vijay Prashad is an Indian historian and journalist. Prashad is the author of twenty-five books, including The Darker Nations: A People’s History of the Third World, The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South, and The Withdrawal: Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and the Fragility of U.S. Power Noam Chomsky and Vijay Prashad. Read other articles by Vijay, or visit Vijay's website.

Caribbean Leaders Call for Unified Latin American Resistance to US Attacks

The US has now struck 18 vessels and killed 70 people in its ongoing onslaught in the Caribbean and Pacific.

By Michael Fox , 

Truthout

November 7, 2025

People watch the USS Gravely, a U.S. Navy warship, departing the Port of Spain on October 30, 2025. The warship arrived in Trinidad and Tobago on October 26, 2025, for joint exercises near the coast of Venezuela.

MARTIN BERNETTI / AFP via Getty Images

The tiny Caribbean island nation of Barbados — with a population roughly the size of Anchorage, Alaska, or Lincoln, Nebraska — might not be the country one would first imagine taking the lead to stand up to U.S. military actions and ambitions in the region. But as the Trump administration continues to attack boats, first in the Caribbean Sea and now in the Pacific, leaders in Barbados have been vocal.

“As a small state, we have invested tremendous time and energy and effort in establishing and maintaining our region as a zone of peace,” Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley said at a conference in late October. “Peace is critical to all that we do in this region, and now that peace is being threatened, we have to speak up.”

Mottley called on other leaders in the region to denounce the U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean and the U.S. strikes on more than 18 vessels that, as of November 7, had killed at least 70 people in the Caribbean and Pacific.

U.S. officials say these boats are carrying dangerous drugs like fentanyl and cocaine to the United States. They say the people killed on these boats are drug traffickers. They provide no evidence for these claims, and in fact, administration officials have also admitted that the military doesn’t identify the individuals on the boats before hitting them.

Ben Saul, the UN Special Rapporteur for the protection of human rights while countering terrorism, has called the attacks a “crime against humanity.”

Top DOJ Lawyer Claims Trump Doesn’t Need Congressional Approval for Boat Strikes
A DOJ lawyer told Congress that the strikes — which Trump says are in “self-defense” — don’t put troops in harm’s way.  By Sharon Zhang , Truthout  November 4, 2025

Family members of the victims who have been found say the people on the boats are just fishermen. They accuse the United States of flouting international law to push its military agenda in Latin America and the Caribbean.

“I believe that the time has come for us, therefore, to be able to ensure that we do not accept that any entity has the right to engage in extrajudicial killings of persons that they suspect of being involved in criminal activities,” said Mottley. “We equally do not accept that any nation in our region or the greater Caribbean should be the subject of an imposition upon them of any unilateral expression of force and violence by any third party or nation.”

Mottley is one of many of Caribbean leaders who have condemned the Trump administration’s actions. But there is also division, particularly due to the outsized role of the U.S. in the region.

On October 18, Mottley met with the leaders of the other Caribbean Community (CARICOM) member nations. They released a joined statement reaffirming the need for peace, dialogue, and the “unequivocal support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of countries in the Region.”

“The fact that they’re speaking up is highly significant,” Alexander Main, the Director of International Policy at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Economic and Policy Research, told Truthout. “These Caribbean governments are very reliant on the U.S. in a number of ways, economically, and have been in a vulnerable position, particularly since the passage of Hurricane Melissa in that area where U.S. help is badly needed.”

This week the U.S. State Department said the United States would provide $24 million in assistance to the Bahamas, Cuba, Haiti, and Jamaica, following the destruction wrought by the hurricane.

One CARICOM country, however, did not endorse the declaration against the U.S. strikes — Trinidad and Tobago. Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar has openly supported U.S. President Donald Trump and his actions in the region. She says Trinidad has been impacted by drug violence and Trump’s attacks are trying to make their country safe.

“He is committed to the fight against drug trafficking within our region. My Government will continue to support the US military drug interdiction exercises within the region,” Persad-Bissessar told the Trinidad Express.

The island of Trinidad is just off the coast of Venezuela — only 6.8 miles at its closest point.

The atmosphere in Trinidad is “tense,” Trinidadian journalist Soyini Grey told Truthout.

“We’re not accustomed to this type of war-like language and these actions,” she said. “So, narco strikes in the Caribbean is odd and bodies washing up on shores or citizens being killed — we had two of our citizens killed in, I believe, strike five. So, that has been very disquieting. And then, when we reach out to the prime minister for comment, she’s very evasive.”

Grey says schools were closed in the capital on October 31 and grocery stores were overrun with people trying to stock up when news reports suggested that U.S. strikes on Venezuela were imminent. Grey says the Trinidadian military went on high alert and troops were called to bases across Trinidad.


“U.S. government officials have committed a murder and violated our sovereignty in territorial water.”

While the attacks expected in those reports have yet to occur, recent actions from the U.S. besides the boat strikes have still given plenty of reason for an abundance of caution. In mid-October, Trump authorized the CIA to carry out covert action in Venezuela. He told reporters the U.S. was considering direct strikes on Venezuela.

“We are certainly looking at land now, because we’ve got the sea very well under control,” Trump said.

The United States has amassed an unprecedented number of ships and military assets in the region — reportedly the largest military buildup in the Caribbean since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. When the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford — the largest warship ever built — arrives in the Caribbean, there will be over a dozen ships and more than 10,000 military personnel.

The Trump administration has labeled drug groups in the region as “foreign terrorist organizations,” in what legal experts say is an attempt to justify military action. Meanwhile, Trump has accused — again, without evidence — Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro of being a narcotrafficking kingpin. He doubled a bounty on Maduro’s head to $50 million in August.

Maduro has denounced Trump’s threat of military operations in the country and accused Washington of “fabricating a war.”

The Venezuelan government was outspoken against the first boat attack. “But since then, it hasn’t exactly reacted,” Ricardo Vaz, a journalist in Venezuela with Venezuelanalysis told Truthout. “I think the government is really trying to avoid any kind of falling for provocations or unnecessarily escalating the rhetoric.”

For good reason — Trump has shown himself to be unpredictable. And the U.S. government has hit back against Latin American leaders who have denounced its campaign in the Caribbean and Pacific.


“Historically, the only way that Latin America has managed to stave off catastrophic U.S. intervention is to come together as a region, and we haven’t seen enough of that beyond rhetoric.”

