Guys, as a Venezuelan, thank you so much for this. It means a lot, truly, if you're ever in Mexico City, drinks are on me (I’ll get you a joint, Katie).
I'll start by saying that it's very obvious, at least to us, that those were drug boats, how do we know? Because the regime never said anything about them, if just one random fisherman was killed you would have seen them plastered everywhere as the regime deploys its propaganda. Now, I understand the issue of attacking these boats under a false premise, but in the end this was about choking the regime resources which might be equally, if not more at this point, from cocaine and not oil.
I will also add that even though the legality of the entire operation is very tenuous, we had no other choice. Over the last 27 years we have exhausted every democratic option available to us, we protested endlessly, moved mountains to vote the regime out and we failed. There's only so much you can do against a regime that holds all the weapons and it took someone that is rather unpalatable to come and help us be free. It had to come to this because our cries for help were ignored, every leftist government in LATAM is at the very least aligned with the regime and at the most propped up with our oil, as were: Evo Morales in Bolivia, the Kirschner/Fernandez in Argentina, Lula Da Silva in Brazil, Ortega in Nicaragua, Petro in Colombia, Mujica in Uruguay, Correa in Ecuador.
Cuba also aided vastly in the architecture of our regime with their decades long experience in propaganda, counter intelligence and civil repression. Something made very apparent by the fact that about half of Maduro's guards were Cuban soldiers.
Yes, I was very put off by the segment about the boat strikes, which came across as quite condescending. I had watched the Triggernometry episode about this and Francis (whose family is Venezuelan) went into a lot of detail about the drug trade and Maduro’s personal connection to the cartels.
Something that I don’t think enough people are looking at is how the crisis in Venezuela has significantly contributed to the migrant crisis. If living standards improve now that Maduro is out of power, fewer people are going to flee the country. Many expats would also like to return. Marco Rubio has mentioned this in the interviews he’s done this past week, so I definitely think it was at least part of the rationale for removing Maduro.
And to go deeper, people underestimate just how many repercussions and benefits to the US taking out the regime has. Not only as you say the migrant benefit, but the security benefits Venezuela can provide because of our position to the US.
The toppling of the regime weakens China and Russia, that used our oil and also breaks Russia's heavy crude monopoly since it's the same type of oil Venezuela possesses.
It also weakens Iran, that had Hezbollah presence in our country and I found out today that part of our oil revenues were being funneled into their nuclear program.
The Cuban regime is as good as dead without our oil, as I said they propped up the chavista regime, Castro wanted Venezuela since the 70s and allied himself with Chavez to achieve this goal and succeeded. They won't endure without the boon our oil gave them.
Every other leftist government in the hemisphere, which are allied with the regime and oppose the US will also be weakened from this: Colombia, Mexico, Nicaragua, etc.
Came here just to post the same! You all beat me to it.
Those were def drug boats form Tren de Agua. The article Katie cites doesn't mention the actual purpose of the boats much, it looks at fentanyl death stats, which is far, far down the chain of events and not a good way to analyze the question.
They were Tren de Agua boats carrying drugs probably fentanyl but also maybe cocaine in it's liquid form.
Did you see the one with the guy, can't remember his name but he's Venezuelan and has been making the rounds on the Free Press and the Moynihan Report? I found his explanations very telling and provided a lot of context to the situation.
It's a first step of many. This is going to be a process of months if not years even, and we're willing to wait and pay whatever price we have to if it will secure our freedom.
It's justice to us. It ended with Maduro in jail. Those people aren't worth the time of day, they're drug runners for a heinous regime. Blowing them up was a mercy.
There is plenty of legal justification, there are 3 main ones the admin and military has put forward.
If the 'gang' works closely with the government it stops being a law enforcement issue and starts becoming a military one. Essentially it comes down to the fact that the drug gang worked as an arm of a UN recognized government.
