pull down to refresh

Making up that term seems like a really dumb move. I can see a court causing major problems for the DOJ if the judge is so inclined.

This isn't semantics: Both the Treasury and State Departments had officially designated the non-existent group as a terrorist organization. The latest development seems to at least partially confirm doubts raised by outside observers and lend credence to denials by the Venezuelan government. In November, the country's foreign minister said he "absolutely rejects the new and ridiculous fabrication" by which Secretary of State Marco Rubio had "designated the non-existent Cartel de los Soles as a terrorist organization."
In July, the Treasury sanctioned Cartel de los Soles as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist," claiming it was a "criminal group headed by...Maduro." The "cartel" was accused of providing material support to two groups already on U.S. terrorist lists: Mexico’s Sinaloa cartel and Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua. Of course, those terrorist designations are themselves controversial, with critics saying the government is purposefully conflating criminality and terrorism. The latter term has long been understood to describe violence directed at civilians with the goal of achieving a political or ideological goal. Historically, exaggerated use of the term has largely been confined to the left.
Historically, exaggerated use of the term has largely been confined to the left.

Huh?

reply

That puzzled me too. I think the author is referring to the desire to classify right wing groups like the Proud Boys as terrorist organizations.

reply

It's of course the other tribe that is at least as bad so this is fine. haha

reply