It can fairly be said that the most precarious jobs in the world are those of a golf ball collector at a driving range, a mascot at a Chuck E. Cheese, and a Trump Administration lawyer.
That was evident at the press conference yesterday as President Donald Trump blew apart the carefully constructed narrative presented earlier for the seizure of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. Some of us had written that Trump had a winning legal argument by focusing on the operation as the seizure of two indicted individuals in reliance on past judicial rulings, including the decisions in the case of former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio and General Dan Caine stayed on script and reinforced this narrative. Both repeatedly noted that this was an operation intended to bring two individuals to justice and that law enforcement personnel were part of the extraction team to place them into legal custody. Rubio was, again, particularly effective in emphasizing that Maduro was not the head of state but a criminal dictator who took control after losing democratic elections.
However, while noting the purpose of the capture, President Trump proceeded to declare that the United States would engage in nation-building to achieve lasting regime change. He stated that they would be running Venezuela to ensure a friendly government and the repayment of seized U.S. property dating back to the government of Hugo Chávez.
This city is full of self-proclaimed Trump whisperers who rarely score above random selection in their predictions. However, there are certain pronounced elements in Trump’s approach to such matters. First, he is the most transparent president in my lifetime with prolonged (at times excruciatingly long) press conferences and a brutal frankness about his motivations. Second, he is unabashedly and undeniably transactional in most of his dealings. He is not ashamed to state what he wants the country to get out of the deal.
In Venezuela, he wants a stable partner, and he wants oil.
Chávez and Maduro had implemented moronic socialist policies that reduced one of the most prosperous nations to an economic basket case. They brought in Cuban security thugs to help keep the population under repressive conditions, as a third fled to the United States and other countries.
After an extraordinary operation to capture Maduro, Trump was faced with socialist Maduro allies on every level of the government. He is not willing to allow those same regressive elements to reassert themselves.
The problem is that, if the purpose was regime change, this attack was an act of war, which is why Rubio struggled to bring the presser back to the law enforcement purpose. I have long criticized the erosion of the war declaration powers of Congress, including my representation of members of Congress in opposition to Obama’s Libyan war effort.
The fact, however, is that we lost that case. Trump knows that. Courts have routinely dismissed challenges to undeclared military offensives against other nations. In fairness to Trump, most Democrats were as quiet as church mice when Obama and Hillary Clinton attacked Libya’s capital and military sites to achieve regime change without any authorization from Congress. They were also silent when Obama vaporized an American under this “kill list” policy without even a criminal charge. So please spare me the outrage now.
My strong preferences for congressional authorization and consultation are immaterial. The question I am asked as a legal analyst is whether this operation would be viewed as lawful. The answer remains yes.
The courts have previously upheld the authority of presidents to seize individuals abroad, including the purported heads of state. This case is actually stronger in many respects than the one involving Noriega. Maduro will now make the same failed arguments that Noriega raised. He should lose those challenges under existing precedent. If courts apply the same standards to Trump (which is often an uncertain proposition), Trump will win on the right to seize Maduro and bring him to justice.
But then, how about the other rationales rattled off at Mar-A-Lago? In my view, it will not matter. Here is why.
The immediate purpose and result of the operation was to capture Maduro and to bring him to face his indictment in New York. That is Noriega 2.0. The Administration put him into custody at the time of extraction with law enforcement personnel and handed him over to the Justice Department for prosecution.
The Trump Administration can then argue that it had to deal with the aftermath of that operation and would not simply leave the country without a leader or stable government. Trump emphasized that “We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.”
I still do not like the import of those statements. Venezuelans must be in charge of their own country and our role, if any, must be to help them establish a democratic and stable government. Trump added that “We can’t take a chance that somebody else takes over Venezuela that doesn’t have the good of the Venezuelan people in mind.”
The devil is in the details. Venezuelans must decide who has their best interests in mind, not the United States.
However, returning to the legal elements, I do not see how a court could free Maduro simply because it disapproves of nation-building. Presidents have engaged in such policies for years. The aftermath of the operation is distinct from its immediate purpose. Trump can argue that, absent countervailing action from Congress, he has the authority under Article II of the Constitution to lay the foundation for a constitutional and economic revival in Venezuela.
He will leave it to his lawyers to make that case. It is not the case that some of us preferred, but it is the case that he wants to be made. He is not someone who can be scripted. It is his script and he is still likely to prevail in holding Maduro and his wife for trial.
N.B.: This column appeared on Fox.com
“It can fairly be said that the most precarious jobs in the world are those of a golf ball collector at a driving range, a mascot at a Chuck E. Cheese, and a Trump Administration lawyer.”
Thanks for the wonderful line.
He missed the part that the Trump Administration lawyer he’s referring to is any Trump Administration lawyer who is serving as a federal prosecutor attempting to indict and convict any Democrat lawyer from within either the Obama and Biden admiistration who committed crimes while serving in that period. How’s that indictment of Comey et al going in those Washington DC courtrooms.
Turley doesn’t strike me as a Chuck E. Cheese customer. Both a mascot for that place and a golf ball collector at a driving range are pretty steady work. Not much precarious about them.
There is one major difference between the latest military fiasco and Noreiga. Panama had declared war on the United States. US military personnel in the Canal Zone had been killed. I fear we’re headed down a long, long road with no end. As far as Venezuela, anyone with any knowledge of the situation knows it’s all about oil.
semcgowanjr says: There is one major difference between the latest military fiasco and Noreiga.
??? latest military fiasco? Oh…. X/George is going to love that! Did you steal that from him?
Your problem is that your credibility has a way to go yet before it recovers from your fiasco of claiming Trump bombing Iran’s nuclear weapon facility was going to lead to Marines storming the shores of Iran and World War III with nukes making us all glow before kids were due to return from summer holidays. Over half a year and none of what you predicted has happened yet regarding Trump destroying Iran’s terrorist nuke factories.
And here you are, once again sharing your “everybody knows” knowledge: same claims, same dire warnings, just change the name of the country from Iran to Venezuela.
The fallout from this will be felt globally. Trump is boasting about the success of capturing Maduro without thinking of the consequences further down the line. A common failure when it comes to the right. He owns this problem going forward. Can’t blame it on Biden or Harris, or the Democrats. It’s all on him. Of course, when things start to go sideways, he will start blaming his own cabinet members before he accepts any accountability.
