Tag: regime change

Trump Rules Out Elections in Venezuela, Anticipates Sending Troops to Occupy Venezuela

President Donald Trump said the US had no plans to hold elections in Venezuela. He said elections are currently impossible, and the country must first be helped by the US. 

“We have to fix the country first. You can’t have an election. There’s no way the people could even vote,” Trump said about the possibility of a vote in the next month. “No, it’s going to take a period of time. We have — we have to nurse the country back to health.”

The President explained that the Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance, and White House adviser Stephen Miller would be responsible for running Venezuela. 

While Trump is laying out a massive nation-building project, he insisted that the US was not at war with Venezuela. “No, we’re not [at war],” Trump said. “We’re at war with people that sell drugs. We’re at war with people that empty their prisons into our country and empty their drug addicts and empty their mental institutions into our country.”

Since returning to office, Trump has ordered extensive sanctions on Venezuela, the seizure of two oil tankers carrying Venezuelan oil, strikes on Caracas, and the kidnapping of President Nicolas Maduro, all acts of war. 

The President went on to say that he is anticipating sending US troops to occupy Venezuela and enforce his will on the country. The US continues to conduct surveillance flights near Venezuela. 

Trump believes the rebuilding of Venezuela will take about 18 months and come at a massive cost to US energy firms. “It’ll be a lot of money.” The President continued,  “A tremendous amount of money will have to be spent, and the oil companies will spend it, and then they’ll get reimbursed by us or through revenue.”

Venezuela’s heavily contaminated crude oil is difficult to reach and expensive to refine. Oil prices need to exceed $100 per barrel to make for companies to see profits. Crude oil is currently under $58 per barrel. 

Keep reading

Behind the DOJ’s politicized indictment of Maduro: a CIA-created ‘network’ and coerced star witness

The US Department of Justice indictment of Venezuela’s kidnapped leader, Nicolas Maduro, is a political rant that relies heavily on coerced testimony from an unreliable witness. Despite DOJ edits, it could expose more Americans to the CIA’s own history of drug trafficking.

The January 3 US military raid on Venezuela to kidnap President Nicolas Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores was followed by the Department of Justice’s release of its superseding indictment of the two abductees as well as their son, Nicolasito Maduro, and two close political allies: former Minister of Justice Ramon Chacin and ex-Minister of Interior, Justice and Peace Diosdado Cabello. The DOJ has also thrown Tren De Aragua (TDA) cartel leader Hector “Niño” Guerrero into the mix of defendants, situating him at the heart of its narrative.

The indictment amounts to a 25 page rant accusing Maduro and Flores of a conspiracy to traffic “thousands of tons of cocaine to the United States,” relying heavily on testimony from coerced witnesses about alleged shipments that largely took place outside US jurisdiction. It accuses Maduro of “having partnered with narco-terrorists” like TDA, ignoring a recent US intelligence assessment that concluded he had no control over the Venezuelan gang. Finally, the prosecutors stacked the indictment by charging Maduro with “possession of machine guns,” a laughable offense which could easily be applied to hundreds of thousands of gun-loving Americans under an antiquated 1934 law.

DOJ prosecutors carefully avoid precise data on Venezuelan cocaine exports to the US. At one point, they describe “tons” of cocaine; at another, they refer to the shipment of “thousands of tons,” an astronomical figure that could hypothetically generate hundreds of billions in revenue. At no point did they mention fentanyl, the drug responsible for the overdose deaths of close to 50,000 Americans in 2024. In fact, the DEA National Drug Threat Assessment issued under Trump’s watch this year scarcely mentioned Venezuela.

By resorting to vague, deliberately expansive language larded with subjective terms like “corrupt” and “terrorism,” the DOJ has constructed a political narrative against Maduro in place of a concrete legal case. While repeatedly referring to Maduro as the “de facto… illegitimate ruler of the country,” the DOJ fails to demonstrate that he is de jure illegitimate under Venezuelan law, and will therefore be unable to bypass established international legal precedent granting immunity to heads of state.

