Cole Welsh, Editor

In a pre-dawn raid, Mexican military commandos killed El Mencho, a notorious drug lord and the leader of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG).

His death kicked off a surge of retaliatory killings and other violent acts across Mexico. In response, many businesses, schools, and airports were closed across the country, leaving some resort town tourists unable to escape.

Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, better known as “El Mencho,” built a vast criminal enterprise in the drug underworld.

After founding the criminal syndicate in 2009, El Mencho transformed CJNG into one of Mexico’s most powerful drug cartels. His organization trafficked copious amounts of cocaine, methamphetamine and fentanyl throughout Mexico and into the United States.

Per the US State Department, which previously offered a $15 million bounty on El Mencho, CJNG has also carried out numerous killings targeting Mexican law enforcement, government officials, and even rival cartels.

CJNG also earned a reputation for utilizing military-style tactics to protect their trafficking operations. Armed drones, improved explosive devices, and ambush assaults on security forces are just some of the tools the syndicate has used in recent years.

Using intelligence focusing provided by the United States, the Mexican Army tracked El Mencho to a location in the Pacific coastal state of Jalisco.

On the morning of February 22, Mexican special forces, backed by the National Guard and a slew of aircraft, sealed off the area before the raid. As Mexican military operators approached, cartel gunmen opened fire. Commandos returned fire, killing several suspected cartel henchmen and forcing El Mencho into a nearby wooden cabin complex. After a second gunfight, El Mencho was gravely wounded and ultimately died during an airlift to a local hospital.

According to Politico, this intelligence, which focused on one of El Mencho’s romantic interests, was allegedly provided by a newly created American task force. Seeking to counter cartel operations posing a threat to the United States, the Joint Interagency Task Force-Counter Cartel (JIATF-CC) includes representation from the Department of War, law enforcement, and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

America’s involvement in the operation is the latest example of how President Donald Trump has prioritized taking down drug cartels as a key component of his national security policy. Since starting his second term, Trump has repeatedly threatened direct US military action if Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum fails to dismantle the cartels that plague her country.

However, unlike her predecessor, Sheinbaum appears more willing to confront the cartels head-on and even cooperate with her country’s northern neighbor. Recently, Sheinbaum extradited 37 inmates with alleged cartel ties to face prosecution in the United States.

While the rival Sinaloa Cartel may be the largest, CJNG is considered the most dangerous and violent cartel by many Mexican and US officials. Even after the death of its founder, the organization has shown no signs of pulling back from their activities and appears even more emboldened by El Mencho’s death.

Unfortunately, this violence, which is a part of an ongoing asymmetric conflict between the Mexican government and various drug trafficking organizations, is nothing new. As violence continues to plague the Latin American country, it remains to be seen how Mexico, and quite frankly the United States, will respond.

Cole Welsh, Editor

Due to President Trump’s oil blockade, Cuba is facing its gravest challenge since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Following the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, the United States has effectively cut the communist-run country off from Venezuelan oil.

To make matters worse, Trump signed an executive order imposing strict penalties on anyone selling oil to the isolated island country, accusing Cuba of undertaking “extraordinary actions that harm and threaten” the United States. 

Shortly after, Mexico, a crucial supplier of oil to the island nation, halted oil shipments entirely to avoid American sanctions. Since then, Cuba has descended into a nationwide fuel shortage. Worsened by aging infrastructure, this energy crisis has yielded rolling blackouts for millions of Cubans.

The once-thriving tourism industry has been particularly hit hard. Cuban aviation officials recently warned that international airlines will no longer be able to refuel on the island. Last week, Air Canada announced it was suspending flights to the country altogether, while other airlines announced delays and layovers in the nearby Dominican Republic.

In response, Cuba’s government has recently adopted rationing measures to preserve essential services—public health, food production and defense, as well as ration oil supplies for key sectors.

Fuel distribution companies have stated that sales will only be made in dollars and limited to about 5.25 gallons per customer. Other recent developments involve the closure of some tourist hotspots, shortening school days and slashing work weeks at state-owned companies.

While the stakes have never been higher, this tension between Cuba and the United States is nothing new.

Following decades of strict U.S. economic sanctions against Cuba, the largest island nation in the Caribbean has seen its economy struggle and become isolated from international trade.

Under Trump, this pressure has only been exacerbated.

As part of the “Donroe Doctrine,” Trump’s foreign policy in his second administration has been characterized by a desire to exert American influence in the Western Hemisphere.

In January, the United States conducted a military operation in Venezuela that resulted in the arrest of Maduro, a long-standing ally of the Cuban regime, on narco-terrorism charges.

In doing so, the United States gained leverage over Venezuela’s oil industry and immediately cut off its foreign adversaries, including Cuba, from the world’s largest proven oil reserves.

