Dem On Dem Crime: Eric Adams Side-Eyes Biden’s Maduro Math. From ‘Narco-Dictator’ to ‘Never Mind’: Former NYC Mayor Isn’t Buying It

New York City’s former Mayor Eric Adams recently took aim at the Biden administration over what he described as “political inconsistency” in its handling of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro — a leader now in New York facing U.S. drug-trafficking charges. Adams wrote that “public safety is not a political game” and slammed the shift from labeling Maduro a narco-dictator one year to treating him differently under a new presidential administration. This critique reflects broader frustrations over political flip-flopping — when elected officials change their positions in ways that appear driven more by politics than principle.

Adams pointed to the human toll of fentanyl flowing from drug networks linked to Maduro, saying thousands of Americans have died and “America is safer today because Maduro is no longer in power.”

What Biden (or the Biden Administration) Did/Said About Maduro

• Under the Biden administration, the U.S. officially labeled Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro a narco-dictator — a leader tied to drug trafficking and corruption.

• In January 2025, the State Department increased a bounty to $25 million for information leading to Maduro’s arrest or conviction for narco-terrorism and drug trafficking.

• Eric Adams criticized the Biden administration for what he called political inconsistency: saying it was “cynical and irresponsible” to label Maduro a narco-dictator and then later object when decisive action was taken against him.

• Adams said that switching tone — from denouncing Maduro to then seeming to oppose action depending on political context — treats “public safety as a political game.”

This clash illustrates growing intra-party tensions as Democratic figures argue over foreign policy, public safety, and how best to address the aftermath of the Venezuelan crisis. Adams’ critique highlights how former allies sometimes turn into sharp intra-party critics when shifting political winds or policy priorities lead to perceived double standards.

Today, politicians across the spectrum face scrutiny for perceived inconsistency. California Gov. Gavin Newsom baffled supporters with a pivot toward engaging MAGA audiences on his new podcast, raising questions among fellow Democrats about his messaging and priorities.  Meanwhile, national leaders of both parties are increasingly criticized by their own bases when they moderate long-held positions or adapt to new political realities.

For voters, such shifts can signal adaptability or opportunism. Scholars note that while some changes reflect genuine policy evolution, the derogatory label of “flip-flopper” persists because many see abrupt reversals as undermining trust and commitment.  In a hyper-polarized climate, criticizing political inconsistency — whether within one’s party or across the aisle — has become a common tactical weapon in elections and public discourse alike.