In late September, the Trump administration revoked the U.S. visa of Colombian President Gustavo Petro. The revocation came after Petro spoke to protesters in New York City, encouraging U.S. soldiers to refuse orders from Trump. Last month, the United States further sanctioned Petro and his family. Trump has promised to cut off all U.S. aid to Colombia.

Petro has been one of the most outspoken voices against the U.S. military actions in the region, calling the boat attacks “murder.”

“U.S. government officials have committed a murder and violated our sovereignty in territorial water,” Petro posted on social media. He named one Colombian man, Alejandro Carranza, who was killed in a U.S. attack, calling him a “lifelong fisherman.”

In mid-October, Petro called on Latin American countries to “unite now to reject and react, beyond mere rhetoric, against any aggression against the homeland of Bolívar and the Latin American and Caribbean territory. Venezuela belongs to Venezuelans.”

“We’ve seen some really promising rhetoric and arguments expressed by Petro, but it’s not enough,” Alexander Aviña, an associate professor of Latin American history at Arizona State University and an expert on the drug war, told Truthout. “Historically, the only way that Latin America has managed to stave off catastrophic U.S. intervention is to come together as a region, and we haven’t seen enough of that beyond rhetoric.”

“I think also Mexico needs to be a lot stronger, more forceful in pushing back against what the U.S. is planning to do in the Caribbean, because eventually, it’s going to boomerang on them,” he said.

That boomerang now seems to be in motion. On November 3, news outlets reported the Trump administration was drawing up blueprints to send U.S. troops to combat drug cartels in Mexico— with or without the support of the Mexican government.

“The United States is not going to come to Mexico with the military,” President Claudia Sheinbaum had previously said in August. “We cooperate, we collaborate, but there is not going to be an invasion. That is ruled out, absolutely ruled out.”

Sheinbaum has also denounced the U.S. boat attacks, some of which have been hitting closer to Mexico.

On October 28, U.S. forces killed 14 people in four alleged “drug boat” strikes in the Eastern Pacific, roughly 400 miles from the Mexican city of Acapulco. Sheinbaum dispatched the Mexican navy to search for survivors.

“We do not agree with these attacks,” she said during her regular morning press conference. “We want all international treaties to be respected.”

But Main says Mexico is in a difficult position.

“Sheinbaum has definitely expressed her strong disagreement with these extrajudicial killings in the region,” said Main. “But they’re about to enter into renegotiation of the United States-Mexico-Canada agreement. They’re also negotiating the security cooperation with the U.S. and doing everything they can to avoid the U.S. violating their sovereignty in a significant way.”

The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) was Trump’s renegotiation of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement. USMCA rolled out in 2020, but the trade deal goes under review every six years, and analysts say Trump is likely pushing for a hefty renegotiation ahead of the July 2026 deadline.

The Cuban and Brazilian presidents have also condemned the strikes. In Brazil, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has offered to help mediate between Venezuela and the United States even as his own country is negotiating over its own trade war with the United States, after Trump slapped Brazil with a 50 percent tariff for bringing his ally former president Jair Bolsonaro to trial for plotting to carry out a coup.

Aside from leaders, there is popular movement across Latin America against the lethal U.S. actions in the Caribbean. People have protested in Cuba, Trinidad and Tobago, and Venezuela.

But the U.S. military push into the Caribbean comes at a time when the region is far from united. Trump allies like Argentina’s Javier Milei, El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele, and Ecuador’s Daniel Noboa have staunchly backed the U.S. lethal attacks on supposed “drug boats.”

Bukele and Noboa have alleged ties to drug groups and narcotrafficking.

“The problem is that, unlike the Pink Tide at the beginning of the 2000s, we now we have a South America that is not so ideologically cohesive,” Brazilian International Relations professor Camila Feix Vidal told Truthout, referencing the shift toward left-wing governments emblematic of that era. “So, it will be very difficult to have a regional unity to denounce this type of action.”

“I think that, once again, as we have seen throughout history, this shows that the United States is not reliable, and that it acts by force for its own ends.”

'It’s crazy!' Republicans turn on Mike Johnson over alleged bid to block Epstein files

Alexander Willis
November 8, 2025 
RAW STORY

U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) exits a press conference with other House Republicans, more than a month into the ongoing U.S. government shutdown on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., November 4, 2025. REUTERS/Annabelle Gordon

An Arizona Democrat who was elected to Congress in September but still hasn’t been sworn into office is gaining new support from Republican lawmakers as House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) faces growing scrutiny over an alleged attempt to block the release of files related to Jeffrey Epstein.

“We're all hoping that Speaker Johnson is going to read the tea leaves and get to work, swear me in so we don't have to go seek judicial support in him doing his job, but that's where we are,” Adelita Grijalva, who won her election on Sept. 23 and has since launched a lawsuit to force her swearing in, told MSNBC Saturday.

Grijalva and others have accused Johnson of delaying her swearing in to avoid the passage of a discharge petition that would compel the Justice Department to release all of its files on Epstein, who died in 2019 awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges. The petition, which currently has 217 signatures, needs 218 signatures to force the House to vote on the matter — and Grijalva has pledged to sign it.

Grijalva told MSNBC’s “The Weekend” that a growing number of Republican lawmakers have joined her cause, however, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), who told CNN recently that Grijalva “should be sworn in.”

“If I were Republican, I would have been sworn in already – I think everybody knows that,” Grijalva said. “And we've had several Republicans come out and say, 'it's crazy, she should have been sworn in a long time ago.'”

Johnson has said that he would swear Grijalva into office once the government re-opens. However, the House has held several meetings amid the ongoing shutdown – known as “pro forma sessions” – in which Grijalva could have been sworn in, she argued.

“There have been over 10 [House] pro forma sessions that I could have easily been sworn in,” she said. “Speaker Johnson painted himself into a corner with saying [he] won't swear [me] in until [the government] re-opens, [and now] I'm stuck in this box that he created.”

On her legal case against Johnson, Grijalva said that a judge was recently assigned to the case, and that the lawsuit may be expedited as early as next week. Asked whether she had any confidence that Johnson would even adhere to a court order should a judge rule in her favor, Grijalva said that she didn’t.

“I think that he'll dig his heels in,” she said. “But let's be real, this administration, it doesn't really matter what court decisions come down, what the rule of law is, they get to make their own decisions, that's sort of what their [modus operandi] has been, and so it is very frustrating.”