Here's Google Gemini's explanation:
The legal justification used by the administration to shift from traditional law enforcement "interdiction" to kinetic military strikes relies on three primary pillars:
1. Declaration of a "Non-International Armed Conflict"
The administration informed Congress in September 2025 that the United States is now in a "non-international armed conflict" (NIAC) with drug cartels and Tren de Aragua.
The Logic: By framing the "War on Drugs" as a literal armed conflict similar to the Global War on Terror, the administration argues that the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) applies rather than domestic law enforcement standards.
Targeting: This allows the military to treat gang members as "unlawful combatants" or military targets who can be neutralized with lethal force (airstrikes) rather than being arrested and afforded due process.
2. Article II Commander-in-Chief Powers
President Trump invoked his authority under Article II of the U.S. Constitution, asserting his inherent power to protect U.S. national security and interests abroad.
The administration characterized the flow of narcotics (specifically cocaine and fentanyl) as an "assault on the American people" and a "national security threat" that justifies a military response to prevent "poison" from reaching U.S. shores.
The War Powers Resolution was also cited in reports to Congress to justify these unilateral strikes without a formal declaration of war.
3. National Self-Defense (Narco-Terrorism)
The administration and Secretary of State Marco Rubio framed the strikes as acts of national self-defense.
By designating Tren de Aragua as "narco-terrorists," the administration argued that the group's activities constitute a hybrid threat of terrorism and organized crime.
They claimed the group works in tandem with the "Maduro regime" in Venezuela to "invade" the U.S. with drugs and criminals, thereby meeting the threshold for defensive military action under the administration's i
lol that's called providing sources...I wrote my thoughts, right there at the top for you, and then provided the info to back it up which was info from gemini, which has it's own sources.
What do Venezuelans think will happen now? It doesn't look like Trump will commit to installing Machado and Delcy Rodriguez is a Maduro loyalist. The Venezuelan military still seems committed to upholding the dictatorship.
The regime still stands, taking out Maduro was simply a first step, a fantastic first step.
The sad reality is that the regime are the ones that know where the bodies are buried (literally). Trump misspoke, as he's wont to do, when it came to MCM, what he meant when he said she doesn't have support is rather that she holds no real power within the country at the moment, even if she has wide popular support, the army isn't loyal to her and she holds no sway over the Colectivos (the regime's paramilitary groups). So putting her in place would rather be detrimental to our cause. It's better to leave the regime in their place for now, boot on their neck, and have them dismantle themselves basically.
Another thing is that part of the reason we are so supportive of MCM is that she never compromised, she never cut deals with the regime, she never gave up the fight and never gave them an inch. So it would be VERY off brand to her to be put into a position where she has to negotiate with them. It's very smart on her part as well how she's played this, even offering Trump her Nobel, as Katie commented.
The truth is this will be a process of months, if not years. It's been 27 years of the destruction of our way of life and our country, the recovery will be slow.
I sincerely hope your optimism is correct. But I don't trust Trump to keep up the pressure (at least if Rodriguez gives him the oil he wants) and the American people don't want to launch a real invasion or occupation of Venezuela.
A real invasion won't be necessary if this continues its course. And believe me, if the US actually invades it will be over quite soon. Consider you guys literally captured the head of the regime, lost no soldiers and killed only 1 civilian. Our army is a joke, they're trained to repress unarmed civilians, not fight wars.
And I don't like Trump more than you do, I just choose to believe what he says, more so I choose to believe what Marco Rubio says.
Even in the worst case scenario: Trump just aligning himself with the regime and getting the oil. It's good for us, because now the regime has no ideological standing, all their anti-imperialist bullshit falls apart, they're subject to the whims of the US when we were already subject to the whims of China and Russia. Not that much changes for us, except that now all those lefties that provided free propaganda for the regime everywhere will be calling them US puppets.
That's nonsensical. If the regime submits to Trump, it will be kept in power by increasing tyranny - that's what happens when puppet governments rule; They are inherently illegitimate and put in place to be run in interests of the controlling power - which means they can only be maintained by force.