However, the Cuban connection to Venezuela is not limited to oil. This alliance, initiated by Hugo Chávez and Fidel Castro, is a deep geopolitical partnership rooted in a shared socialist ideology and an anti-American sentiment. In exchange for heavily subsidized oil, Cuba has provided essential intelligence and security personnel to protect Venezuelan leadership.

During the American raid that captured Maduro and his wife, 32 Cuban soldiers and security personnel were killed in what is considered the largest loss of Cuban combatants in a foreign military operation since the 1961 failed Bay of Pigs invasion.

Put simply, Cuba has lost both a strategic ally and an economic partner.

With regime change as a very real possibility, it remains to be seen what long-term effect this American blockade will have on the communist country. As Cubans suffer in the short term, one can only speculate as to how their country’s future unfolds.

Cole Welsh, Editor

In a historic victory for the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, New York State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani will become the next mayor of the Big Apple.

The Ugandan-born Democratic Socialist beat former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who ran as an independent, and Republican Curtis Sliwa last Tuesday.

Defeating his opponents with approximately 50% of the vote, Mamdani will become the city’s first Muslim mayor and the first of South Asian descent. At 34 years old, Mamdani will also become New York City’s youngest mayor in more than a century when he takes office on Jan. 1.

On Election Day, voters came out in large numbers, with more than 2 million voters casting ballots for the first time since 1969.

While younger, more progressive voters backed Mamdani in large numbers, Republicans, moderates and older Democrats largely backed Cuomo.

Mamdani, who campaigned on a progressive economic platform to make the city affordable, became the front-runner after clinching the Democratic primary in June. Since then, the Queens resident has notched key endorsements from politicians such as former Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Kathy Hochul.

Some of his main campaign promises include making the city’s buses fare-free, freezing stabilized rents, raising taxes on the wealthy, establishing city-owned grocery stores and reassigning some of the duties of police officers to social workers.

However, the mayor-elect has also faced backlash over the feasibility of his proposals and his controversial views on issues such as policing.

On the campaign trail, Mamdani was criticized by both Cuomo and Sliwa for his past comments referring to law enforcement as racist and calling for defunding the police.

His candidacy was also met with trepidation by many Jewish New Yorkers, who have taken issue with his steadfast support for Palestine and his criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Last month, Mamdani drew outrage when he posted a smiling photo with Imam Siraj Wahhaj, a Brooklyn Muslim cleric who defended the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and other convicted terrorists.

Incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, a more moderate Democrat, initially ran for a second term, despite a scandal-plagued first term. After President Trump’s Justice Department dropped the corruption case against him, he announced his reelection bid in June as an independent. However, he dropped out in late September after failing to gain traction in the polls and secure enough campaign dollars.

In less than a week after his victory, Mamdani has hit the ground running with several key personnel selections. He announced that Dean Fuleihan, a City Hall veteran who has worked in government for nearly five decades, will be his first deputy mayor. For chief of staff, Mamadani tapped his campaign manager, fellow Democratic socialist Elle Bisgaard-Church.

Ultimately, the biggest question is whether or not NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch, who has overseen a decrease in crime and built support among rank-and-file officers, will remain in her position. While Mamdani has publicly suggested that he will keep Tisch, there is no guarantee that she would even accept such an offer. Some speculate that the policy differences between the two might be too large to overcome.

FDNY Commissioner Robert Tucker, who also happens to be Jewish, announced his resignation just hours after Mamdani was declared the winner of the mayoral race, pointing to ideological differences with the mayor-elect.

As there are many more personnel and policy decisions ahead, it remains to be seen what Mamdani’s mayorship will look like. However, since America’s biggest city is now set to have a socialist mayor, the eyes of the country and the world will surely be on New York City come 2026.

Kelsey McGovern, Writer

Many people do not pay attention to elections other than the presidential election every four years. However, voters have a lot of impact within other local or primary elections. The municipal election is on Nov. 4. To register to vote in this election, Pennsylvanians must register to vote by Oct. 20. To apply for a mail-in ballot, voters must do so by Oct. 28.

What Does the Municipal Election Entail?

Registered Pennsylvania voters will be voting for local government representatives on committees such as the borough and city council and township supervisors.

What Am I Voting On?

Voters will be deciding on district attorney, city controller, Pennsylvania Supreme Court judicial retention, judge of the Supreme Court, judge of the Commonwealth Court, judge of the Court of Common Pleas and judge of the Municipal Court.

The district attorney handles investigations and criminal cases, determining who to prosecute. They decide on criminal appeals, criminal charges, and jail and court resources. Voting on the district attorney is important to ensure there is someone to represent how the voter views prosecution. Taxes are also involved because if the resources used here are more expensive, taxpayers will be paying more. The way the voter views public safety and justice reform is also an important reason to vote.