Turley, was obligated to give cover for Trump’s obvious moronic uttering of the truth. It was clear they wanted to keep the narrative about Maduro being a criminal. But that wasn’t the real reason. He wants to control their oil not only because it will buttress our supply but because it will put a crimp on China’s supply. Our oil reserves are at maturity, meaning they can no longer produce more. We spent so much energy and time drilling and producing so much that we didn’t think about the reality of depleting what we have and be smart about it. So…we have now secured another source through force, Venezuelan oil.
“The fallout from this will be felt globally.”
Absolutely – DJIA has risen since this took place.
Russia has fewer options to launder its sanctioned oil and therefore has a weaker negotiating position in the Ukraine war.
China see that an attempt to take Taiwan by force is even less likely to be successful, and is less likely to try to do so.
More Venezuelan illegal immigrants in the US are likely to CHOSE to return home.
Venezuela is going to accept US criminal deportees from Venezuela and it is likely to return them to prison for its own protection.
More abundant oil means lower oil prices in the US and the world and that means lower prices for everything that depends on oil.
Those neations whose political power is dependent on Oil have been diminished.
Cuba is one step closer to collapse.
Iran is one step close to collapse.
These and many many other things are the “fallout” of this action.
And Trump is responsible.
“He owns this going forward. Can’t blame it on Biden or Harris, or the Democrats. It’s all on him. ”
Absolutely.
If this fails – that is TRUMPS Problem.
If it succeeds TRUMP gets the credit.
“Of course, when things start to go sideways, he will start blaming his own cabinet members before he accepts any accountability.”
Possibly – though that has not been a pattern of Trumps.
Regardless If this goes sideways – people will blame Trump.
The REALITY is that though SOME effects of this are not as of yet determined.
SOME fo the potential benefits and harms of this are still speculative.
It is essential that the US prevent Venezuela from descending into Anarchy and chaos as a result of this
and that is possible. It is also important for the US to as quickly as possible extricate itself from determining Venezuela future.
The future of Venezuela must be determined by Venezuelans – not the US.
If Venezuallans have not yet had their fill of Socialism – that is their choice not ours.
“Venezuela is going to accept US criminal deportees from Venezuela and it is likely to return them to prison for its own protection.”
Most of the people being sent back aren’t violent criminals. They are people who fled the conditions in Venezuela and, because Trump isn’t fixing those, they run a good chance of being tortured and killed, rather than doing useful and productive work in the USA.
X
Again – there are innumerable potential benefits as well as risks from this.
There are many reason for the US to have chose to do this.
And many reasons for the US to NOT do this.
I am at this time happy with the outcome SO FAR.
Military action has SO FAR worked better than I expected.
I have ZERO problems with the US forcing Regime change on a country whose leaders are the consequence of election fraud.
Regardless We fought Nazi Germany – that was a Regime Change war.
Overall the US has had a terrible record at this stuff.
And that could still prove to be the case here.
I personally would have continued the drug and oil interdiction and blockade and waited for Maduro to seek asylum.
But I am not president.
I have ZERO problems with the US forcing Regime change on a country whose leaders are the consequence of election fraud.
I have zero problems with the US forcing regime change on any country, even if the leaders were fairly elected, as Chavez originally was. Or as Allende probably originally was (though the US’s only role in that coup was to indicate that it wouldn’t object; but I wouldn’t have had a problem even had the US ousted him itself). There is no law, nor any principle of ethics, that says we must not oust foreign governments that are inconvenient to us. The only guide to whether and when to do so is prudence.
Z – you really should stop talking about oil – you are not only wrong about the facts, you are wrong about predictions.
and you are reppeating malthusian nonsense that was debunked long ago.
Can you name anything that we have actually run out of ever ?
Not chosen to use something different – but actually run out of ?
Anything ? Ever ?
Dodos, and passenger pigeons. And the ore from which wootz was made, which shut down that industry after more than 1500 years of production. In all case we had adequate alternatives, but those are things we ran out of, that we would still be using if they were available.
It’s not about running out of oil. It’s about running out of economically recoverable oil. They went to fracking because conventional wells were no longer producing. The problem with fracking as a technology is that it’s an endpoint. One cannot do better than shattering the container to get the last drops out of it and they started with the easiest places to do this extraction.
Most of the time some better alternative happens, but that doesn’t save the original as a source. Humans nearly slaughtered all the sperm whales because they stored a fuel oil. After happening on petroleum that extraction stopped.
So, the next step in energy isn’t to do more with petroleum. Unfortunately Trump is either so demented or is paid so much by the Saudis that he is standing in the way of the necessary transition to wind and solar generation. It won’t matter to him – he’s already dying – but it does matter to his wallet, and that is all that matters to him.
X says: The fallout from this will be felt globally. Trump is boasting about the success of capturing Maduro without thinking of the consequences further down the line.
X/George: remember whose line this is? “We came. We saw. He died.”
Yes! That’s right, very good! Clinton – boasting and cackling – after she, Obama, and Biden (Obama’s avowed Foreign Policy Expert) helped their friends in Iran kill the mildly pro-American leader of Libya and put one of their hajji Muslim terrorist groups in power in Libya in his place.
Now X: prove you own your your foreign affairs chops by explaining to everybody the consequences down the line after The Smartest Guy In The Room, Bribery Biden, and would be president Clinton decided to kill Khaddafi despite the fact there were no American arrest warrants for him as there are for Maduro.
There were no stolen American corporations assets in his hands as with Maduro.
There were no hundreds of billions of dollars in legal awards in place concerning Khadaffi as there are for Maduro…
And Khadaffi was not working hand in glove with the ChiComs and Putin to inject lethal drugs into America, killing over 100,000 Americans each year as Maduro was.
The single reason for the Obama/Biden/Clinton regime change in Libya was to steal Libyan oil – even if it meant turning Libya over to the Libyan hajji terrorists run by their favorite terrorists in Iran.
And perhaps a second reason: to give Cackles Clinton a hot shot of publicity to set her up for her step by step plan to replace Obama as the next American president.
Entertain us with your foreign affairs analysis of “without thinking of the consequences further down the line” regarding Libya after Obama and Clinton directed the coup to kill Khaddafi.
After all, you voted for Obama, Clinton, and Biden each time one of them was on the ballot seeking to be elected president.
