‘Death Knell’: Biden DOJ Retaliated Against DEA Agent Who Tried to Stop Flood of Fentanyl 70%

By Fred Lucas0%

7/9/2026, 10:58:12 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Anecdotal, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 34.2% saturation with 267 hits. Analysis detected 2,100 faulty-reasoning hits from 780 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 63.2% and a BS Rank of 70% (6,363 of 21,204 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 70.00% of the article peer group.

The Biden Justice Department retaliated against the Drug Enforcement Administration agent who exposed an operation allowing hundreds of thousands of fentanyl pills to enter the United States, the whistleblower’s lawyer said. 
DEA Special Agent David Howell, working in New Mexico, objected to the process of allowing the highly lethal drug to enter the country, arguing that the Justice Department’s goal was to trace the drugs to large drug trafficking organizations for high-profile arrests. 
“The U.S. attorney’s office became more and more upset with his making these disclosures, and ultimately they told the DEA in New Mexico they would no longer work with Special Agent Howell,” Tristan Leavitt, president of Empower Oversight, a whistleblower advocacy group, told the Daily Signal. 
“They refused to take any of his cases, and for a federal agent that’s really kind of a death knell to your career.” 
The Office of Special Counsel, a watchdog agency within the Justice Department, has found in past cases that refusing to work with someone qualifies as retaliation, Leavitt explained. 
The fentanyl operation has drawn comparisons to “Operation Fast and Furious,” a Justice Department gunwalking scandal that occurred during the Obama administration. 
Leavitt said that early on, Howell began piecing together that the U.S. attorney’s office was focused on something other than seizures of illegal drugs. 
“Special Agent Howell and his partner seized that fentanyl and really got chastised by the U.S. attorney’s office,” Tristan Leavitt, president of Empower Oversight, a whistleblower advocacy group, told the Daily Signal. 
“After that initial conversation, Special Agent Howell started looking closer at what was behind this from the U.S. attorney’s office and started to realize that other cases also were instances where the U.S. attorney’s office was directing that fentanyl not be seized,” Leavitt added. 
“He started to see a pattern, and that’s what led him to both speak up to the U.S. attorney’s office but also to prepare to file whistleblower complaints.” 
He took his complaint to the Office of Special Counsel in November 2023. 
Former U.S. 
Attorney Alex Uballez of New Mexico, whom President Joe Biden nominated in 2022, oversaw and defended the program. 
He told the Associated Press, “The bigger fish are worth catching,” referring to the goal of monitoring fentanyl trafficking to eventually apprehend higher-ranking figures at the cartels. 
Uballez also said, “That will save more lives.” 
Powell and other critics of the operation contend that fentanyl is too lethal of a drug to be allowed into the U.S. 
After Howell raised his objections with the Justice Department, Leavitt said he wasn’t able “to do normal DEA work,” was detailed to other agencies, and went through “a series of makeshift work assignments to get around the fact that he couldn’t do his normal work as an officer.” 
He was not allowed to testify in a case at trial or even to have a case of his brought by the U.S. attorney’s office, Leavitt said. 
In September 2024, the Office of Special Counsel and Office of Professional Responsibility returned their report; Leavitt said it did not address the core of his complaint. 
Nevertheless, Howell still thought the matter might gain public interest. 
He recalled the gunwalking program that occurred during the Obama administration known as “Operation Fast and Furious,” when the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives allowed firearms to flow into Mexico with the intent of tracing them to a Mexican drug trafficking organization. 
The ATF lost track of the guns, two of which were found at the scene of the 2010 fatal shooting of U.S. 
Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. 
The whistleblower saw parallels between the two cases. 
“Special Agent Howell reached out to John Dodson, the original ATF whistleblower in Fast and Furious, and through him got in touch with us,” Leavitt said. 
“And that’s how we first learned David’s story and decided to start representing him.” 
The Justice Department in Washington, the U.S. attorney’s office in New Mexico, and the DEA did not respond to specific questions for this story before publication. 
Last month, DEA Administrator Terry Cole asked the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General to investigate the matter. 
“The alleged conduct occurred under the Biden administration’s disastrous open border policies,” a Justice Department spokesperson told the Daily Signal last month. 
“The Trump administration has closed the border and is aggressively pursuing drug traffickers. 
DEA Administrator Cole has requested an independent DOJ-OIG review of DEA’s actions in light of this reporting to reaffirm the public’s confidence in our law enforcement agencies. 
Should that review identify areas of improvement, the DEA will of course implement changes to better their practices.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 32.4%Fred Lucas: 12.4%Daily Signal: 6.2%Confirmation Bias32.4%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 3.7%Daily Signal: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 11.8%Fred Lucas: 2.6%Daily Signal: 3.1%Availability Heuristic11.8%This article: 1.0%Fred Lucas: 1.5%Daily Signal: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic1.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 1.9%Daily Signal: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 15.5%Fred Lucas: 11.3%Daily Signal: 8.5%Framing Effect15.5%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.2%Daily Signal: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.3%Fred Lucas: 0.7%Daily Signal: 0.5%Status Quo Bias2.3%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 11.5%Fred Lucas: 4.6%Daily Signal: 1.2%Optimism Bias11.5%This article: 2.9%Fred Lucas: 1.0%Daily Signal: 1.3%Pessimism Bias2.9%This article: 34.2%Fred Lucas: 13.4%Daily Signal: 9.1%Negativity Bias34.2%This article: 1.8%Fred Lucas: 5.4%Daily Signal: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias1.8%This article: 2.3%Fred Lucas: 1.9%Daily Signal: 1.8%Fundamental Attribution Error2.3%This article: 5.4%Fred Lucas: 0.5%Daily Signal: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias5.4%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 2.4%Daily Signal: 3.4%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.2%Daily Signal: 3.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.2%Daily Signal: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 1.2%Daily Signal: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 1.2%Daily Signal: 3.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 2.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 18.1%Fred Lucas: 10.7%Daily Signal: 4.6%Appeal to Authority18.1%This article: 4.5%Fred Lucas: 1.9%Daily Signal: 2.8%False Dilemma4.5%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.5%Daily Signal: 1.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.8%Daily Signal: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 17.1%Fred Lucas: 10.4%Daily Signal: 9.4%Hasty Generalization17.1%This article: 5.6%Fred Lucas: 1.2%Daily Signal: 0.3%Red Herring5.6%This article: 1.7%Fred Lucas: 1.2%Daily Signal: 0.8%Bandwagon1.7%This article: 11.7%Fred Lucas: 11.6%Daily Signal: 7.2%Appeal to Emotion11.7%This article: 4.5%Fred Lucas: 2.5%Daily Signal: 2.2%Begging the Question4.5%This article: 12.6%Fred Lucas: 4.5%Daily Signal: 3.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)12.6%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 7.4%Fred Lucas: 7.0%Daily Signal: 1.3%Burden of Proof7.4%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 24.1%Fred Lucas: 5.1%Daily Signal: 2.5%Anecdotal24.1%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 2.9%Daily Signal: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Fred Lucas: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 17.4%Fred Lucas: 2.8%Daily Signal: 2.7%Unattributed Quote17.4%This article: 5.4%Fred Lucas: 1.8%Daily Signal: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection5.4%This article: 9.6%Fred Lucas: 2.9%Daily Signal: 9.7%Biased Writer Voice9.6%This article: 2.3%Fred Lucas: 2.2%Daily Signal: 3.9%Indoctrination2.3%This article: 2.3%Fred Lucas: 0.2%Daily Signal: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias2.3%This article: 1.9%Fred Lucas: 8.4%Daily Signal: 10.7%Politically Right Leaning Bias1.9%This article: 1.8%Fred Lucas: 1.6%Daily Signal: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.8%