If the regime doesn't submit to Trump, the country will be continually destabilised by further attacks.
This first step, if it had been accompanied by the strong message to implement a democratic process and the return of MCM to compete within that process, it could have been.
As it is, it is at best the replacement of domestic kleptocracy with a foreign kleptocracy which is not an improvement by any means.
You're wrong on pretty much everything you said. And it's demonstrable by both what we have seen and what people like MCM and Rubio have stated.
And having the dictator out, the regime with a boot on their neck and the political prisoners being released is a VAST improvement to us.
So please, keep your condescension and attempts to explain the situation about OUR country to yourself, we're not ignorant to what's happening and we fully understand the possible consequences and prices we must pay with what's happening.
Nothing I said relates specifically to your country - it is about the dynamics of political power. Maybe it will turn out your Vice President is some kind of political genius, but the natural outcome of the current situation is not likely to be positive for Venezuelans unless she is.
Dude, our "Vice President" is a fucking demon, she's the head of torture in the country. She's one of the most ideological and radical people in the regime. We want her in prison or dead just as much as Maduro, but seems we'll have to conform ourselves with her being exiled to Russia or similar since the Trump admin has their boot on her neck forcing her to collaborate. They threatened to kill her unless she complied, they threatened all of them, when they should've taken them or executed them on the spot.
I'm telling you you're wrong because you're wrong in every single way you view this situation.
Thor Mendosa's been making the rounds and he pointed out that we have no idea how much and what kind of drugs are being produced in Venezuela. In all other countries, there's cartels and government corruption. But there are government raids, arrests, fields are found, international collaboration to capture cartels.
So we get some idea of the scope and scale of it.
In venezuela, the cartel IS the government. It's in the wide open. What looks like a factory could be a full production cocaine refinement plant. We just don't know.
My concern is that a, it wasn't done in a legal or constitutional way, b, Hegseth is a piece of shit, c, everything that Trump does is done to benefit himself in someway. They are going to put someone in charge of venezuala that will allow Trump and his cronies to benefit from Venezuala's natural resources, which also includes Russia.
Hegseth is so beefed up on HRT and whiskey that god knows what other rash decisions he'll make because that's what real men do! Hell, he probably ok'd the invasion so he'd have a clearer connect to coke.
That to me is what is terrifying - the people overthrowing your dictator are not much better than him, I don't trust any of their motives, and there are no checks and balances to make sure they don't run completely off the rails.
The motives don't matter, because we're aligned on outcomes. I understand your concern, the legality is a little tenuous but there is a legal case that can be constructed.
We're a little concerned about it being Trump that did this, of course. But you guys are definitely way more worried about what he might do than we are. Partly because of what he did and also because the people that were already doing imperialist things to us are way worse.
Was Pepe Mujica particularly aligned with Venezuela? The most I can find about his presidency suggests that he intentionally distanced himself during the campaign from Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales, and then I find little about Uruguay-Venezuela relations from his actual presidency. Just being "leftist" doesn't strike me as the strongest correlate, and in terms of being "propped up" with Venezuelan oil, data suggests that Uruguay's crude oil imports don't come from Venezuela (looks like Brazil, Argentina, Nigeria and the U.S. are the top producer sources for their imports, based on what I find).
We suspect Pepe Mujica was propped up by Chavez as well. You're mistaking that by propping up I mean direct oil imports, it's shadow money, moved even using diplomatic luggage to smuggle it.
From what I've heard, which makes sense both logistically and geographically, the drug boats which do originate out of Venezuela are usually carrying cocaine (likely from Columbia, unless there's a mountainous portion of Venezuela), and mostly heading for Europe, but it's entirely possible also Florida or any other part of the gulf coast.