I think Venezuela should adopt the State of Texas’ Constitution and Laws (since Texas is also an Oil State and has the reserve right to seceded)
Then the same day the new Venezuelan Constitution is ratified apply to be the 51st State of the United States. If the US Congress turns Venezuela down – they should all be shot.
It has the mineral resources (oil) to be successful on its own and capability to be productively competitive (GDP) on the Global market (which is a lot more than you can say for a number of US States).
Texas does NOT have “the reserve right to secede”.
Secession is not prohibited by the Constitution and is fully constitutional, and secession is literally constitutional per the 10th Amendment.
It matters not what the Supreme Court of 1973 decided regarding abortion, and it matters not what the Supreme Court of 1869 decided regarding secession.
Judges and justices must support the literal verbatim Constitution.
Period.
Please cite the Constitution, not the absurd decisions by so-called judges, when arguing fundamental law.
George/X/Anonymous Confederate Kluxxer says Secession is not prohibited by the Constitution and is fully constitutional, and secession is literally constitutional per the 10th Amendment.
And what recognizable authority do you base that Confederate Kluxxer claim on that is more authoritative than SCOTUS who says that’s Confederate BullSchiff?
Jefferson Davis does not count – that’s as absurd as claiming Confederate Kluxxer White Supremacy is fundamental law. (BTW – you lost your first War Of Confederate Slavery Insurrection, you don’t want to try playing that angle a second time… this time today’s Darkies have guns that your slaves did not)
Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1868)
Affirming the perpetual nature of American federalism, and that the USA is an indestructible union from which no state can unilaterally secede.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/74/700/
The Union of the States was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and
character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to “be
perpetual.” And, when these Articles of Confederation were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country,
the Constitution was ordained “to form a more perfect Union:. The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an
indestructible Union composed of indestructible States.
When those states became one of the United States, they entered into an indissoluble relationship. The union
between individual states and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union
between the original States.
There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of all the States
to amend the Constitution.
The current court could overturn that as not being in line with originalism.
Jonathan Turley says: In Venezuela, he wants a stable partner, and he wants oil.
A few years ago, when Obama and Clinton took out Khaddafy as Sec State Clinton cackled “We came, we saw, he died!”… there was no outstanding arrest warrant and no seized American assets and outstanding billions of dollars in court awards to Americans. But perhaps any elections in Libya were stolen through corruption just as Maduro did the last two elections Khaddafy was replaced by a Iran sponsored and funded terrorist group and leader. Perhaps there’s an equivalency to the last time we removed a foreign dictator?
Khaddafy had become slighty pro-American in the Middle East after Reagan reminded him of his mortality by flying a cruise missile into his bedroom window while he happened to be elsewhere.
So: in your expert analysis, was that Obama and Clinton killing a foreign leader – not arresting him for outstanding indictments – all done in the pursuit of Libya as a stable partner while making a grab for his oil?
As the author of The Age Of Rage, you surely must realize that poor choices of words and phrases can feed the animals looking for food inside your Age Of Rage.
Trump – your subject for today – for all of his successes, just can’t help regularly interrupting those successes to step on his dick by saying something that makes him the gift that keeps on giving for the Democrat-Mainstream Media Propaganda Complex – who he well knows hates him with the heat of a thousand burning suns.
They don’t need any help misconstruing and misinterpreting what he says without him handing them freebies like this. Where would the trolls here yesterday with their “He’s a King! rage be without Trump’s words that they seized on before that – the king that complies with every single order from every corrupt basement level Democrat activist federal judge.
So what exactly do you mean with your analysis he wants Venezuela’s oil?
Do mean he’s going to take ALL of it for America?
All of it except for the oil belonging to the foreign concessionaires who purchased Venezuelan oil leases from the former democratic Venezuelan government before the communists came along and stole it? Will he or won’t he allow the companies from the Netherlands, Spain, the UK, etc (about five in all aside, from the companies from the US who also purchased oil leases) to have their stolen oil leases back? Or is he going to take all their oil stolen by the communists as well for the USA?
Or is he just going to return the oil leases stolen from US companies by the two communist dictators, Chavez and Maduro, to the American owners and let the next Venezuelan government decide what they’ll do next to fix the communists reducing their wealthy nation to a nation of poverty where people were eating their pets and fleeing to the apparent systemic White Racism of Obama’s USA?
Context and nuance matter in your Age Of Rage, Professor Turley… you should use some of that context and nuance while telling us Trump is after Venezuela’s oil.
I’m still waiting for Trump to deliver on the Democrats’ dire prediction he bombed Biden’s favorite terrorists’ nuclear weapons facility in Iran, because he wanted their oil.
Six months later and we still don’t have Trump putting boots on the ground inside Iran to seize their oil.
He “wants their oil”, not in the sense of seizing it, but in the sense of wanting it back on the legitimate world market, thus lowering global prices.
Are you reading professor Turley’s mind and answering for him? Or are you reading Trump’s mind and helping him out by repeating what he’s thinking but not saying?
–Hey, just thinking about the bombed drug cartel boats and I assume the cargo was not retrieved but sank?….
Does that mean that our grandchildren will be seeing cross-eyed fish swimming in circles with water pipes in their mouths?
Will we enable species intelligence to the extent that they may learn to inject one another through their gills, or will it create a new niche market for swordfish? Will prior drug cartel boat people decide, “Ain’t gonna try THAT again..- Now we just strap mule saddles loaded with bump/pookie onto large fish and send ’em out with a return-to-sender payment invoice attached?
If you lie so blatantly just on the question of trump transparency, Turls…, how can you be trusted on anything else? Not only that…, if you lie about transparency amidst one of the greatest coverups in American history how can we not just laugh in your face???
And hell, I haven’t even touched on trump & family corruption yet. Yowzers.
Here’s what the presser made abundantly clear: trump appeared drugged and progressing quickly into outright senility. Trump is tongue holing oil companies for funding him. And Rubio and Miller have plans to do this in Cuba and Mexico too…
Thereby putting a gigantic proxy war directly on America’s southern border. You may’ve already defected to Russia by then Turls, so that doesn’t seem to bother you. Thing is, maybe if you whip up your magats loud enough they’ll create a big enough diversion for you to bust out the side door.
Kamala, your TDS is getting the best of you.
What does Trumps Dementia Syndrome have to do with Kamala?
Isn’t there a communist party meeting somewhere or a communist teachers union strike you need to attend?
Blue hair day at the Salon…
“Blue hair day at the salon….” What has that comment to do with the topic at hand?