GOP lawmaker says new Epstein bombshell might keep House in recess ‘through next year’

Alexander Willis
November 8, 2025 

RAW STORY

U.S. financier Jeffrey Epstein appears in a photograph taken for the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services' sex offender registry March 28, 2017 and obtained by Reuters July 10, 2019. New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services/Handout via REUTERS.

A new bombshell report revealing new details about Jeffrey Epstein and his international influence has led one MAGA lawmaker to suggest the House may remain in recess through 2026 to avoid drawing more attention to the revelations.

According to a report Friday from Drop Site News, Epstein had helped broker a defense agreement between the West African nation Côte d'Ivoire and Israel, a revelation uncovered from recently leaked emails of former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak.

“This might keep the House out of session throughout next year,” wrote Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) in a social media post on X Saturday, referencing Drop Site News’ reporting.

The House has been in recess since September 19 after members passed a funding bill that the Senate has failed to pass, largely due to disagreements on health care policy.

While House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has the ability to reconvene the House at any moment – even amid the ongoing government shutdown – he has refused to, with some critics arguing his hesitancy stems from wanting to avoid a vote on an Epstein-related piece of legislation.

That legislation is a discharge petition filed by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), which, if approved, would compel the Justice Department to release all of its files on Epstein. The petition requires 218 signatures to force a vote in the House, and thus far has received 217. An Arizona Democrat that was elected to Congress last September has pledged to sign the petition, but has not been sworn in by Johnson, who now faces a lawsuit over the delay.

Drop Site News has also previously reported that Epstein helped broker a security cooperation agreement between Mongolia and Israel, as well as helped establish a backchannel for Israel to communicate with Russia amid the Syrian Civil War.

Epstein died in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges, and was well-known for his close ties with powerful figures, including President Donald Trump, former President Bill Clinton, and a slew of entrepreneurs and celebrities, including Woody Allen and Bill Gates.Trump has faced increased scrutiny in recent months over his past ties with Epstein, who once said he was “Donald’s closest friend for 10 years

.” Johnson has also faced increased scrutiny for what critics describe as efforts to protect the president in connection with Epstein, even going as far as to claim that Trump was once an “FBI informant” tasked with gathering incriminating evidence on Epstein, a claim he later walked back.

'Can of worms opened' as ex-Trump official flags 'Epstein connection you don't know about'

David McAfee
November 8, 2025 
RAW STORY

A banner of Jeffrey Epstein and President Donald Trump hangs in Grand Park during a protest against federal migration enforcement in downtown Los Angeles, California, U.S. August 2, 2025. REUTERS/David Swanson

There is a "hidden Epstein connection you don't know about" and it's related to the shutdown, according to Donald Trump's previous white house communications chief.

Anthony Scaramucci, who previously said Trump was a grifter who "really wants to hurt people," flagged the purported connection in a video released on social media Saturday. Specifically, he seized on reports that the identity of the anonymous donor who gave $130 million to the Trump administration to pay troops amid the ongoing government shutdown was revealed to be reclusive billionaire Timothy Mellon, whose contribution, according to a report from The New York Times, would likely violate federal law.

According to Scaramucci, "Timothy Mellon gave $130 million to pay for the troops. Number one, is that even something we should be accepting or doing?"

Number two, he stated, is, "It turns out that his dad, Paul Mellon, is all over the Epstein flight logs, back and forth to Epstein island."

"So go ahead, square the circle for me," he added.

That's when podcast co-host Katty Kay said it "opens a whole can of worms."

"First of all, whether it's ok to take Tim Mellon's personal money to pay the troops," she said. "This $130 million, my understanding is it doesn't go terribly far to pay the troops, but it's clearly a huge, big donation. He's done it to make Donald Trump happy."

Regarding Paul Mellon potentially being on Epstein's "Lolita Express" plane, Kay added, "That has to be looked into."

"First of all, you have to verify that flight log," she said, before asking, "Is Tim Mellon in a position where he doesn't also want the Epstein files released because of something around his father?"

The Rest Is Politics US posted the video along with the caption, "The HIDDEN EPSTEIN CONNECTION You Don't Know About..."

‘This is fantastic!’ Ghislaine Maxwell gushes over special treatment in prison

Alexander Willis
November 8, 2025 8:13AM ET'

RAW ST0RY

Ghisliane Maxwell's mugshot from the Metropolitan Detention Center in New York City, New York.

Convicted sex offender and Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell gushed over her special privileges in prison recently in a series of letters to her family and attorney, NBC News reported Saturday.

“I feel like I have dropped through Alice in Wonderlands looking glass,” Ghislaine wrote to her relative in a letter dated Aug. 8. “I am much much happier here and more importantly safe. So yes everyone can breath a sigh.”

The letters were obtained by NBC News from the House Judiciary Committee, which has launched multiple probes files related to Epstein. Epstein died in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges, and is alleged to have run a blackmail operation targeting powerful figures, including President Donald Trump and former President Bill Clinton.

Maxwell was sentenced to 20 years in prison for her role in procuring sex-trafficking victims for Epstein, and was initially serving her sentence in a maximum-security prison in Florida. Shortly after reporting revealed new details about Trump’s relationship with Epstein, however, Maxwell was quietly transferred to a minimum-security prison in Texas, a transfer that ran afoul of Justice Department policy as it relates to sex offenders.

And yet, even as Maxwell enjoys the cushier conditions at the low-security prison, she’s been entitled to special privileges not afforded to other inmates, something Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) described as “VIP treatment.”

“They are even delivering her meals to her and NO inmates is allowed to prepare her meals,” wrote one inmate at the Texas prison, according to emails obtained by NBC News.

Maxwell has also received special treatment as it pertains to the Supreme Court case where justices weighed in on her petition to be released, a petition that the justices ultimately threw out. In a letter to her attorney, Maxwell said that the prison warden had worked in tandem with her legal council to expedite filings on her behalf for the Supreme Court, special treatment that one criminal defense attorney described as highly unusual.

“That’s a rare occurrence,” said Patrick McLain, a criminal defense attorney who’s represented women at the Texas prison, speaking with NBC News. “It would be like the head of a large corporation of a manufacturing plant regularly having contact with people on the assembly line.”

In response to Maxwell’s mail being published, her attorney, David Oscar Markus, lashed out at outlets for their coverage.