The logistics of Mexican made drugs being taken to South America or a multi-stage trans-shipment when it's relatively easy to get people and cargo into the USA over land without leaving territory where the Cartels have at least strong influence is the kind of thing that the US Government (or the State of California) might do, but for any organization with an interest in efficiency or expedience it just wouldn't make sense to try it.
i left some other comment below and i was following up and i fucked up somehow. I have troubling typing on substack on my phone. It doesn’t always show me the space i have to type
The quality of your Venezuela explainer makes me wish you covered more serious topics... Seriously, thank you for speaking to actual Venezuelans and not oversimplifying it.
Just don't make it the only one you hear. Ezra Klein's interview of Jonathan Blitzer and the Triggernometry interviews fill in some much needed context.
Thanks! I am married to a Venezuelan academic and proofread his research on Venezuela so already have some context, but I am interested in how the Anglosphere is grappling with this.
After the last decade the doublethink is no longer surprising, but I am curious how progressives attacking Venezuelans for celebrating Maduro's arrest would answer these questions:
1. Is violent repression of political opponents only bad when Trump does it?
2. Is extractivism good, actually?
3. Is rigging elections fine, actually?
4. If Venezuelan migrants are bourgeois, did the ruling class in pre-Chavez Venezuela comprise 20% of the population?
5. Do developing countries have any political agency or unique internal tendencies, or are they just stages on which US politics plays out?
The Triggernometry guys did great bringing Di Martino. But they have a Venezuelan as a cohost so it would be impossible to not get a good opinion on what's happening with them. Ezra on the other hand, I couldn't finish that interview.
Coleman Hughes also had a great interview on how Cuba infiltrated our country.
I *cannot* *believe* that Jesse - Jesse Singal! Of all people! - has a mealymouthed political opinion mostly based on not wanting to be seen as supporting Trump!
I was curious what the solution was in general, in his opinion, regardless of Trump. He couldn't possibly think some abstract people should continue to suffer because those willing to interfere don't have a right to
I googled it and apparently dictator or dictatorship isn't even defined by UN and also there several member of UN who would be considered dictators, if it was defined.
First I would file a Declaration of Intent to Submit an Application for Resolution of Initial Finding on Humanitarian and Climate Impacts with the UN. Next I would…
As a serious answer, the closest thing that comes to mind was the UN body that tried Slobodan Milosevic. Of course it's not a 1:1 parallel as he had already been deposed and was voluntarily handed over by Serbian authorities before being tried.
so you do think it's appropriate for a country to interfere with internal affairs of another sovereign country, as long as their follow their internal lawful process
My biggest problem with Trump is that the executive branch is basically running the entire country and if we make a decision, like to get rid of a leader that can prompt a lot of instability in the region, then we need to involve Congress. it would be helpful if we had the government actually discussing the benefits in the downsides to going into the Venezuela, so there was actual representation from the majority of the country in a decision that involves our resources. Instead, I get all this bullshit propaganda and very little explanation and we’re just seeing this all litigated on Twitter.
i don't know if the honest discussion on that level is even possible with all sides being so partisan. Another thing is, was Trump's action even illegal? I don't know, other presidents seem to have done similar thing before
there has been a long time problem of leaving Congress out of decisions that are warlike. I think some of our instability in this country in the last 20 years has really been related to this executive branch being superpowered, including doing military actions and that includes democrats and republicans.
The partisan thing is a problem because it is true that we don’t know who to trust and we can’t make any decisions as a country and I wish we had anyone other than Trump as a leader just because he’s incredibly divisive and refuses to work with Congress. I don’t know how we change the culture of all of this, but it’s just so damaging because we’re just caught up in partisan warfare and they’re just not helping Americans who they’re supposed to represent
ok but let's say the congress approves. Would you be OK with what happened then? I am just trying to understand if the issue is with the action itself or the way it's done
I value internal US legality equally or more so than "international legality" in this case, largely because the latter has been so bastardized. But our internal US standards should remain high. Not saying this incident was definitely illegal (I don't know), but it is an important standard.
I'm not sure, so I'm not taking a firm position on that yet. I do think it's an issue that if Congress thought it were illegal, they weren't consulted to say so.