“Here’s what the presser made abundantly clear: trump appeared drugged and progressing quickly into outright senility.”
And Turls: don’t be giving me any of your MAGA crap claiming I’m projecting about my boss who who should STILL be President, President Biden. There’s enough of your MAGATs here with their stupid “Oval Office House Plant, President Auto-Pen” without you feeding your clones more of that Trumptard BS.
Your Orange Orangatang in his best days could never speak as well or as lucidly as our President Biden in the last year of his presidency. Don’t even try another lie claiming that fact is not true.
Lithium
Is it true that lithium causes brain damage? Drink up!
Who’ll drop the 1st nuke and where?
..to the Troll Hiding behind ‘Anonymous:’ ‘If you lie so blatantly…’ The Least you could do in this forum is *NOT* LIE SO BLATANTLY! !…
There aren’t any facts in there at all. Not even one.
JT, is this as close as you can come to admitting trump started a war without Congress declaring war as the Constitution demands?
“The problem is that, if the purpose was regime change, this attack was an act of war,…”
I’ll say it again, if Canada were to do a secret operation and abduct our President (trump or anybody else), and in the process they killed 3 or 30 security people, Citizens of the United States would (rightly) view this as an act of war. Why is so hard for people to look at from the Venezuelan point of view?
…started a war without Congress declaring war as the Constitution demands?
The constitution makes no such demand. All it says is that only Congress can declare war. Nowhere does it say or imply that anything hinges on such a declaration. The courts determined back in the 1790s that a state of war can exist just fine without one. The first war the USA fought was the “Quasi war” against France, and the courts ruled that a state of war legally existed even though neither side had ever bothered declaring it.
I’ll say it again, if Canada were to do a secret operation and abduct our President (trump or anybody else), and in the process they killed 3 or 30 security people, Citizens of the United States would (rightly) view this as an act of war.
And I’ll say again: no we wouldn’t. Why is it so hard for you to see that normal Americans have functional memories that last longer than a reading a ten second propaganda post?
After all, the last foreign dictator we removed was when Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton killed Khaddafy. No screams “It’s an act of war”!!!!”
They didn’t arrest him – they engineered one of their favored Islamic terrorist groups killing him and replacing him as the leader of Libya. There were no arrest warrants in America for khaddafy (he had become slightly pro-American), no billions of dollars in legal judgements against Khaddafy that he didn’t pay – and no stolen elections and Khaddafy helping foreign narco-terrorists inject lethal drugs into America.
And Democrats across America giggled to themselves and purred “I’m With Her!!!!” after Obama and Clinton killed him and unleashed ISIS pouring out of Libya and across the Middle East.
Why is it so hard for Democrat Communist Useless Idiots to understand that normal Americans don’t see their version of history the way they do?
Anonymous 1: I’ll say it again, if Canada were to do a secret operation and abduct our President (trump or anybody else), and in the process they killed 3 or 30 security people, Citizens of the United States would (rightly) view this as an act of war.
Anonymous 2: And I’ll say again: no we wouldn’t.
Yes, we would. Of course we would. Even if that president were Biden or 0bama, we would still view it as an act of war and we would respond appropriately. The first Anonymous was completely right in saying this. And also completely irrelevant, for several reasons.
First, suppose there had been a coup here, the constitution were overthrown by force, and a usurper was sitting in the White House. Suppose further that the 2nd amendment had previously been repealed, and all firearms had (somehow, never mind how) been successfully confiscated, so that we were unable to oust the usurper ourselves. Suppose even further that somewhere in the world was some power capable of ousting the usurper for us, even though we couldn’t do it ourselves. Since we’re doing all this supposing, fine, let it be Canada, somehow miraculously turned into a benevolent power capable of such an operation. In that case we would view it as a friendly act, not as one of war.
Second, forget all that impossible fantasy and accept the original supposition, that Canada somehow pulled off an operation like this against us and kidnapped our legitimate president. Yes, we would absolutely regard that as an act of war, and respond appropriately. Canada would very shortly regret its impetuosity. Now, is Venezuela in a position to do that to us, even if it wants to?! No. So who cares whether they consider it an act of war? How is that relevant? Let it be an act of war; since when can’t we wage war on people?
If the USA wants to wage war on Venezuela, or on Denmark, that is our business and only our business. No one can tell us not to.
It’s Muammar Gaddafi. Such ignorance and unwillingness to check the slightest fact.
“The Venezuelan point of view” is convincingly that of relief, freedom and joy, so don’t let that get in the way of your storyline. When the USA or Canada are being controlled by a ruthless dictator that tortures, maims or kills citizens at will, then circumstances might be somewhat comparable. The current celebrations in Venezuela and abroad will justifiably continue.
IMHO:
(1) I opine that Trump did not need prior Congressional approval for the Maduro seizure and extradition to U.S., under either Article II or the War Powers Resolution, notwithstanding any relevance to reporting requirements under S. 1543 if applicable.
(2) Regarding the continued presence in Venezuela and exertion of control over its oil production, I do not feel qualified to draw an opinion, as the use or limitation of the word “hostilities” in either legislation or judicial findings appear nebulous in binding precedent. However, of all the legal scholars and authors addressing such issues, I tend to like John Yoo, and I offer the following from him: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5139&context=uclrev
(3) Continuing on the remaining presence in Venezuela and any requisite approval needed, there are two considerations:
(a) the massive seizure and nationalization/re-appropriation of oil interests and revenues belonging to American and other foreign companies–and (importantly)l the STILL-OUTSTANDING $$$$ millions/billions owed to them following judicial findings and adjudications against Venezuela (which Venezuela never paid). (Do the “interested parties” who have these outstanding awards against Venezuela need to go back into court, to secure/compel payment through U.S. government assistance/intervention?)
(b) Trump’s assertion of creating a void which could invite Russian, Chinese, or Iranian takeover is a real danger and existential threat to hemispheric economic and nation security interests. I WOULD like to see a joint executive and congressional plan advanced from this exigent situation.
(4) I think the media is/was intending to set up/entrap Trump (to create a situation of illegal/unconstitutional conduct) by challenging his failure to put Machudo (sp.?) in power. The U.S. wisely rejected that challenge, and deferred to the Venezuela’s people’s elected VP choice. The media also tries to declare an ulterior motive in Trump by reconstructing his action -not one of justice but rather one of oil greed. The narco-terrorism crimes and long-term outstanding compensation owed to oil companies seem to have been pushed to the wayside by them in pursuit of their anti-Trump agenda.