“That’s tabloid behavior, not responsible reporting,” Markus said in a statement, NBC News reported. “Anyone still interested in that kind of gossip reveals far more about themselves than about Ghislaine. It’s time to get over the fact that she is in a safer facility. We should want that for everyone.”

'People can buy their own': Trump unloads all-caps rant about controversial Obamacare plan

David McAfee
November 8, 2025 

RAW STORY

Donald Trump on Saturday uncorked an epic all-caps rant in which he doubled down on an insurance plan some experts say will "kill a whole lot of people" if enacted

Trump over the weekend was met with ridicule after he unleashed a major plan that he said will provide a multibillion dollar payout directly to Americans as an alternative to funding government health care subsidies that have divided lawmakers amid the ongoing government shutdown.

Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of Campaign for New York Health, weighed in on the plan, saying, "The average cost of giving birth without insurance is $18,865. The average cancer patient will spend at least $150k. Trump’s approach would bankrupt and kill even more Americans when they can’t afford care. Our taxes should be funding universal healthcare with Medicare for All."

She added that the plan "is going to kill a whole lot of people."

But criticisms like that didn't stop Trump from doubling down. He took to Truth Social again, this time in all-caps, to go further with the insurance proposal.

"NO MORE MONEY, HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, TO THE DEMOCRAT SUPPORTED INSURANCE COMPANIES FOR REALLY BAD OBAMACARE," the president wrote without offering evidence or supporting data. "THE MONEY MUST NOW GO DIRECTLY TO THE PEOPLE, TAKING THE 'FAT CAT' INSURANCE COMPANIES OUT OF THE CORRUPT SYSTEM OF HEALTHCARE."

The president added, "THE PEOPLE CAN BUY THEIR OWN, MUCH BETTER POLICY, FOR MUCH LESS MONEY, SAVING, FOR THEMSELVES, AN ABSOLUTE FORTUNE!!! PRESIDENT DJT."

Trump proposes multibillion-dollar handout to voters to end shutdown: ‘To the people!'

Alexander Willis
November 8, 2025
RAW STORY 

Donald Trump gestures to reporters from the roof of the White House. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

President Donald Trump made a stunning announcement Saturday in recommending that Congress sign off on a multibillion dollar payout directly to Americans as an alternative to funding government health care subsidies that have divided lawmakers amid the ongoing government shutdown

“I am recommending to Senate Republicans that the Hundreds of Billions of Dollars currently being sent to money sucking Insurance Companies in order to save the bad Healthcare provided by ObamaCare, BE SENT DIRECTLY TO THE PEOPLE SO THAT THEY CAN PURCHASE THEIR OWN, MUCH BETTER, HEALTHCARE, and have money left over,” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social.

Now on its 39th day, the government shutdown was sparked over disagreements over whether or not to fund an extension for Obamacare subsidies, which are set to expire on Jan. 1, 2026, resulting in an estimated 4 million people losing health insurance and premiums increasing by 114% for Obamacare enrollees.

The shutdown has resulted in a lapse in food assistance payments for 42 million Americans, including 16 million children, and significant disruptions to air travel as air traffic controllers continue to work without pay, among other things.

And, while some experts have anticipated Trump caving to Democrats’ demands out of fear of political backlash, Trump’s new proposal would see Obamacare gutted entirely, and instead, send the hundreds of billions of dollars directly to Americans.

“In other words, take from the BIG, BAD Insurance Companies, give it to the people, and terminate, per Dollar spent, the worst Healthcare anywhere in the World, ObamaCare,” Trump wrote. “Unrelated, we must still terminate the Filibuster!”

There are around 260 million adults in the United States as of 2024 according to the U.S. Census Bureau, and, with spending for Obamacare subsidies alone topping out at around $125 billion that same year, Trump’s proposal could see Americans each receive a check for at least $481. If Trump’s proposal included all of the government’s spending on health care, which in 2023 was about $1.6 trillion , Americans could each receive a check for about $6,150.

TOM* TACO

'Oh my god': WaPo analysis shows Trump 'was sleeping for 20 minutes during a live event'

David McAfee
November 8, 2025 6:30PM ET
RAW STORY


U.S. President Donald Trump reacts during an event to announce that the Space Force Command will move from Colorado to Alabama, in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 2, 2025. REUTERS/Brian Snyder


Donald Trump caught heat for closing his eyes through a press conference, and a new Washington Post analysis reveals the president spent nearly 20 minutes sleeping or battling sleep during the event.

Trump appeared to doze off during a press conference on Thursday, drawing both mockery and shock from political analysts and other online observers. One night later, as he was trying to shake off the Oval Office scandal, he was seen "slumping" into his limo, according to video posted by Fox News and shared by the Daily Beast Saturday.

Now, the Washington Post has published an analysis of the Oval Office event, reviving the scandal with video evidence suggesting Trump was asleep for nearly 20 minutes on that occasion.

In a Saturday article called "A closer look at Trump’s apparent struggles to fight off sleep in the Oval Office," the outlet argues that its "analysis of multiple video feeds found that the president spent nearly 20 minutes apparently battling to keep his eyes open at a recent event."

"President Donald Trump hosted one of the more attention-grabbing press events of his term in the Oval Office this week, announcing price cuts for weight-loss drugs, only to be interrupted when one of the attendees collapsed in a faint. Before that dramatic turn of events, however, Trump appeared to struggle to stay awake as his health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and two other deputies took turns explaining the announcement. Clips of the scene have circulated widely on social media and drawn heavy criticism from Democrats," the Post reported. "A Washington Post analysis of multiple video feeds found that Trump spent nearly 20 minutes apparently battling to keep his eyes open at the Thursday event. It was a seemingly stark illustration of the strain of the presidency on a 79-year-old who typically keeps a vigorous travel schedule that even his aides say they struggle to keep up with — and who has reveled in calling his predecessor 'Sleepy Joe' Biden."

Reacting to the report Saturday, former government official Neera Tanden said, "Oh my God. He was sleeping 20 minutes during a live event."

*(TIRED OLD MAN)

Read it here.

 

'He worse than Biden': 'Exhausted' Trump seen 'slumping into limo' amid sleep scandal

David McAfee
November 8, 2025
RAW STORY

Fox News video / screen grab

Just as Donald Trump is trying to shake off a scandal after purportedly being spotted falling asleep in the Oval Office, the president was seen in a video reportedly "exhausted" and "slumping" into his limo.