Do you think its appropriate to break the laws of your own country just because the country youre acting against considers your actions to be unlawful?
I dont want to be trite here, but two wrongs dont make a right.
Are the people of Venezuela funding US intervention or is the US taxpayer? Should the tax payer, through their elected reps, not get a say?
could you explain "Do you think its appropriate to break the laws of your own country just because the country youre acting against considers your actions to be unlawful?
If - and its a presently debated question - but if the president is required to get authorization from congress to invade a foreign country and capture its dictator, should the president simply ignore such a requirement imposed on him by his own country just because invading another country and capturing a dictator violates THEIR laws?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your original question/response to someone else.
no, i don't think he should ignore that. I don't know if the authorization was required under these circumstances.
My question is not about that, exactly, it's about how should a dictator be removed, theoretically, without some outside force. Isn't it a bit of a catch 22
I would ask, what’s the correct way to do foreign policy? Every country should go around overthrowing the governments of other countries they don’t like?
You should probably have a plan for what to do next with the rest of the regime, although that’s a level of object permanence beyond the cognitive capability of the Trump administration. You’d think it’d take more than 5 years after the fall of Kabul for people to forget that ‘we’ll just get rid of the Bad Guys and everything will turn out great!’ is not a strategy, but here we are.
Your idea of sound foreign policy and military strategy is ‘have some fun, make some noise, kidnap heads of state and leave it to the maid to clean up the aftermath into something that actually serves our national interest’? Jesus wept.
Maduro was negotiating for free passage so he could go into exile in Belarus, I think that would have been better than killing a hundred people but what do I know.
When these people have been repressing, torturing, disappearing and killing you, stealing your resources, forcing you into exile, breaking up families and all around destroying your country for 27 years how would you feel towards them? Do you still think it's cold in that circumstance?
Jesse, if you don't think it matters whether or not they were fishing boats, then stop calling them fishing boats. If it doesn't matter to your argument, and you *also* refuse to address the extremely ridiculous nature of the hypothesis that the US bombed random fishermen, then you can't also casually insert "fishing" in front of every mention of the boats. This is intellectually dishonest.
If you want to say its bad to bomb drug boats, then say its bad to bomb drug boats, you can't have it both ways.
I think they were probably all drug boats, but come on, it's not ridiculous to think the Trump Admin might act on *suspicion* of some of them being drug boats. Especially since they're making no effort to convince us or provide intel/evidence.
Blowing up boats in the Caribbean without providing any information about it is a big deal. A large portion of the naval chain of command is in the know about it. There are a *lot* of boats in the water, and we're targeting very few of them. Every detail points towards this being a precise operation, and you have to do a lot of confabulation to even come up with a scenario in which the intelligence is bad. It's not impossible, but it's very very unlikely.
My argument to Jesse though, is that if your position is that you don't know, then you must, in order to participate in good faith, assume that your opponent is correct about things you are explicitly unwilling to consider. This was purely an epistemic complaint.
That's reasonable. In situations where there isn't dispositive publicly available intel (assuming that is the situation here, as far as I know?) I think it's equally level-headed to say that one doesn't know, without assuming XYZ politicians are being both truthful and correct. I'd assign weight based on their track record of trustworthiness.
we have a not insignificant venezuelan diaspora in metro detroit and they have been all over our local news with their happiness. I have a venezuelan student (grade 6) who was so excited he literally wanted to discuss it in class. I was able to lay out criticisms of the trump admin over the questions of legality and discuss the economic damage that maduro has done to
venezuela. We talked about infant morality rates and ridiculous inflation and how the oil infrastructure was just used and abused. He talked about his relatives and talking to them over the weekend. I teach social studies and this is one of those rare organic teachable moments with young kids where they can literally see impact but also be able to appreciate the complicated questions surrounding it. We were also able to let our friend show his perspective and the kids gave respect and listened. All of them. this is my most difficult hour with known behavior problems. I’m a trump hating shitlib and i get the criticism. I also see the happiness of our community here. Btw it is not hard to lay out positive and negatives and criticisms and open questions without getting opinion of your own
in there. It is very possible to make it easy and accessible for young kids age 11 to appreciate. I used to show pictures of the dramatic weight loss of venezuelans around 2017 because our textbook was so fucking old it was showing that venezuela was a successful country. We got rid of it eventually
and inflation-it was a good lesson and the boy discussed some of
You know, of course not, but consider that that child was born with his country in a dictatorship. I was 12 years old when Chavez took power, and when I was 14, in 2002 after the oil strike, Chavez fired all the striking oil workers, my father included.