(Machado. sorry, just looked it up.)
Republicans have repeatedly failed to learn their lesson from Iraq, neglecting to develop a coherent strategy beyond simply executing warrants and hoping for the best afterward. There is no comprehensive plan in place, as has often been the case. Turley emphasizes legal arguments heavily because he recognizes that the underlying policy and strategic issues are significant problems. Currently, Venezuelans are experiencing a brief period of happiness and euphoria with Maduro’s departure; however, this optimism is likely to be short-lived. Once it becomes clear that the United States intends to siphon off their natural resources—particularly oil and minerals—and that the Venezuelan people will not directly benefit from this, public sentiment is expected to sour quickly.
Regarding Trump’s promise of refraining from invading other countries or engaging in regime change, it appears he has broken that promise. Distinguishing Trump from his predecessors seems increasingly difficult. Turley and other Trump supporters are now scrambling to justify actions that are clearly inconsistent with his campaign promises. They argue that if it was wrong for Obama to intervene in foreign nations or engage in regime change, then Trump’s similar actions should also be deemed wrong. Interestingly, Turley did not defend Obama’s actions to the same extent when they occurred, likely because of his partisan loyalty to the Democratic Party. This inconsistency highlights the partisan bias that influences such legal and political debates.
Trump never promised to refrain from invading other countries or engage in regime change. You’re just making that up.
Part of his #47 victory speech:
“”We had no wars, for four years, we had no wars. Except we defeated ISIS,” Trump proclaimed.
“They said ‘he will start a war.’ I’m not going to start a war, I’m going to stop the wars.”
Simply not calling them wars is the key to his current approach.
X’s Desperate Democrat Deflection Of The Day: Republicans have repeatedly failed to learn their lesson from Iraq,
Before you explain to us what Biden learned from his lessons in Libya, where he, Obama and Clinton cackled “We came, we saw, he died” – killing Khadaffi rather than arresting him, and turning ISIS loose on the Middle East while replacing USA-neutral Khadaffi with a hajji terrorist group and its leader… lets give you a chance to do Iraq first since you brought the Democrat version up:
True or lie, X/George: prior to Bush resuming the ongoing war with Iraq in 2002, he obtained bipartisan support in a Resolution that passed both the House and Senate.
True or lie, X/George: among Democrats voting approval for Bush to resume the ongoing war with Iraq were a corrupt Democrat Senator named Biden, along with another corrupt Democrat Senator named Clinton. Also among the yea votes were Clinton’s fellow would-be Democrat presidents Edwards, Kerry, and Lieberman, and Democrat Senate Leaders Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer.
Now, while you want to assure us that Venezuelans are going to miss the Compassionate Communism of Maduro after a brief period of euphoria – tell everybody here what Biden, Clinton, Kerry, Obama, Reid, Schumer, et al learned as their lesson from killing Libya’s leader, Khaddafi?
Anything that should have given them pause before allowing Putin to invade Ukraine shortly after that?
X/George…. you still here? Or are you doing the infamous Democrat Drop A Dump To Deflect Then Disappear?
The vote was about whether to allow the threat of war to be used to negotiate, not to start one.
It was authorization for Bush to take the gun out of the holster, not for Bush to start shooting people.
At the time the Republican propagandists had made it clear that America was going for revenge and that anyone attempting to slow that process was evil. So the US attacked Iraq, a country that was very much not involved in the 9/11 events, because Iraq was a thorn in the side of Saudi Arabia, where Bush had a number of very wealthy friends in the oil business.
(1) War requires a minimum of two parties engaging in a conflict. Venezuela has not declared War upon the U.S., The extraction of a Fugitive of Justice performed by one party does not institute the conventions of War, further the extraction did not result in military retaliation, thus rising a conflict.
(No Conflict – No War)
(2) Venezuelans currently have limited expertise and internal-recourse to rebuild the Oil Industrial Complex.
(3a) The expropriated Oil Industrial Complex of: Royal Dutch Shell, Standard Oil (Creole Petroleum), ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips Petroleum built and establish prior to Venezuelan Nationalization (under state-owned Corporación Venezolana de Petróleo (CVP)) and the 1976 nationalization of the entire oil industry. Shall be rebuilt and ownership reconciled (tbd) with the historical record of Industrial development.
Re.:
Expropriated Petroleum refers to a government seizing foreign-owned oil assets, often through nationalization, as seen historically in Mexico (PEMEX) and recently in Venezuela (PDVSA), leading to legal battles and demands for compensation by companies like ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips, with ongoing disputes over “stolen” assets and international arbitration. These actions involve taking control of wells, refineries, and oil supplies, sparking conflicts between nations and corporations over fair compensation and property rights, sometimes leading to sanctions or blockades.
Ref.:
They took all of our oil not that long ago. And we want it back’: Trump demands Venezuela return seized assets
Trump cited the lost U.S. investments in Venezuela when asked about his newest tactic in a pressure campaign against leader Nicolás Maduro, suggesting his administration’s moves are at least somewhat motivated by disputes over oil investments, along with accusations of drug trafficking. Some sanctioned tankers already are diverting away from Venezuela.
…
Venezuela first moved to nationalize its oil industry in the 1970s, a process that expanded under Chávez, who nationalized hundreds of private businesses and foreign-owned assets, including oil projects run by ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips. That led to the arbitration panel’s 2014 order.
“There is a case that can be made that Venezuela owes this money to Exxon. I don’t think it’s ever been paid,” economist Philip Verleger said.
“We’re not going to be letting anybody going through who shouldn’t be going through,” Trump told reporters. “You remember they took all of our energy rights. They took all of our oil not that long ago. And we want it back. They took it — they illegally took it.”
By: David Klepper and The Associated Press ~ December 18, 2025
https://fortune.com/2025/12/18/venezuela-oil-trump-chevron-seized-assets-blockade/
Wiki: Nationalization of oil supplies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalization_of_oil_supplies
….not one of justice but rather one of oil greed
Democrats are not about justice but about coveting power because they do not believe in democracy, ie. sharing power
“the Venezuela’s people’s elected VP choice”?! When exactly did they elect her, and how did they not elect Maduro at the same time?
milhouse
Under Venezuelan law, Maduro appoints his own VP, and the Venezuelan people have not objected–Rodriquez has been VP for several years now.