Trump appeared to doze off during a press conference on Thursday, drawing both mockery and shock from political analysts and other online observers. One night later, he was seen "slumping" into his limo, according to video posted by Fox News and shared by the Daily Beast Saturday.

"President Donald Trump slumped into a waiting limousine after landing in Palm Beach for a Mar-a-Lago weekend on Friday—even as he demanded lawmakers keep at it in Washington, D.C., amid the ongoing government shutdown," the outlet reported. "In footage captured by Fox News on Friday night, Trump can be seen slowly making his way off Air Force One. He descends the stairs at a cautious pace and raises his fist after completing the task without incident, before almost collapsing into the seat of his waiting car."

According to the Beast, "The dark footage shows Trump’s head rolling back, and he appears to sigh as he sits."

"Less than two hours before he flew south for the weekend, Trump posted to Truth Social that senators should not leave the capital until they can reopen the government, which has now been closed for 39 days—the longest stretch in American history," according to the news report.

When the news spread online, one anti-Trump "news junky," It's Howdie Doodie Time, chimed in, "All those McDonald’s burgers & fries catching up. He worse than Biden."

Read the report and see the video here (subscription required).

Turn It Up: Hero With A Hero Is Icing On the Cake

Sandwich Guy art on K Street in D.C.
Photo by Franziska Wild

Further
Abby Zimet
Nov 08, 2025

COMMON DREAMS


Hope glimmers. After an election that saw “democrats in array” rising up to thunderously repudiate anything connected with a doddering tyrant - “Apparently Americans liked the East Wing more than anyone thought” - the final small sweet revenge was a jury acquitting D.C.'s valiant Sandwich Guy for the crime of making it pellucidly clear, with mustard, he doesn’t want stormtroopers in his town. One sage: “The only way this week could’ve been better for America was if Dick Cheney died again.”

On Tuesday, voters came out in sometimes record numbers - New York saw its highest turnout in over 50 years - to reject MAGA cruelty, inequity and greed, and win “just everything.” New Jersey and Virginia saw double-digit wins for women governors - a veteran and former CIA officer - reflecting a failure of anti-trans bigotry and resurgence of Democrats’ big tent. There were comparable wins from Connecticut and Pennsylvania to Mississippi and Georgia. Maine overwhelmingly rejected an effort to restrict mail-in voting, Colorado willingly raised taxes on the rich to fund school lunches, California’s re-districting Prop. 50 passed by an almost 2 to 1 margin; Newsom showed how to fight Trump - “After poking the bear, this bear roared” - and urged other states to also “meet this moment head-on.”

Most thrillingly, New York’s Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani evinced “the way to win is to include everyone. All everyone,” and he did in an off-off year yet. One analyst: “Republicans raved every Democrat was Zohran Mamdani, and Americans said, ‘Sign me up.'” In Mamdani’s electrifying speech - Eugene Debs! - to an exultant crowd, he rebuffed a politics that has “bowed at the altar of caution (and) paid a mighty price...Too many working people cannot recognize themselves in our party.” “We chose hope together,” he said. “We won because we insisted that no longer would politics be something that is done to us. Now, it is something that we do...New York will (be) a city built by immigrants, powered by immigrants and, as of tonight, led by an immigrant.” To Trump: “To get to any of us, you will have to get through all of us.”

He and his vassals will also have to exit the alternative reality bubble - and immense cognitive dissonance - revealed this week in Miami, where Trump spoke at an opulent America Business Forum to billionaires from Saudi Arabia to Silicon Valley. As Republicans lost every election in sight, the government shutdown became the longest in history, and 42 million people, including 3 million in Florida, faced hunger, the assembled tycoons paid $2,000 - but got a $50 gift card for food - to hear a vengeful old man babble, ramble, boast, confuse “Communist” South Africa with South America, and nonetheless gloat about the “economic miracle” he’d delivered to usher in a reeling America’s “golden age.” Like the tawdry Great Gatsby party he held, “They just can’t seem to stop doing things shockingly out of touch.”

Meanwhile, per the advice of his ghoulish mentor Roy Cohn, Trump is using the courts as a “personal cudgel” against his perceived enemies. Along with terrorizing blue cities, prosecutors have gone after over 20 anti-ICE protesters, often with “impeding” charges. In Chicago, prosecutors charged primary candidate Kat Abughazaleh with “conspiracy” after roughing her up at a protest. In L.A., a goon shot Carlos Jimenez, absurdly claiming self-defense, after he tried to warn marauding troops that kids were coming out of a school. In Chicago, head Nazi Greg Bovino, who’s told ICE thugs to arrest anyone who makes “hyperbolic” comments, charged a protester with giving him a groin injury purportedly requiring a two-week leave to recover; prosecutors just dropped the case after video, shockingly, showed they lied.

And so it goes. Mostly, the fascists, being inept, lose. (GOP) Judge Karin Immergut just permanently blocked Trump from inflicting “all necessary troops” on “war-ravaged” Portland OR after finding “no credible evidence” there was need for them and insisting “the facts - not the President’s political whims - guide how the law is applied.” Ouch. Still, the most failures have been earned by laughably unqualified US Attorney Jeanine “Boxwine” Pirro, who keeps trying and failing to get grand juries - seven at this point - to indict the proverbial ham sandwich. Her latest and most public effort to “turn a gag-gift-worthy moment into a federal criminal offense” was the case of folk hero, Air Force veteran and former DOJ attorney Sean Dunn, 37, who “brought a sandwich to a fascism fight” - specifically, a salami sub - and won.

In the infamous case of “the hoagie heard around the world,” Dunn, in a pink shirt and holding a just-bought, now-historic sub, confronted troops skulking on a downtown DC corner, reportedly about to raid a gay club there. He yelled they were fascists who should get out of his town; then he got in the face of 23-year-veteran Border Patrol agent Gregory Lairmore, yelled some more, hurled his sub at Lairmore’s bullet-proof-vested chest, and took off running. Thugs gave chase, caught and handcuffed him, and released him without charges. But for the “retaliatory animus” of the thin-skinned toddler in power, it would’ve ended there. Instead, video of the encounter went viral, the toddler got pissed, and a SWAT team went to Dunn’s apartment, complete with pulpy heavy-metal video of the action, to arrest him.