Further, the indictment relies on transparently unreliable, coerced witnesses like Hugo “Pollo” Carvajal, a former Venezuelan general who has cut a secret plea deal to reduce his sentence for drug trafficking by supplying dirt on Maduro. Carvajal was said to be a key figure in the so-called “Cartel of the Suns” drug network which the DOJ claims was run by Maduro. If and when he appears to testify against the abducted Venezuelan leader, the American public could learn that the “cartel” was founded not by the deposed Venezuelan president or one of his allies, but by the CIA to traffic drugs into US cities.

As sloppy and politicized as the DOJ’s indictment might be, it has enabled Trump to frame his lawless “Donroe Doctrine” as an aggressive policy of legal enforcement, emboldening the US president to levy further threats to abduct or bump off heads of state who stand in the way of his resource rampage. This appears to be the real purpose of the imperial courtroom spectacle to come.

Keep reading

International Law Experts Agree: Trump-Ordered Attack on Venezuela 100% Illegal

Protests have erupted in the US and around the world following President Donald Trump’s attack on Venezuela and abduction of President Nicolás Maduro, and international law experts on Monday joined in rebuking the deadly military operation, with several outlining exactly how Trump’s actions were unlawful.

At Just Security, University of Reading professor of international law Michael Schmitt, New York University law professor Ryan Goodman, and NYU Reiss Center on Law and Security senior fellow Tess Bridgeman explained that the US military’s bombing of Venezuela and kidnapping of Maduro differs legally from the dozens of boat strikes the US has carried out in the past four months.

The attacks in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific have killed more than 100 people and have also been violations of international law, according to numerous legal experts—but they “have occurred in international waters against stateless vessels,” wrote Schmitt, Goodman, and Bridgeman.

In contrast, the operation in the early morning hours on Saturday took place within Venezuelan borders and “is clearly a violation of the prohibition on the use of force in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter,” they wrote. “That prohibition is the bedrock rule of the international system that separates the rule of law from anarchy, safeguards small states from their more powerful neighbors, and protects civilians from the devastation of war.”

Keep reading

The Trump Effect: One Day After Maduro Capture, Reports Say Iran’s Supreme Leader Preparing to Flee Country to Moscow

Call it the Trump Effect. Or the Maduro Effect, if you don’t like naming it after Orange Man Bad.

The point is, if a report in Sunday’s Times of London is to be believed, it’s very real — and it could mean regime change is coming to Iran the same way it came to Venezuela.

Just one day after the daring capture of Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro in an early-morning raid, the Times quoted intelligence sources which said that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the 86-year-old supreme leader of Iran’s theocratic regime, had formulated a back-up plan to get out of Dodge (or Tehran, in this case) if the protests against his regime, which began in late December, intensified.

Mass uprisings in Iran have been nothing new, especially under Khamenei. In 1999, 2009, 2017, 2019, and 2022, Khamenei’s government has faced massive popular opposition; it’s as regular as the swallows returning to San Juan Capistrano, almost, only if the swallows were forced to wear the niqab and were gunned down by the IRGC if they did not disperse.

This spate of protests is fueled by the same reasons past protests have broken out, as well: economic collapse and political repression. But, for several reasons, things could be different.

First, the country’s paper tiger status was fully confirmed with the 12-Day War, in which Israeli and U.S. forces were able to operate without even the slightest resistance inside Iran’s airspace, crippling the country’s military and nuclear facilities.

Second, Trump has taken an active interest in the protests, saying on Truth Social that “[i]f Iran [shoots] and violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue.”

Third — well, you probably know by now.

Keep reading

Fetterman: If We Didn’t Want Maduro Removed, Why Did Biden Have a Bounty on Him?

On Monday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) pointed to President Joe Biden raising the bounty on Nicolas Maduro to $25 million in January of 2025 and said, “Democrats, years ago, wanted to eliminate him, and why have a bounty of $25 million if we didn’t want him gone? Why would you do these things if you weren’t willing to actually do something other than harsh language?”