THe Venezuelan Supreme Court ordered that VP Rodriguez take over as acting president following Maduro’s capture.
THE UNITED STATES DID NOT INTERVENE, DISRUPT, OR DEFY THAT VENEZUELAN ACTION.
Dont’ speak unless you know what you are talking about
JT said: It can fairly be said that the most precarious jobs in the world are those of a golf ball collector at a driving range, a mascot at a Chuck E. Cheese, and a Trump Administration lawyer.
<b?… or Trump federal prosecutor trying to get an Obama or Biden Administration official who's a member of the Washington DC Bar Association first indicted and then convicted in a Washington DC judge's courtroom.
Fixed it for you Jonathan, as the lead line signals this is about Trump… just filling out what you omitted to mention. No need to thank me.
Now go get the Madmani, anti-Constitution, anti-American, direct and mortal enemy of America in the communist republic of New York.
Begin with the Supreme Court striking down rent, wage, and price controls as egregious violations of the absolute 5th Amendment right to private property.
The Supreme Court upheld all of those things nearly a century ago. There’s no indication it has any inclination to change its mind.
The Supreme Court of 1973 decided that abortion was a federal constitutional right.
The Supreme Court does not uphold and support the Constitution, as required by its sworn oath, the 5th Amendment of which provides Americans the absolute right to private property, in stark contrast to the Communist Manifesto, which promised emphatically to abolish private property.
You seem very communistic, comrade, when you argue for the Communist Manifesto over the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution.
You seem bizarre when you support judges and justices without question and with reckless abandon.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“…courts…must…declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
“…men…do…what their powers do not authorize, [and] what [their powers] forbid.”
“[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
– Alexander Hamilton
JT said: It can fairly be said that the most precarious jobs in the world are those of a golf ball collector at a driving range, a mascot at a Chuck E. Cheese, and a Trump Administration lawyer.
<b?… or Trump federal prosecutor trying to get an Obama or Biden Administration official who's a member of the Washington DC Bar Association first indicted and then convicted in a Washington DC judge's courtroom.
Fixed it for you Jonathan, as the lead line signals this is about Trump… just filling out what you omitted to mention. No need to thank me.
I don’t think Trump went off script. His remarks about running Venezuela during a “judicious” transition period were part of his prepared remarks. I believe some of his comments on US control of the oil sector were as well. I don’t think these remarks will affect the legal case, for the reasons given by the professor.
Trump should forcibly impose the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, 1789, on Venezuela with the intent to compel its implementation throughout South and Central America and the Caribbean.
Trump should forcibly impose the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, 1789, on Venezuela
Nah… I didn’t vote for Trump doing that rather than defending Americans interests. Venezuelans were doing just fine before they made the mistake of voting a communist into power – who made sure they’d never be able to vote their way out again, and having seized their firearms they wouldn’t be able to shoot themselves out of the communist tyranny as the other option.
They were doing well before that, with a little help from the world to get their country back on their feet after communist totalitarianism, they can do the same again.
We almost did the same – it was a narrow escape from ending up with Obama’s Fourth Term… Biden’s puppeteers were SO close….
I didn’t vote for that either, but I would have no problem with it if he can do it. It would be the right thing. I just don’t think it’s practical, or that he has any intention of doing it, but if he did and got away with it then more power to him.
My apologies, forcibly by force of influence and diplomacy.
But those remarks – I did it for the oil – handed massive ammunition to the Democrats . I suspect we are facing a legal mess.
A political mess, maybe, but not a legal mess. Legally it’s completely irrelevant. And legally what the president does in this field is nobody’s business but Congress’s. So long as Congress doesn’t object, he can take whatever military action he likes.
Trump was unable to run casinos or handle a pandemic. How’s he going to run a country where he doesn’t speak the language.
It’s a trick question – he’s replacing Maduro as the head of the Venezuelan cartel.
Democrats must defend Maduro at all costs because ignoring victims of Marxist dictatorships is part of their cult dogma. Democrats are merely being consistent just like they ignore the millions killed under the brutality of Joseph Stalin, Mao ZeDong, Pol Pot, Fidel Castro, etc, etc, etc. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
Venezuela’s Murderous Regime
JULY 5, 2019
A new United Nations investigation underscores the brutal nature of Nicolas Maduro’s government in Venezuela. As reported in the July 4 edition of the New York Times, UN investigators found that Venezuelan Special Action Forces “have carried out thousands of extrajudicial killings in the past 18 months and then manipulated crime scenes to make it look as if the victims had been resisting arrest.” In essence, government security units acted as death squads to eliminate regime opponents.
The death toll is shockingly large. Security forces “killed 5,287 people in 2018 and another 1,569 by mid-May of this year, in what are officially termed by the Venezuelan government ‘Operations for the Liberation of the People.’” The campaign of cold-blooded mass murder is made worse by the government’s cynical, Orwellian euphemism.
https://www.cato.org/blog/venezuelas-murderous-regime
Dear Prof Turley,
Apparently, Maduro’s ‘corrupt’ drug-running military/security friends in Venezuela were really Trump’s CIA friends. Sunday morning media debrief says Trump/JSOC had the green light and it was all over in a few hours .. . which probably saved a lot lives.
Everybody, including the Powerhouse Roundtable, all say Maduro is a bad, bad, dude. A destabilizing influence in the southern hemisphere for years. Biden also had a warrant for Maduro . .. but never pulled the Auto-pen trigger.
We haven’t been this united since Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Ukraine, Iran and Gaza. To name a few.. . What could go wrong?
Hopefully, even drug-running foreign heads of state will get their day in U.S. courts. .. Trump recently pardoned one of the most notorious ‘convicted’ state drug-runner south of the Gulf of America.
Trump can certainly be ‘brutally honest’, but is hardly the most ‘transparent’ in my life (see e.g. the Epstein Files). Trump is what Dave Chappelle calls an ‘honest liar’.. . when Hillary accursed Trump of tax evasion, Trump immediately responded: “that’s what makes me smart”.
*I agree it probably will not matter. ..
“For over a thousand years Roman conquerors returning from the wars enjoyed the honor of triumph, a tumultuous parade. In the procession came trumpeters, musicians and strange animals from conquered territories, together with carts laden with treasure and captured armaments. The conqueror rode in a triumphal chariot, the dazed prisoners walking in chains before him. Sometimes his children robed in white stood with him in the chariot or rode the trace horses. A slave stood behind the conqueror holding a golden crown, and whispering in his ear a warning: that all glory is fleeting.” – General George S. Patton, Jr.
dgsnowden posted: Apparently, Maduro’s ‘corrupt’ drug-running military/security friends in Venezuela were really Trump’s CIA friends.