Insisting on the preposterous narrative Dunn was pretty much the Zodiac killer and not a guy who threw some bread, Pirro theatrically announced felony assault charges against him: “This guy thought it was funny. Well, he doesn’t think it’s funny today.” An equally off-the-wall Pam Bondi chimed in, raving about “assault on a law enforcement officer” and claiming Dunn was “an example of the Deep State” (who worked at the DOJ). Pirro tried to get a grand jury to indict him; they (hilariously) declined, but she finally got a misdemeanor charge to stick. And so to the federal jury trial starting Tuesday - in rare poetic justice, the day after National Sandwich Day - to protect our brave troops from food fights and send the dubious message to a restive populace: “Mess with this government, and it will mess with you.”

Presiding over what he called “the simplest case in the world” was US District Judge Carl Nichols. And it should have been, especially since the perp, at the scene of the crime, had already confessed, boldly proclaiming, “I did it. I threw a sandwich.” Still, it took two days and much bickering as the jury of 12 of Sandwich Guy’s peers struggled to remain straight-faced during what one observer called “a strange sort of performance art,“ both amusing and menacing. The opening statements clearly laid out both sides’ differences. Defense: ”He did it. He threw the sandwich.“ Also, so what: See First Amendment.” The government: “No matter who you are, you can’t just go around throwing stuff at people if you’re mad.” Also poor traumatized Officer Lairmore, who was just protecting the public, from sandwiches.

There was squabbling over words in a charge that cites “forcibly opposing, impeding or interfering” with federal agents on duty. What’s “forcibly”? Defense: A sandwich doesn’t constitute force any more than “an eight-year-old throwing a stuffed animal in the middle of a temper tantrum.” Prosecution, leaning hard into bellicose language: “Here we have the defendant throwing - it’s a sandwich, but throwing it hard...at point-blank range...He takes the sandwich, he cocks it back.” There’s the “impact” through the vest. Also, it’s not just a sandwich; there was “screaming,” “cussing,” “attempting to instigate.” (The judge reminds the jury speech isn’t assault). And, like an IED in Fallujah, prosecutors note the victim’s harrowing testimony the sandwich “kind of exploded. I could smell the onions and mustard.” The horror! The horror!

Meanwhile, Sandwich Guy sits in the cafeteria on lunch break, eating soup. A friend’s GoFundMe for him - “Help support the Sandwich Guy” - notes his ten years of service in Afghanistan, the Forest Service, the DOJ: “He is proud of his career serving the people of the United States.” Back in the courtroom, defense attorney Sabrina Shroff shreds Lairmore’s claim the sandwich “exploded” with video showing said sandwich still wrapped on the sidewalk. “Do you recognize that sandwich?” she asks. Lairmore waffles. Shroff: “You don’t see there’s mustard on it?” Lairmore wilts. No. “You can’t tell there’s ketchup on it?” No. “Mayonnaise? Lettuce? Tomato? No. ”In fact, the sandwich hasn’t exploded at all has it?“ Lairmore, helpfully, ”It looks like a little bit is coming out towards the bottom.“

Shroff also cited two “gag gifts” Lairmore said, sheepishly smiling, he got from co-workers: A plush sandwich he put on his shelf at work and a cartoon patch of Dunn throwing the sandwich, with the words “Felony Footlong,” he put on his lunchbox. So much for trauma, she suggested. Her closing argument was fiery. “This case, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is about a sandwich,” she declared. “A sandwich that, according to agent Lairmore, somehow both exploded on his chest in a spray of onions and mustard, but also landed intact on the ground still in its Subway wrapping.” Most vitally, she argued, a sandwich cannot be a weapon worthy of federal charges, especially facing off against a bulletproof vest. Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo glumly dissented: “We’re not just talking about a sandwich.”

Social media lapped up the coverage. They “relished” the testimony, they argued it “didn’t pass mustard,” they called Lairmore’s claim “baloney.” They summoned “12 Hungry Men.” Asked, “Do you see the sandwich seated in the courtroom today?” Argued, “If the sub doesn’t fit, you must acquit.” Snarled, “Say hello to my foot-long friend.” Asked, “Show us on this doll where the sandwich touched you.” Mused, “Not all gyros wear capes.” Insisted, “I did not have a relationship with that sandwich.” Proclaimed, “Liberte! Egalite! Panini!” When the verdict came Thursday - with every juror voting for acquittal - they celebrated Sandwich Guy “beat the wrap,” “justice, like a good sandwich, was served,” and, like them, an anti-fascist jury looked at the video, decided what mattered, and essentially said “what sandwich?”Outside the courthouse after the verdict, Shroff thanked jurors for their "affirmation" that dissent is "not just tolerated." "It is legal," she declared, "and it is welcome." Sandwich Guy also thanked the jurors, as well as "family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it was emotional or spiritual or artistic or financial." "I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything," he said. "That night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants...Let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says ‘E pluribus unum.’ That means ‘from many, one.’ Every life matters no matter where you came from. No matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free." A nation salutes you. Warren Zevon would have too: "Enjoy every sandwich."

Outside the courthouse after the verdict, Shroff thanked jurors for their "affirmation" that dissent is "not just tolerated." "It is legal," she declared, "and it is welcome." Sandwich Guy also the jurors, as well as "family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it was emotional or spiritual or artistic or financial." "I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything," he said. "That night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants...Let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says ‘E pluribus unum.’ That means ‘from many, one.’ Every life matters no matter where you came from. No matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free." A nation salutes you. Warren Zevon would have too: "Enjoy every sandwich."

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.


Abby Zimet
Abby Zimet has written CD's Further column since 2008. A longtime, award-winning journalist, she moved to the Maine woods in the early 70s, where she spent a dozen years building a house, hauling water and writing before moving to Portland. Having come of political age during the Vietnam War, she has long been involved in women's, labor, anti-war, social justice and refugee rights issues. Email: azimet18@gmail.com
Full Bio >

'Should have known better': Ex-US attorney hammers Jeanine Pirro over Sandwich Guy 'waste'

FOX TV JUDGE 

Adam Nichols
November 8, 2025 

RAW STORY

U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ferris Pirro speaks during a press conference  REUTERS/Annabelle Gordon



An ex-US attorney slammed a current one Saturday for adamantly pursuing a farcical case she said should never have been prosecuted.