Fetterman said, “I’ve seen the speeches from — whether it’s Leader Schumer or…past tweets from President Biden, we all wanted this man gone, and now he is gone.”

He added, “Democrats, we all used to describe him as a dictator or a tyrant or a terrible person, and it wasn’t less than a year ago, President Biden raised the bounty [to] $25 million, less than a year ago.”

Fetterman further said, “Now, remember, we all — Democrats, years ago, wanted to eliminate him, and why have a bounty of $25 million if we didn’t want him gone? Why would you do these things if you weren’t willing to actually do something other than harsh language?” And “if you are putting in these $25 million [bounties] and calling that he has to go…are you willing to do more than just harsh language on social media?”

Keep reading

Trump DOJ Admits Venezuela’s ‘Cartel De Los Soles’ Isn’t An Actual Organization

A major plank in the Trump administration’s case for military intervention in Venezuela is looking thinner today, as the Department of Justice has retreated from the notion that captured President Nicolas Maduro was the head of an organized drug cartel called Cartel de los Soles. The DOJ now says the term “Cartel de los Soles” is merely descriptive of a “culture of corruption” fueled by the illegal drug trade.

This isn’t semantics: Both the Treasury and State Departments had officially designated the non-existent group as a terrorist organization. The latest development seems to at least partially confirm doubts raised by outside observers and lend credence to denials by the Venezuelan government. In November, the country’s foreign minister said he “absolutely rejects the new and ridiculous fabrication” by which Secretary of State Marco Rubio had “designated the non-existent Cartel de los Soles as a terrorist organization.”

The retreat from the idea that Cartel de los Soles is an actual organization was apparent in the DOJ’s filing of a superseding (updated) indictment. The previous indictment referred to the supposed cartel 32 times, naming Maduro as its chief. The new one only mentions the term twice, and says it’s only descriptive of a “patronage system” and a “culture of corruption” propelled by drug money. That’s consistent with the fact that the DEA’s annual National Drug Threat Assessment has never mentioned any “Cartel de los Soles” in its cataloguing of major traffickers.  

In July, the Treasury sanctioned Cartel de los Soles as a “Specially Designated Global Terrorist,” claiming it was a “criminal group headed by…Maduro.” The “cartel” was accused of providing material support to two groups already on U.S. terrorist lists: Mexico’s Sinaloa cartel and Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua. Of course, those terrorist designations are themselves controversial, with critics saying the government is purposefully conflating criminality and terrorism. The latter term has long been understood to describe violence directed at civilians with the goal of achieving a political or ideological goal. Historically, exaggerated use of the term has largely been confined to the left. 

Keep reading

Switzerland freezes assets of Venezuela’s Maduro and his inner circle

Switzerland has frozen all assets belonging to Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and individuals from his close circle, the Swiss government said.

“The Federal Council decided to freeze any assets held in Switzerland by Nicolas Maduro and other persons associated with him with immediate effect,” the statement reads.

The measure is said to ensure that “any illicitly acquired assets cannot be transferred out of Switzerland in the current situation.” The Federal Council added that the asset freeze targets individuals who have not previously been sanctioned in Switzerland and will not affect members of the current Venezuelan government. “The asset freeze is in addition to the sanctions against Venezuela that have been in place since 2018 under the Embargo Act,” the statement says.

Keep reading

Revealed: Deep State Saboteurs TRAITOROUSLY LEAKED Trump’s Venezuela Plans BEFORE The Raid

In a brazen act of betrayal, holdovers from the Biden era leaked classified details of President Trump’s high-stakes military operation against Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro to legacy media giants, aiming to torpedo the mission and potentially cost American lives.

Yet, in a rare show of restraint born from fear, The New York Times and Washington Post sat on the story, citing concerns for troop safety – a decision likely influenced by Trump’s relentless legal assaults on defamatory reporting that have left the media reeling.

