It's been long! anyway, here are my answers:

The sources are as reliable as you decide, I'm not advocating either for a hitman, but this is a much better source than Escobar's son, since Jhon Jairo Velásquez was directly involved in the business, unlike Juan Pablo Escobar who was not even 18 years old when his father died.

One could easily argue that as a direct relative, even more, a son, he has access to different (and important) information as compared to his hitman, who basically knows about their joint crimes, which is the nature of their relationship. Even more, the son inherits from his father all kind of things, documents and records. An inmate can be coerced into accepting smearing someone in exchange for jail-time... just an especulation. He was 16 when his father died and had to flee Colombia for Africa to scape, so we could say he was kind of involved. According to his wiki, Escobar was calling him when the police intercepted his called and finally that led to the situation where he was killed.

About Venezuela, according to what I'm reading right now the Accion Democrática's wiki: in the 80´s it ceased to be "anti-imperialist", "progressive" and "nationalist", which sure equals, at least in political terms, socialism. But in the 80's is shifted to "center-left", a more moderated stance "ignoring statism..."

That happened across the world. Like Chile's Social Democracia, those are only nominal left. Their discourse sound leftist (sometimes) their real actions and policies are 100% neoliberal.

Anyway, ties to drug trafficking (or any other kind of criminal activity, it's kind of dumb to separate this particular crime from all the other more traditional government crimes like taking bribes, stealing, killing civilians with death-squads, etc) seems to be transversal to many right and left governments, as I tried to stablish: there´s is nothing inherent to socialism that makes it more prone to that particular crime.

Well, if you talk about the "Deep State", we are talking about an entity independent of the government that we can not see who is constituted, this is not an entity for anything capitalist and is taking advantage of the constitutional system of the United States, including its policies are closer to the left than to the right and they are quite statist, since they are the deep state. If the deep state controls the CIA and the drug business has absolutely nothing to do with the United States being an empire, I do not know what these things are related to.

Again, you go too far! =D

Since you are a libertarian let me point you to another libertarian: Murray Rothbard. In Wall Street banks and American foreign Policy <---- PDF

he details (not because of any kind of personal affiliation to either the right or the left, but because he needed to expose FACTS, regardless of how they looked regarding "capitalism") how the Deep State is created in and around 1947 by creating the CIA and the National Security Council (NSC). The Truman administration (and by that I mean the executive, State Department and such, those who surround the President) was, according to him, ALL Wall Street bankers and lawyers.

And I mean like perhaps 1 person in the whole executive was NOT tied to Walls Streets banks/ law firms. The first actions they take were to finance rightist politicians in Italy against the Communist Party there, a strong party with chances to gain power.

Then they got to oust Mossadegh in Iran. He was a nationalist, with NO ties to communism, but dangerous anyway: he wanted to nationalize the Anglo-Persian Oil Co. What finally happened was that the Deep State, Sullivan & Cromwell lawyer Allen Dulles and his brother John Foster Dulles, heads of the CIA and State Dep. allied itself with the MI-6, toppled Mossadegh, reinstaled the Shah of Iran to throne and shared the oil among 5 American companies, Dutch Shell and the British.

The next year in Guatemala, very similar picture, this time the nationalist government of Arbenz, with no ties to Russia but smeared as communist by the US corporate media (corporations dedicated to "information", are as you know, indispensable tool of regime change) corporate journalism is always used by the gov. and deep state. He wanted to nationalize United Fruit who basically controlled part of the country's economy. He was toppled by similar means: bribes, CIA-paid street mobs, etc. Walls Street lawyer and CIA head, Allen Dulles, had direct ties to that firm and its partners, as Rothbard mentions too in his essay.

That pretty much sums the Deep State's affiliation and motivations. They are part of the State and government, the fact that they are called the "deep state" doesn't mean they are invisible or impossible to control, they are free to do what they do because the US governmente without a shadow of a doubt is rigged in favor of big money and the CIA is the tool of big money.

They are "statists" as you say, for depending on the State's force like that and by the way they use it to their advantage, but capitalism itself depends wholly on a State that can guarantee certain rights and conditions. The US thrived during the Industrial Revolution closing its markets selectively and subsidizing certain industries. They are still doing it, despite the rhetoric about free markets. Example: agro-industry. US like to drop their subsidized crops in 3rd world countries whose farmers obviously can't compete... hurray neoliberalism! (a reference here

The world does not move for money, it moves for power, do you think that those who run the world are interested in having billions in their accounts? they just want power, and they use the money to move people like zombies.

Please... at most levels Money = Power. Everyone looking for power has to go through obtaining huge amounts of money, find me the exception and confirm the rule. You can argue that charismatic politicians (like Obama) obtain power through that and cunning, but who pays the piper? someone behind the curtain with a lot of money, like Wall Street.

By the way, if the deep state hated blacks and immigrants, I would not force them into the United States and Europe.

Why not? Cheap labor for their masters. Many of them are racists and do hate non-whites. Do some research about how present the KKK is in modern police force. But the overall reason is just to keep down whoever is there, keep the poor where they are and keep exploiting them, don't let them raise their heads.

No, there is no structural racism in the United States not only because an African-American occupies the presidency, but because practically being a white heterosexual is a sin in the entire Western world

Is it? or is people just knowledging the traditional privilege cast system our societies are?

What there is is cultural neo-Marxism, and an absurd quest to divide the nation into different small groups that are useless to each other, but that can be manipulated.

Divide and conquer is way older than any kind of cultural whatever...
What's exactly "Cultural Marxism"? Criticizing the West? Accussing the West or any country of their atrocities amounts to "Cultural Marxism"? Perhaps you could clarify the term a bit. I'm kind of suspecting I am one. I hope it doesn't mean I'm getting paid for it because I'm definitively not! Is not taking a side for "our people" (I'm literally laughing) meaning the West, cultural marxism? sounds like anyone critic and non-conformist is a "cultural marxist".

All that criticism of the United States is the same as critical I, because they are neither capitalist nor "right" things, are things of a small elite. That's not why I'm going to throw myself through a ravine that is the left.

Rothbard's essay state "those things are rightist" as in benefiting corporations and an economic elite. Their ways, as you say, are not either "rightist" or "leftits", but THEY are rightists, they (the deep state) fought communist everywhere just like they fight "Russian Hackers" and "Islamic terrorists" today, which doesn't mean there aren't real hackers or terrorists or that they aren't been persued by someone... What I mean is that they are used as rationalizations and excuses for the Empire to operate worldwide. Many times they create the threat themselves.

Sorry about the extremely long and late response.