By the time I was 16 I had seen my father go a year and change without work, because not only did he fire them they were blackballed from working in their field in the country, Luis Tascón composed a list of all the oil workers that was circulated in the country for this purpose, the famous Lista Tascón. My father fell into a deep depression, we were subsisting because of my mother's dessert business, selling jewellery, our cars, anything of value in order to get the necessities: food and continue me and my younger brother's education in school.
We were an upper middle class family, and we got there due to my father's hard work and my grandmother's hard work, a single mother who raised 3 children on a secretary's salary and managed to put them all through college, a testament not only to her fortitude but also to how prosperous our country was back in the 70s and 80s.
We lost everything over time except our home which luckily we owned, my father managed to find work through friends managing restaurants. But before that he spent almost 2 years unemployed and in a deep depression. His pension was taken, his savings with the company, everything he dedicated 20 years of his life to building.
So you can imagine we as a young teen, and my brother 5 years my junior, witnessing this and how that shaped our worldview. And now think what it means for a kid that was born during the dictatorship, living in it perhaps and seeing that chaos and suffering or living the hardship of immigration through his parents telling him why they had to leave. Children are not dumb, they understand more than we think.
Thank you for your story. Thatcher did something similar to my father. Life is hard.
Your point about Greta makes my point exactly. 11 year olds aren’t truth tellers, they are parrots. There is nothing but schmaltz in using them as examples.
I'm laughing because you think anything Thatcher did is remotely comparable to what we lived. I also laugh at you because of the kind of person you clearly are based on the other thread. You don't care about tyranny, you care about ideology.
these reactions. Just saying the kids were able to understand how bad maduro was for venezuela but also see why some legal experts may call it into question
I'm married to a Cuban woman (Jesse, I'm the guy that just randomly shows up around the world to say hi). And yeah, we were at the Venezuelan celebration in Madrid. It was great. I brought my US flag and literally had 100 people celebrating me as "El Gringo".
And yes, I can say that my very non-white Cuban in-laws are very much in favor of the US intervening. I've been hearing for years complaints that the US doesn't invade, especially as they have a base on the island already. That breaks the head of so many people.
But yeah, we end up in this situation where "what if this extremely good thing was done for nebulous reasons" and frankly, I don't care at this point.
One more point, people really misunderstand the whole "we're taking their oil" part. Trump speaks with all the precision of an imperial stormtrooper, but if you listen to people who are actually running things, they will use the term that the us is "marketing" Venezuelan oil. That's a massive difference, and basically boils down to the fact that PDVSA is the motor of Venezuelan corruption and letting money go through there would just be letting all the worst people have funding.
Something many seem to not understand is that we Venezuelans don't care about the oil, it's just been used to finance our oppression and sold, and even gifted, to heinous regimes to finance their own horrible endeavors. We care more about our lives and freedom than our oil, and we understand that there is a price to pay for those things are and happy to pay it.
The example in the NYT article is an excellent illustration of the problem: if you're not allowed to charge more than $1000 for a studio in an older building, the rent is not going to cover the maintenance. A tenant organizer is going to go after the landlord who is probably in violation of the law, but most tenant organizers are very much for continuing rent control and rent-stabilization. In general they tend to be younger people who don't understand that building maintenance costs money and even more so for an older building that probably has asbestos everywhere and plenty of lead paint.