Trump’s CIA friends are actually Castro’s internal security exports sent from Cuba to Venezuela years ago?????
Cuban security for Maduro collapsed during U.S. operation: The network that protected him became his greatest vulnerability
https://en.cibercuba.com/noticias/2026-01-03-u1-e207888-s27061-nid317780-seguridad-cubana-maduro-colapso-durante-operacion
“The capture of Maduro exposes the vulnerability of the Cuban-Venezuelan security system. The U.S. operation reveals internal tensions and the erosion of Cuban control in Caracas.”
Apparently dgsnowden has been getting his news once again from Obama’s communist Young Turks YouTube channel. Alcohol addled Never-Trumpers see the CIA where Latin America and the rest of the world see the Cuban internal security forces that the Castro’s installed to control and protect first Chavez and then Maduro.
*Seek professional help, dgsnowden: it would be an act of mental health kindness to give yourself
**day drinking Chinese cooking wine in conjunction with bing watching of communists on YouTube, within the Washington Post, NYT, etc is harmful to both your physical and mental health. The salt in that cooking wine alone will destroy your kidneys.
El gordo edición
@GordoEdicion
– “A quienes dicen que a Estados Unidos solamente le interesa el petróleo, a esas personas les pregunto: ¿Qué creen que querían los rusos y los chinos? ¿La receta de las arepas?”
https://x.com/GordoEdicion/status/2007614544596848992
Translated from Spanish
– “To those who say that the United States is only interested in oil, I ask those people: What do you think the Russians and the Chinese wanted? The recipe for arepas?”
Look at that—Turley making excuses for Trump, what a surprise. He just did a slightly better job than Rubio by trying to steer the narrative back to the legal justification, which is now laughably irrelevant since Trump let the cat out of the bag. This has never been about drugs; I’ve said it many times—it’s always been about the oil. Securing Venezuela’s oil supply to support ours is to have a friendly government that owes us” because we got rid of Maduro.
Turley goes to great lengths to justify this by emphasizing the legal angle, insisting that it’s entirely legal. Strangely enough, he never said the same when Obama sent air strikes in Libya and killed an American who pledged loyalty to a terrorist group, claiming that was also legal and within his powers. Even in this column, he wouldn’t outright say Obama’s actions were perfectly legal. The key difference is, Obama never aimed for regime change in Libya or claimed they were taking over their oil. Right? Trump—the moron, who can’t stay on script—is not being transparent; he’s just acting like a moron. Rubio’s face was priceless; he knew Trump had blown their carefully crafted narrative when he forgot that he, too, was supposed not to say the quiet part out loud.
While Venezuelans are happy that Maduro is gone, that euphoria won’t last long once they realize Trump’s choice for their leader will just be a puppet rather than a legitimately elected head of state. Remember, he already said he’d be okay with boots on the ground—a promise he made when campaigning, then quickly walked back. Barely a year into his term, he’s already managed to get involved in regime change.
Two words. National security. That is what this operation is about. Mission accomplished.
“Turley making excuses for Trump”
Oh, and former U.S. Attorney General William Pelham Barr doing the very same.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
AI Overview
In January 2026, following the capture of Nicolás Maduro by U.S. forces, former Attorney General William Barr expressed a “high degree of confidence” that the deposed leader would be convicted in U.S. courts.
Barr’s commentary centers on the original 2020 narco-terrorism indictment he oversaw during his tenure as Attorney General. His key comments include:
Criminal Enterprise: Barr previously characterized Maduro’s government as a “corrupt Venezuelan regime” that effectively converted the country into a criminal enterprise at the service of drug traffickers.
Narcoterrorism: He alleged that for over 20 years, Maduro and high-ranking colleagues conspired with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) to “flood the United States with cocaine,” treating the drug trade as a “weapon against America”.
Betrayal of Institutions: Barr stated that the defendants “betrayed the Venezuelan people and corrupted Venezuelan institutions” to line their pockets with drug money while the population suffered.
Legitimacy: At the time of the initial charges, Barr noted that the U.S. did not recognize Maduro as the legitimate president, which justified treating him as a criminal defendant rather than a head of state.
Following the 2026 military action, these previous legal assertions have become the foundation for the criminal charges Maduro now faces in the Southern District of New York.
” Strangely enough, he never said the same when Obama sent air strikes in Libya and killed an American who pledged loyalty to a terrorist group, claiming that was also legal and within his powers. Even in this column, he wouldn’t outright say Obama’s actions were perfectly legal. “
This dope, when his many name changes were revealed, denied ever being on the blog. What a liar! Presently, he admits being on the list since 2011, when Libya was attacked by Obama. His words here are lies as well, but this guy can’t get his story or the facts straight and contradicts himself all the time. I think all on the blog already know X, George Svelaz, to be a liar, so the only one who benefits from this revelation is GSX.
x says: Look at that—Turley making excuses for Trump, what a surprise.
To nobody’s surprise, X/George is back in full rage mode with his Daily Rage: BBBBBUUUTTTT…. MUH TURLEY!!!!! HE’S WRONG AND I’M RIGHT!!!
X/George – your eagerness to fail just as miserably in 2026 as you did in 2025 is…. stupid?
No, it’s more than that. Give us a few minutes to find a better descriptive word while you babble on about how Venezuelans are going miss the Compassionate Communism of Maduro, where they will no longer have to eat their pets rather than starve.
Whether this project succeeds will depend on the attitude taken by the regime that remains in place in Venezuela. Trump wants to work with it and seems skeptical about the opposition led by Gonzalez and Machado. If they cooperate with him in the oil sector, Trump would be happy to proceed without a deeper regime change. If they don’t cooperate, he will have to choose between further military intervention and simply maintaining the status quo. I suspect he will try very hard to work things out with the government now in place, because those choices are unpalatable.
Trump goes off script because he is a “re-founding” figure pulling America out of it incestuous relationship with our failing governmental system. We are reinforcing our power in south America and pushing China and its malign influence out.
For trying to save an America that doesn’t want to be saved, he is roundly hated!
