Former New York Mayor Eric Adams recently made headlines with his strong stance against Nicolás Maduro following the U.S. operation to detain the Venezuelan leader. Adams, who hinted at his new freedom from public office in a social media post, voiced his support for President Donald Trump’s actions. He criticized fellow Democrats, particularly Vice President Kamala Harris and President Joe Biden, for their handling of Maduro, presenting a stark contrast to the sentiment expressed by his mayoral successor.
In a video shared online, Adams was seen enjoying a cigar and drink while emphatically critiquing the government and its past mishaps. He proclaimed, “slow as s—,” painting a picture of a government filled with inefficiencies and obstruction. His remarks about an “unforgettable, bada–, no bull—- 2026” signaled a promise of more assertive leadership and engagement in issues that matter deeply to him.
Once the operation to capture Maduro unfolded, Adams quickly shifted from playful banter to serious commentary. He expressed gratitude to Trump for taking decisive action against a leader he blamed for turning Venezuela into a “narco-state.” “I have seen firsthand how Nicolás Maduro destroyed Venezuela and turned it into a narco-state. Millions fled. Thousands landed in New York City,” Adams stated, reflecting on the human toll the dictator’s regime has inflicted.
His criticism of Harris was pointed. Adams rejected her claim that detaining Maduro was “unlawful and unwise,” arguing that public safety shouldn’t be played as a political game. “Public safety is not a political game,” he emphasized, challenging Harris’s notion that a change in administration could alter the objective threat Maduro posed. He highlighted the hypocrisy of labeling someone a threat while later dismissing those dangers simply due to political alignment.
Adams also recounted tragic local stories, like that of a young boy in the Bronx who was poisoned due to the fallout from fentanyl, connecting these deaths to Maduro’s influence. His direct words, “America is safer today because Maduro is no longer in power,” echoed his urgency to address the widespread consequences of the cartels under Maduro’s purview.
The tension within the Democratic Party was palpable, especially as Adams took a position that drifted from the views of those who have championed a more cautious approach to foreign interventions. His successor, socialist Zohran Mamdani, voiced stark opposition to Trump’s actions, framing the operation as an “act of war,” which he argued carries implications for New Yorkers, particularly the Venezuelan community. Mamdani presented a different perspective on safety and governance, one that prioritizes diplomatic solutions over military actions.
This clash between Adams and Mamdani illustrates a broader divide within the Democratic Party on foreign policy and public safety. Adams’s firm backing of Trump’s operation underscores a willingness to engage with issues that directly impact American lives, while Mamdani represents a cautionary stance against unilateral military actions.
Adams’s assertive criticism of fellow Democrats over their responses to Maduro reveals a significant rift in party ideology. His emphasis on public safety and accountability resonates deeply, providing a counter-narrative that calls for decisive action against threats, regardless of political winds. As these dialogues unfold, the implications for local and national discourse on safety, governance, and foreign policy continue to evolve.
"*" indicates required fields