Barbara McQuade wrote for MSNBC about the case of Sean Dunn, an Air Force veteran who threw a Subway sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection agent, which she wrote had become a striking example of prosecutorial overreach and resource misallocation.

And President Donald Trump's pick for Washington, D.C. US attorney, ex-Fox star Jeanine Pirro, was hammered for heading the investigation.

"Pirro should have known better than to file assault charges because the facts didn’t satisfy the elements of the offense," McQuade wrote in a column titled, "US Attorney Jeanine Pirro wasted our money pursuing sandwich thrower."

"To prove an assault under the federal statute, the prosecution must establish not just that Dunn threw the sandwich at the agent, but that the act constituted a 'forcible assault.'"

A Subway sandwich bouncing off an agent clad in body armor certainly didn't meet that standard, she wrote.

Dunn admitted to throwing the sandwich as an act of protest against President Trump's federal law enforcement surge into Washington, D.C. The jury ultimately agreed with his defense, returning a not-guilty verdict.

The prosecution's case hinged on proving a "forcible assault," which legally requires demonstrating a "reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm." However, the evidence and testimony made this claim seem ridiculous, McQuade wrote.

She wrote that defense attorney Sabrina Shroff masterfully dismantled the prosecution's argument, declaring, "A footlong from Subway could not and certainly did not inflict bodily harm." When Dunn threw the sandwich, it hit the agent's bulletproof vest, prompting laughter in the courtroom when the agent testified about sandwich "explosions" and condiment stains.

Shroff's closing argument was particularly pointed: "If the vest is designed to protect an agent from gunfire, it is definitely going to keep you safe from a sandwich."

Pirro defended the prosecution, stating, "Even children know when they are angry, they are not allowed to throw objects at one another." However, the article argues that not every inappropriate action warrants criminal charges.

But McQuade wrote the prosecution's approach raised serious questions about resource allocation. The federal government invested significant time and effort in a high-profile arrest, even posting video of Dunn's arrest on social media - a violation of Justice Department policy.

Dunn had already suffered professional consequences, losing his job as a paralegal at the Department of Justice. The criminal prosecution seemed unnecessary and potentially distracting from more serious cases that might have gone unaddressed, McQuade wrote

DC “Sandwich Guy” Who Threw Sub at CBP Agent Acquitted on Fed Assault Charges

The immigration agent claimed that the harmless sub had “exploded” on his bulletproof vest.

By Chris Walker ,

Truthout

November 7, 2025

An art piece depicting an individual throwing a sandwich is seen on August 17, 2025 in Washington, D.C.Kayla Bartkowski / Getty Images

Ajury in Washington, D.C. has acquitted Sean Dunn, the man who was accused of assaulting a Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officer by throwing a “sub-style sandwich” at him.

The case was handled by the office of U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, a former Fox News host and staunch ally of President Donald Trump. Her office had originally sought to have Dunn charged with felony assault, but after a federal grand jury rejected that idea, prosecutors aimed to charge him with a misdemeanor.

Although typically a rare occurrence, several cases in Washington D.C. have been rejected by grand juries, seen as being overreaches on the part of Trump’s Justice Department.

Dunn, who became known as the “D.C. Sandwich Guy,” became somewhat of a local folk hero following news of the sandwich throw. Several memes of the incident appeared online, and graffiti depicting him throwing the sub appeared around D.C.

Dunn has admitted to throwing the sandwich, with his lawyers arguing it was a protest gesture during a demonstration against President Donald Trump’s anti-immigrant crackdown in D.C. in early August. The prosecution had reportedly embellished the extent to which Dunn’s actions affected the CBP agent, Gregory Lairmore, claiming that the hoagie was thrown violently, at “point-blank range.”

Lairmore testified that the sandwich had “exploded all over my uniform” and that he had “mustard and condiments” on him, including “an onion hanging from my radio antenna” following the incident — a testimony that was lambasted on social media shortly after it became public.

Following the sandwich toss, federal agents chased Dunn through the streets and temporarily detained him. He was released, but arrested at his home later on.

The depiction of events surrounding the sandwich throw was challenged during the trial — pictures of the offending sandwich after the incident occurred showed that it was still in its wrapper, on the ground, after it hit Lairmore’s bulletproof vest.

Dunn’s defense lawyer also noted that Lairmore and his colleagues later joked about the event, with his coworkers buying him gag gifts like a plush toy sandwich, demonstrating that the incident wasn’t a major event in the officer’s life, as the prosecution had depicted.

“They’re joking about it with each other, and they’re joking about it with Agent Lairmore. Why? Because they think it’s funny,” defense attorney Sabrina Shroff said.

After several hours of deliberation, the jury came to the conclusion that Dunn had not committed a criminal offense. In response to the outcome of the case, Dunn relished the fact that he was acquitted.

“I’m relieved, and I’m looking forward to moving on with my life,” Dunn said. “I am so happy that justice prevails, in spite of everything happening.”

Polling in the nation’s capital showed overwhelming opposition to President Donald Trump’s federal takeover of the city, with one survey showing that 79 percent of D.C. residents were opposed to the action. A Reuters/Ipsos poll last month shows that Americans are also opposed to militarization of U.S. cities more broadly, with nearly 3 in 5 respondents (58 percent) saying troops should only be sent to areas that face an external threat.

‘He Beat the Wrap’: Sandwich-Hurling DC Protestor Found Not Guilty of Assault

“No assault with a deli weapon after all,” joked one reporter after the verdict.


Banksy-style posters depicting a protester throwing a sandwich at Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth appear in the Georgetown neighborhood on August 31, 2025 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Andrew Leyden/Getty Images)

Brad Reed
Nov 06, 2025
COMMON DREAMS


Sean Dunn, the former US Department of Justice employee who was famously hurled a sandwich at Customs and Border Protection officers this past summer, has been found not guilty on misdemeanor assault charges.

Jurors acquitted Dunn on Thursday after deliberating for several hours after his trial ended on Wednesday afternoon. According to CNN, Dunn told reporters after the verdict that he was “relieved and looking forward to moving on with my life.”

‘How Is That an Assault?’ DC Residents Scoff as Trial Starts for Man Who Chucked Sandwich at Trump Agent

US Attorney Jeanine Pirro had originally tried to charge Dunn with felony assault, but lowered the charge to a misdemeanor offense after a grand jury in Washington, DC refused to indict him.