The city controller is responsible for making sure taxpayer money is being used properly, handling financial corruption, approving funds and managing debt. Voting for the city controller is important so voters can trust someone to be honest while making financial decisions so tax dollars are not wasted.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court judicial retention vote allows the voter to decide if a judge should be retained for another term. Supreme Court judges are responsible for upholding constitutional rights, determining criminal cases and more. If the voter believes a judge is underperforming, they can vote to end their term. If judges are voted out, voters will later choose a new judge.

The judge of the Commonwealth Court handles policy issues within state and local governments. This court makes decisions based on government lawsuits and checks state agencies’ actions. This can affect many areas voters should be aware of, like voting laws and workers’ rights.

The judge of the Court of Common Pleas handles more serious criminal cases. This affects how fast cases are solved, bail amounts, custody within families and more.

The judge of the Municipal Court covers minor cases. This court is often the only court that hears an appeal if it does not get passed on to the next level. The voter is responsible for electing someone who upholds justice.

In voting in this election, voters will be able to make a difference on the local stage. Voting in local elections is very important so laws are interpreted in the manner the voter wants. When only focusing on the presidential election, changes that citizens want will not be completely reflected in daily life. By learning about candidates, the voter will understand what each candidate stands for and whether that aligns with their beliefs.

Jack Wagner, Editor

Late-night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel returned last week after a six-day suspension that raised concerns about free speech and the current administration’s stance on First Amendment rights.

ABC, the network that has aired Kimmel’s show “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” since 2003, suspended him indefinitely on Sep. 17 after pressure from Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chair Brendan Carr over statements the late-night host made about the assassination of right-wing political activist Charlie Kirk.

During his monologue on Monday, Sep. 15, Kimmel commented “The MAGA Gang [is] desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” prompting backlash from Carr.

During his appearance on a conservative podcast, Carr said the FCC had ways to punish Kimmel. “We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct, to take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or there is going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.” Carr also suggested the FCC could pursue news distortion cases against station licensees over airing Kimmel’s comments. Hours later, ABC announced his suspension.

Two of the largest station owners in the country, Nexstar Media Group and Sinclair Broadcast Group, said they were removing Kimmel’s show from all of their affiliates beyond ABC’s suspension. Sinclair published a statement saying, “Sinclair will not lift the suspension of ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ on our stations until formal discussions are held with ABC regarding the network’s commitment to professionalism and accountability.”

President Trump also commented on Kimmel’s suspension. “They should have fired him a long time ago, so you know, you can call that free speech or not. He was fired for lack of talent,” said Trump during a meeting with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Kimmel’s suspension and Carr’s actions drew pushback from both politicians and citizens. Senator Rand Paul, R-Ky, said in an interview, “You have to sell sponsorships. You have to sell commercials, and if you’re losing money, you can be fired. But the government’s got no business in it, and the FCC was wrong to weigh in,” and Senator Ted Cruz, R-Tx, said Carr was acting like “a mafioso.”

Disney, ABC’s parent company, reportedly lost 1.7 million paid subscribers during the week of Kimmel’s suspension across all of its services, which include Disney+, Hulu and ESPN+, with many claiming the company’s actions regarding Kimmel as their reason.

Disney officially lifted the suspension on Sep. 22, saying that Kimmel would be back on ABC’s schedule Sep. 23. During his first show back, Kimmel thanked many people for their support, including fellow late-night hosts and the politicians who spoke out against his suspension, and commented on how dangerous the actions taken by Carr were for free speech, saying, “our government cannot be allowed to control what we do and do not say on television, and that we have to stand up to it.” 

Nexstar and Sinclair reinstated his show several days later, claiming that they were “committed to protecting the First Amendment” and they were responding to “thoughtful feedback from viewers, advertisers and community leaders,” respectively.

President Trump was less pleased, posting on Truth Social, “I can’t believe ABC Fake News gave Jimmy Kimmel his job back. The White House was told by ABC that his Show was cancelled! Something happened between then and now because his audience is GONE, and his ‘talent’ was never there.”

Trump also appeared to go on and threaten ABC with some kind of lawsuit, writing, “I think we’re going to test ABC out on this. Let’s see how we do. Last time I went after them, they gave me $16 Million Dollars. This one sounds even more lucrative.”

The whole affair raised some questions about the safeguards in place to protect First Amendment rights and media freedoms in America. The Kimmel situation appears to be settled, but it already comes after fellow late-night host Stephen Colbert had his show cancelled by CBS, supposedly due to “financial decisions,” but is suspected by many to be politically motivated. One way or another, the media landscape for late-night hosts looks rough for the near future.

Cole Welsh, Editor

Just weeks away from the closely watched New York City mayoral election, Mayor Eric Adams announced he is ending his re-election campaign.

The incumbent mayor announced his decision Sunday in a video posted on X, citing media speculation and the withholding of public matching funds.