780 words analyzed.

Speakers

8speakers72%attributed speech216writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageDEA • 42 words • 0.0% coverageTristan Leavitt • 46 words • 100.0% coverageTristan Leavitt • 23 words • 0.0% coverageOffice of Special Counsel • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageTristan Leavitt • 24 words • 0.0% coverageTristan Leavitt • 32 words • 100.0% coverageTristan Leavitt • 44 words • 0.0% coverageTristan Leavitt • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageAlex Uballez • 27 words • 100.0% coverageAlex Uballez • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageTristan Leavitt • 48 words • 0.0% coverageTristan Leavitt • 27 words • 0.0% coverageOffice of Professional Responsibility • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 44 words • 0.0% coverageBureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageTristan Leavitt • 26 words • 0.0% coverageTristan Leavitt • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageTerry Cole • 18 words • 0.0% coverageJustice Department • 22 words • 0.0% coverageJustice Department • 13 words • 0.0% coverageTerry Cole • 27 words • 100.0% coverageDEA • 18 words • 100.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
27 attributed words4.8% of attributed speech80% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+85.6 ptsWriter: 14.4%Office of Professional Responsibility: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-22.2 ptsWriter: 22.2%Office of Professional Responsibility: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-8.3 ptsWriter: 8.3%Office of Professional Responsibility: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-6.9 ptsWriter: 6.9%Office of Professional Responsibility: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -6.9 ptsWriter: 6.9%Office of Professional Responsibility: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.