The operation, greenlit by Trump on Friday night, culminated in Maduro’s swift capture early Saturday, marking a decisive blow against the socialist regime that has flooded America’s borders with chaos and drugs. However, it could have all gone disastrously, given that details of the top-secret incursion were leaked to both The New York Times and The Washington Post by an unidentified party, according to sources familiar with the communications.

Keep reading

COUP D’ÉTAT IN VENEZUELA? Heavy Gunfire in Caracas, Anti-Aircraft Artillery Firing Non-Stop – Armed Groups Moving Through the City, Clashing With Government Troops 

The Bolivarian regime seems to be eating itself, now.

Monday night erupted in heavy firefights in Caracas, more specifically in areas of Miraflores, where the presidential palace is located.

This comes a mere hours after the interim president, Delcy Rodríguez, was formally sworn in.

Rumors have been circulating that Maduro’s right-hand man, Diosdado Cabello, was planning a coup d’état against Rodríguez.

Apparently, her first decisions were not to the liking of the generals of the highly ideological Bolivarian Armed Forces of Venezuela.

Diosdado controls many of the ‘colectivos of Venezuela’, far-left, heavily armed paramilitary groups operating independently of the Government.

Keep reading

There’s Compelling Evidence That Someone Connected to the Trump Administration Profited Off the Invasion of Venezuela by Placing Large Bets on Polymarket

Prediction markets like Polymarket and Kalshi have long garnered a reputation for facilitating cheating and insider trading — allowing an athlete, for instance, to place a bet on a game they could then lose on purpose.

Now there’s compelling evidence that someone with inside information about the Trump administration’s regime change plans in Venezuela used that foreknowledge to profit massively from the conflict.

As spotted by researcher Tyson Brody, an unidentified user bet tens of thousands of dollars on various predictions that Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro would be imminently “out” or that the US forces would show up “in Venezuela by” a specified date during the runup to the incursion.

The account “existed for only one week and quickly became the biggest ‘yes’ holder in the Maduro out market,” Brody tweeted.

The evidence of insider trading is compelling, to say the least, given the highly suspicious timing. The account invested over $30,000 less than two days before the United States launched its invasion to kidnap Maduro and his wife and “profited $400,000 in less than 24 hours,” as sports entrepreneur Joe Pompliano calculated in a post on Bluesky.

“Seems pretty suspicious!” he added. “[Secretary of defense] Pete Hegseth making some beer money on the side?” Brody joked.

“Insider trading is not only allowed on prediction markets; it’s encouraged,” Pompliano argued.

Who was behind the Polymarket account remains a mystery. Accounts on markets like Polymarket are anonymous, and payouts are in cryptocurrency, making them hard to track.

As Semafor reported over the weekend, news organizations also had early intel of the US raid on Venezuela, but held off publishing the information so as not to put US troops in danger.

In other words, could it have been an insider at a New York or Washington newsroom who was trying to make a buck — or was it an operative inside the Trump administration?

Prediction markets have long raised concerns over exactly these types of situations. Case in point, one Polymarket user made $1 million in 24 hours in early December after betting on Google’s 2025 Year in Search rankings. Per Forbes, the account had a “near-perfect record of 22 correct predictions out of 23 attempts.”

As The American Prospect points out, critics of the Trump administration have long accused officials of dabbling in similar behavior. The administration has also allowed the prediction market to flourish by dropping enforcement cases in the crypto world and failing to introduce meaningful regulations.

Even Trump Media and Technology Group (TMTG), which owns the president’s social network, Truth Social, entered the prediction markets business last year, showing a pointed appetite for the space.

“Of course insiders shouldn’t be able to get rich off of policy decisions — but even more concerning is the possibility that people are skewing policy outcomes in order to make their bets pay off,” Demand Progress executive director Sean Vitka told The American Prospect.

One thing’s for sure: while insiders profit, those without that privileged information lose out — and when the bets are on a deadly conflict, innocent people stand to suffer as well.

Keep reading