As the deadline for his name to be removed from the ballot already passed, Adam’s name will still appear on the ballot.

Adams, running as an independent, had previously resisted calls to drop out of the race.

Rivals of Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani had long sought for Adams to withdraw, concerned that he and independent candidate Andrew Cuomo would split the vote.

In the past several weeks, Adams had been polling behind Mamdani, Cuomo and Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa.

As a retired NYPD captain and former Brooklyn borough president, Adams was elected in 2021 on a platform prioritizing public safety and economic recovery. Defeating several candidates to his left in that year’s Democratic primary, his campaign’s focus on reducing crime delivered a broad coalition that spanned across the city’s five boroughs.

However, the mayor and his administration soon became embroiled in numerous corruption scandals involving his inner circle and members of his administration.

In 2024, Adams himself was indicted on a slew of crimes, including bribery, conspiracy and campaign finance violations. Then-U.S. Attorney Damian Williams alleged that Adams abused his current position, along with his past role as borough president, to take bribes and solicit illegal campaign contributions.

However, the charges against the mayor were dropped in April in what his critics described as a quid pro quo with the Trump administration.

Both Adams and the Justice Department have denied that any quid pro quo took place.

Shortly after the corruption case against him was dismissed, Adams opted out of the Democratic primary to run as an independent in the general election.

This election, Adams was hoping to galvanize support from across racial and political lines.

Over the summer, Adams picked up endorsements from multiple law enforcement labor unions, including those representing the city’s detectives, sergeants, lieutenants and captains.

He also earned the support of the New York Post’s editorial board and Republican businessman John Catsimatidis.

While Adams failed to break single digits in the polls, his withdrawal from the race could still make a difference.

Many political pundits speculate that political moderates who previously supported Adams will shift their support to Cuomo in a head-to-head matchup against self-described democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani.

Republican Curt Sliwa, who has achieved around 15% in most polls, remains in the race and has rejected calls to drop out.

While Assemblyman Mamdani appears to still be the favorite in the three-way race, it remains to be seen how exactly Adams’ withdrawal will change the race.

With a competitive mayoral race well underway that could serve as a litmus test for national political trends, all eyes will be on New York City come November.

Cole Welsh, Editor

Fulfilling a key campaign promise, President Trump formally designated eight Latin American crime organizations as “foreign terrorist organizations.”

The move, carrying out an executive order signed by Trump on his first day in office, labels Tren de Aragua in Venezuela and La Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) in El Salvador, among others, as terrorist groups.

Such a designation requires showing that an organization is foreign, engages in terrorist activity and threatens American national security. 

The “foreign terrorist organization” label for drug cartels is certainly unconventional, as the designation has traditionally been reserved for groups that use violence for political gains, including the Islamic State and Hezbollah.

While American authorities have previously labeled organizations such as the Taliban and al-Qaeda as “narco-terrorists,” the difference is that these were existing terrorist organizations that used drug profits to fund their activities.

Latin American cartels, which primarily traffic drugs for monetary purposes, have not historically received this designation.

However, the Trump administration, which has taken a hardline approach to the drug epidemic, argues that the international connections and operations of the cartels warrant the designation.

They cite the involvement of these cartels in the illicit drug trade, human trafficking and violent campaigns to extend their territory. 

For Trump, these cartels are a top concern, flooding the United States with deadly drugs, violent criminals and vicious gangs.

While Republicans and law enforcement have generally embraced the order, others have criticized the move as potentially harmful to diplomatic and trade relations. In particular, cartels play a key role in the Mexican economy, dealing in not only drug trafficking but also the multibillion-dollar avocado industry.

Regardless, this designation should come as no surprise. Running on a law and order message, Trump has made securing the U.S.- Mexico border one of his chief priorities, vowing to carry out mass deportations and sending active duty troops to the border.

With this label, the cartels have gained new adversaries.

In the past, federal law enforcement, mainly the FBI and the DEA, largely investigated these cartels as part of the War on Drugs. Following Trump’s executive order, these agencies will continue their operations with additional support.

Along with other intelligence agencies, the CIA can now play a role, gathering information in ways law enforcement cannot without fear of prosecution or having to justify their actions in court.

Similarly, the military could also be utilized to neutralize the heavily armed and violent cartels outside of the United States. This could take the form of drone strikes or even the deployment of special operators, although concerns regarding Mexico’s sovereignty might deter such action.

For law enforcement, this order will impact almost every aspect of counter-narcotics policing. From local officers on patrol to state and federal agencies, law enforcement now has additional integrated resources at their fingertips.

With increased cooperation between police, intelligence agencies and the military now a possibility, the War on Drugs has entered what many consider a new stage.

Although exact details still need to be provided by federal officials, this designation potentially transforms America’s rules of engagement with organized drug trafficking, elevating it from a crime to a national security threat.