@Amish Warrior
Agreed. He is undoing globalist plans in real time, all the time. It is driving them mad. That he is also actually inspirational to most of us is positively sending them over the edge.
“Refounding Father”? You are on drugs. The man is the worst President in US history – and there is some competition for that – with an arrant disregard for the law, Constitution and common decency and morals. In a year from now, the Republicans will have lost Congress, and he will be impeached. Along with Bondi, Noem and, quite likely, Hegseth. Hopefully there will be a spare cell for those three next to Nicky Maduro.
How’s the weather on Fantasy Island today? No surprise that such an anti-American would use ‘anonymous’ to post.
Refounding Father. So true.
The executive power is vested exclusively in a President of the United States, and the President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States exclusively.
No executive or military power may be usurped or exercised by the legislative or judicial branches; no legislation or adjudication may usurp or exercise executive or military power and must be devoid of such.
Congress may impeach and convict the president for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Oh, and the absolute worst president in U.S. history was “Crazy Abe,” by his own admission.
To wit,
“If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher.”
– “Crazy Abe,” Lyceum Address, 1838
He was.
Oh, and the absolute worst president in U.S. history was “Crazy Abe,” by his own admission.
And then there was our own Mad King George/X, the compassionate communist Confederate Kluxxer…
The overwhelming singular failure of the American republic rights and freedoms experiment has been voters allowing the continued existence of the vile and violent, seditious DNC and their equally vile members like X, The Racist Democrat Communist Formerly Known As George. The Democrats who provided us with racist, Constitution-hating Democrat presidents such as Woodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Obama, and of course their fellow Kluxxer, Biden
Go back to your cartel job.
Enjoy the stunning contrast between an American President and a democrat – as your brethren are doing -https://x.com/ugaalf1/status/2007439714811298154/photo/1
The man is the worst President in US history – and there is some competition for that
Looking at the track record of the puppeteers that manipulated The Oval Office House Plant for the last four years… why don’t you make your case that Trump’s presidency is worse than that of Biden’s puppeteers?
Just stick with foreign policy – this is worse than abandoning Afghanistan and the thousands of Americans and our allies deserted and left behind for the Taliban to kill and subjugate?
Stay and play – don’t do the Democrat Drop A Dump To Deflect And Disappear.
Trump has just made the world a lot less safe for Americans, including himself. Pardoning the strongly convicted Honduran strongman Hernandez while attacking a sovereign country on the basis of a warrant that could be gotten for anyone in some court is an act of war. The case against Maduro is much weaker than the case against Hernandez. You don’t fight totalitarians this way. You become a totalitarian.
This game of force will impact Americans and our interests and any objection will be empty. Wasn’t Trump elected on a platform of less intervention? And now he has his own Iraq.
Trump doesn’t care about America. Any person who heaps honors on himself instead of waiting for posterity to award them is stealing valor. He is a deranged narcissist and I kick myself for not seeing this earlier. Unfortunately his Democrat opposition is usually so wrong that you can set your clock by their errors. Well, apparently, this time they were right.
LOL
When people answer inarticulately like this, exactly what point do they hope to make?
There are a lot of smart conservatives, but unfortunately also a lot of zeros.
When people answer inarticulately like this, exactly what point do they hope to make?
Any of you gaslighters with nothing more than that to add want to make any comments on your own intellect? Or the original post that the person you’re so critical of gave his response to? Mount a defense of that post, give it a try!!!!
Here’s your chance to play Official Internet Psychologist… or thank Trump for making gas so inexpensive to help you light your way!
Gaslighting
Gaslighting is the intended psychological manipulation by a low-IQ perpetrator of those they hope to victimize through intentionally misleading that person or group. This involves the perpetrator lying, denying events, and other methods used in the hope their intended victims doubt their perceptions of reality, memories, and feel overly emotional or irrational.
The main five methods of gaslighting that may be used alone or in conjunction with others are: trivilizing, countering, lying, blame shifting, and withholding.
@Anonymous
Iraq? Really? That’s quite a false equivalency you’ve got there.
Time will tell
“. . . attacking a sovereign country . . .”
There is no such thing as a “sovereign” dictatorship. Just as there’s no such thing as a “sovereign” domestic criminal. (In spite of the Left’s wishes to the contrary.)
But trump said the Venezuelans are going to cheer when Exxon Mobile sends in Texas oil workers to extract their oil and send it to U.S. refineries. I’m sure it will work out just like that. without sending in any boots on the ground. The Venezuelan people will all turn in their guns and ask if they can work as cooks and maids at the Exxon camps. What could possibly go wrong?
There’s still room for more – https://x.com/ugaalf1/status/2007439714811298154/photo/1
It’s not “their oil”. What makes it theirs?
The Venezuelan people will all turn in their guns and ask if they can work as cooks and maids at the Exxon camps.
Sonny, when you’re finished fantasizing about Venezuelans mounting an armed revolution to try and win back the Compassionate Communism of Maduro, and waiting for WWIII to begin as you fantasized about six months ago when Trump took out Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities….
… Maduro’s security forces already took all the guns they could find that had been registered by Chavez/Maduro’s edicts.
Trump has just made the world a lot less safe for Americans, including himself.
Say something new – you’re repeating exactly what you said six months ago when Trump destroyed the nuclear weapons facilities of you Democrats’ favorite terrorists, The Mad Mullahs subjugating Iran.
You said six months ago that we would now be engaged in WWIII, nukes would be flying, and Trump would have our military on the ground seizing Iran’s oil facilities.
Do something different for a change: explain to us how Clinton, Biden (as foreign policy expert) and Obama killing Libya’s leader who didn’t have any arrest warrants or billion dollar legal judgements against him, and then placing Libya in the hands of an Iran sponsored hajji terrorist group while unleashing ISIS on the world made Americans safer.
Are Americans safer since Obama, Biden, and Clinton killed Khaddafi for no reason than wanting another infamous Democrat photo op to fuel Clinton’s intended run to replace Obama as president? ISIS kill any Americans since they unleashed that terrorist hajji group?
Can you do that to prove you aren’t actually an amoral, hypocritical Democrat lying Apparatchik that doesn’t actually care about communist or Muslim tyrants, but exists only to cover Democrat government felons by engaging in BBBBUUUTTT…. MUH TRUMP!!!!! I DEMAND BRIBERY BIDEN, THE OVAL OFFICE HOUSE PLANT FOR PRESIDENT AGAIN IN 2028!!!!