I thought Jesse's comments in that section are balanced and he understands how rent controls can lead to crumbling buildings. He says that there are bad landlords who really do let their buildings go. I don't think anyone in the world thinks that isn't true. Jesse also says he likes his landlord. I'm not sure where your statement or the venom is coming from.
My landlord is reasonable. There are bad ones. But there are whole communities on Reddit (not surprised) that think landlords should be put to the wall on shot regardless of whether they are good.
For older budlings in bad repair, maintenance can absolutely be the main driver or rent increases sometimes.
The market doesn't value them much because they suck, so that doesn't drive increases, but they might need $5 million in work on their heating plant, or $20 million in work on their elevators. If rent control has lead to maintenance reserves being underfunded and rents so low they don't cover maintenance expenses some of these high ticket items can cause an immediate financial crisis for a building and its owners.
I think a pretty important thing happened yesterday, and few seem to be picking up on it — Little Marco allowed some Venezuelan oil to be sold *in exchange for emptying a prison full of Maduro’s political prisoners.*
The US has the awful government in a straitjacket. I anticipate it’ll remain that way until there’s real free elections and a new government takes over.
On the city protests, the CBS affiliate in DC deserves dishonorable mention. In their afternoon newscast, the field reporter stumbled upon a supportive rally, and interviewed many happy people.
For the night show, go to the Cuban Embassy with Code Pink mourning the guards who died.
Musty smell could possibly be a dead rodent in your walls. Lasts for a couple of weeks depending on the size of the rodent, not much you can do about it but ask your landlord to look for rodent entry points in the basement or attic to prevent recurrence.
Damn - you get there first with it. The description reminded me of when I was a high schooler and a mouse died somewhere under the floorboards but near a radiator. Ewww.
Jesse Jesse Jesse. The most direct thing that led to the woman’s tragic demise was the democratic policy of letting so many undocumented immigrants into the US. So many that many normal people decided to elect trump to fix the border issue. Which he did. Of course the admin is using enforcement as a tool against the liberal cities that allowed and encouraged this. I also think the media and dems riling up their base and supporting excessive disruption of legal enforcement is CRAZY. Moms and people in general should peacefully protest as is their right. But putting your life in danger to block, disrupt and antagonize federal officers is wild. Trumps regime and the officer play a role in this. It will come down to what the officer was trained to do in that situation. If he wasn’t allowed (based on protocols/training) to draw down with a car accelerating at him then he should be charged. But let’s apportion responsibility equally to all involved. I cannot fathom for one second using my car to block law enforcement and then NOT following an order to get out of the car.
Jesse, I think the causation chain for the Minnesota shooting extends past Trump's election in 2024. After all, we didn't see a similar ICE presence during his first term. His policies now are a reaction to Biden's open border policy. If Biden had not been elected in 2020, or if he'd not been so lax, Trump either would not have been reelected or his policies now would be similar to the past.
People who flee a state are going to be against that state shocker. Jesse’s takes all seem to be Jessica’s and her sources are ‘exiles I know’. His take is ‘everyone is glad he’s gone and non-Venezuelans don’t get it’. Which is clear nonsense.
Posts talking of 27 years of hurt obviously ignoring Chavez won massive landslides in 4 elections in that time (2000-2013).
All power structures create winners and losers and the winners will mourn Maduro, the losers will cheer. Each will hope to replace the other. I come from a land where this exact dynamic plays out between Protestant and Catholic.
Yes, Chavez won handily many times, but there were also many irregularities in how those elections went: bribes, extortion, coercion, etc.
Also, how would you feel if people told you that everything happening in your country is ok because "Trump won by a landslide"?
Also bear in mind you said yourself 4 elections, why the hell did he run 4 times? Before Chavez rewrote our Constitution in 99 with his mandate we had no immediate reelection. 1 term and you were out and you could eventually run again but after someone else had been president. He increased the presidential term to 6 years with immediate reelection, to then change it again to allow for public officials of any level to be reelected an indefinite numbers of times. This last thing he held a referendum for, was rejected and then with his grip on all branches of government made it happen anyways.