Dunn was caught on camera angrily throwing a sandwich at federal immigration enforcement officers back in August, and he could be heard calling the officers “fascists,” and telling them they were not welcome in his city.

Shortly afterward, Pirro vowed to throw the proverbial book at Dunn for his food-tossing transgression.

“He thought it was funny,” Pirro said in a video she posted on social media. “Well, he doesn’t think it’s funny today because we charged him with a felony. And we’re gonna back the police to the hilt! So, there. Stick your Subway sandwich somewhere else.”

Dunn’s case became a cause célèbre for many Washington, DC residents who have opposed President Donald Trump’s decision to deploy the National Guard and to conduct aggressive immigration raids in their city.
Many journalists reacted to news of Dunn’s acquittal by deploying a number of sandwich-related puns.

“Apparently you can indict a ham sandwich but you can’t convict turkey sub,” joked tech journalist Kara Swisher in a post on Bluesky.

“You could say he... beat the wrap,” wrote Los Angeles-based independent journalist Mel Buer.

“If the hoagie didn’t hit, you must acquit!” wrote The Bulwark’s Sam Stein on X.

“No assault with a deli weapon after all,” remarked Wall Street Journal reporter Josh Dawsey.

“Congratulations, US Attorney Pirro, for making Sean Dunn the hero that DC deserves,” wrote journalist Marcy Wheeler.

“Another jury finds another Trump DOJ case sub-par,” wrote Adam Klasfeld, editor-in-chief of All Rise News.

Local hero: ‘DC sandwich guy’ found not guilty of assaulting officer with sub

By AFP
November 6, 2025


Sean Dunn (2nd from left) was arrested after throwing a sandwich at federal law enforcement in protest against Trump's crackdown on crime, with his act of defiance going viral on social media - Copyright AFP JUSTIN TALLIS

Asad HASHIM

A US man charged with using a sandwich to assault a law enforcement officer was acquitted Thursday after a jury decided that charges brought by President Donald Trump’s prosecutors were baloney.

The prosecution made a surprise local hero of 37-year-old Sean Dunn, who was protesting Trump’s shock takeover of law enforcement in the capital Washington.

He was accused of flinging a “sub-style sandwich” at an armed Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agent on August 10 in a busy nightlife district after shouting expletives at the officer.

The officer was part of a huge crackdown ordered by Trump, with multiple agencies and troops deploying in Washington and several other Democratic-run cities, ostensibly to fight what the Republican president says are crime waves and anarchy.

Prosecutors wanted serious felony charges, but a grand jury refused to indict Dunn — a rare occurrence. A misdemeanor charge was filed and Dunn faced a maximum of one year in prison if convicted.

While prosecutors ultimately proved ham-fisted, Dunn had appeared to be in a serious pickle.

Right after hurling his sandwich he was chased down, then released, only to be arrested in a raid on his home that was publicized by the White House.

As video of the initial altercation went viral, Dunn was quickly dubbed “DC sandwich guy,” becoming a symbol of resistance to Trump. Stylized images of him in mid-sandwich-attack appeared on posters, graffiti, T-shirts and even a popular Halloween costume.

Trump’s much-touted crime crackdown has seen an increase in arrests and indictments, but US media analysis of the data shows much of that has come from pursuing minor offenses in court.

The top Trump-appointed prosecutor for Washington, Jeanine Pirro, has pursued maximum penalties for all arrests since taking office, including in the Dunn case.

Dunn was a paralegal at the Justice Department at the time of the altercation and was fired from his position.

On Monday, as proceedings opened, Judge Carl J. Nichols noted that he expected the trial to be a short one as “this is the simplest case in the world.”

Dunn’s defense did not dispute that he threw the sandwich at the officer, instead arguing that his action did not constitute an offense, and that the charges against him were a “blatant abuse of power.”

Much of the case centered on the definition of key terms, including whether the throwing of a soft object constitutes an act that is “forcible,” and whether Dunn’s action impeded the officer in the conduct of their duties.

On the first day of court proceedings, the defendant, dressed in a black-and-white patterned sweater, appeared subdued as his defense team engaged in feverish consultation.

Dunn’s defense has contended that he was being selectively prosecuted due to his political views, having called the federal officers “fascists” before he threw the sandwich

Sandwich thrown by protester 'exploded' and left mustard stain on border agent, court hears

IT REMAINED WRAPPED, CBP LIES!

Kayla Epstein

BBC
November 6, 2025


moment a sandwich is thrown at federal agent in Washington DC


A US immigration agent has testified he could feel through his ballistic vest the impact of a sandwich hurled at him by a Washington DC protester, who has gone on trial for assault.

Customs and Border Patrol agent Gregory Lairmore told the jury the snack "exploded all over him" and he "could smell the onions and mustard" on his uniform.

Neither side disputes that Sean Dunn, 37, did in fact lob obscenities and a deli-style sandwich at officers deployed by President Donald Trump to patrol the nation's capital in August. But Mr Dunn's lawyer argues it was not a criminal act.

The incident was captured on video and went viral, making Mr Dunn a symbol of opposition in Washington DC to Trump.

Government prosecutors initially tried to secure felony charges against Mr Dunn, but a grand jury declined to indict him. Prosecutors have instead charged him with a lower-level misdemeanour assault.

Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to Washington DC this summer sparked outrage from some of the city's residents, who saw it as a politicisation of the military. The White House argued the forces were necessary to crack down on crime.

According to charging documents, Mr Dunn approached a group of officers at about 23:00 on 10 August, calling them "fascists" and shouting: "Why are you here? I don't want you in my city!"

The court witnessed a re-enactment from Mr Lairmore on Tuesday as he took the stand to testify against Mr Dunn.

"I could feel it through my ballistic vest," he said of the sandwich's impact, adding that an onion string hung from his police radio and mustard stained his shirt.

Mr Dunn's lawyer, Julia Gatto, said in her opening statement that hurling the sandwich was a "harmless gesture that did not, could not, cause injury".

But prosecutor John Parron said Mr Dunn must be held accountable.

"No matter who you are, you can't just go around throwing stuff at people because you're mad," Mr Parron said, according to the New York Times.

After the alleged assault came to light, Mr Dunn was fired from his job as a paralegal in the Department of Justice.

Getty Images

A man, who was later arrested for assaulting law enforcement with a sandwich, interacts with Border Patrol and FBI agents along the U Street corridor on 10 August.