How would you feel if Trump did the same thing? How would you feel if then people minimized your experience as an American, living under this tyrant, by saying "but he won multiple times by popular demand"? Does it make it right?
And this is just talking about the electoral nature of Chavez.
Secondly it would seem to me that one-term presidents is an inherently unstable situation and likely leads to its own set of manipulation problems as political blocs seek to retain power.
Thirdly the man won 4 elections. His politics -which Trump hates - is incredibly popular across South America - and equally detested by people of your standing - which is fine, that’s democracy. Rewriting the history of leftist populism in South America to say maduro is 27 years of hurt is clear propaganda.
Fourth - nothing I’ve said supports Maduro’s turn to dictatorship.
Fifth -nothing Trump did was about Maduro being a dictator.
That's your answer to what I said? Really? I'm telling you how someone eroded the balance of power to perpetuate themselves in the presidency indefinitely, because they're a tyrant, and you comment on how one term presidents are unstable when we had 40 years of democratic rule with power alternating hands until chavismo came along and barricaded themselves in power? Really?
What's wrong with you? It's not that he's "detested by people of our standing" HE PERSECUTED, IMPRISONED, TORTURED AND MURDERED US. He just died before all the shit he did could come to light so people just remember him in a better light but he is the architect of our destruction. He plundered our country, his daughters are BILLIONAIRES.
Watch this video on our torture center https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI00QRXK6q4 this was created under Chavez' tenure, he was a tyrant, as bad or worse than Maduro, just more charismatic.
You try being online while having foreigners 24/7 in the last few days demean you, insult you, call you a liar, a bot, a CIA asset, a nazi, fascist gusano, denying things you lived in the flesh, denying what this ideology did to your family, your friends, your country.
Better yet, try that for 27 years, and see how well you fare. I took the time to explain to this person everything, I explained how Chavez violated our system to entrench himself in power and their response is just even more ideological drivel.
Luis, the hostile comments are mostly coming from Euro-peons who are taking out their deferred anger towards America on you. It's got little to do with you. I appreciate you taking your time to share your perspective here.
I get along with Alphonse most of the time, but if he gets out of line, report his online harassment to the UK and they'll put him in jail for a 30-day time out. He'll love it and deny that it even happened.
What ideology is that Luis? Do tell. Feel free to quote where I’ve supported Maduro or even Chavez.
Of course you can’t because stating facts about election results isn’t a statement of support. All you have is wild accusations and slurs and insults.if doing that to a stranger on the internet helps you then knock yourself out buddy. I can take it.
I’m honestly shocked by the number of war hawks in the comment section cheering on a blatant breach of international law. Ethics seem to vary a lot depending on whether you stand to make a profit from such a violation or not. And this obvious propagandist doing the rounds, what the hell. I know FdB was having a breakdown when he insulted J&K, but having been absent from this comment section for a while and returning these last few days, I feel like the lefty portion of commenters here has dwindled markedly.
Yeah your comment above says otherwise, and don't excuse it as support for Chavez, Chavez was the architect of every he just left Maduro in his place. So yes, you do support Maduro, because you support Chavez and leftism and Maduro was just the continuation of his project.
I don't think that's what Jesse said at all. I think that whole section of the podcast is about, per usual for BARpod, how people on the internet have different opinions on Maduro's removal, and people responding to the other side both argue that the sentiments of the other side aren't "wrong," they're "fake."
No, to criticise anyone’s position as misrepresentative he has to adopt a standard of what he believes to be the case - which is standard in BARpod - 100s of times Jesse and Katie both say ‘this isn’t what’s happening here’ in any topic.
Jesse’s repeatedly takes the ‘venezuleans are happy he’s gone, non-venezuleans arent’ stance - pro-Maduro protests are even called ‘supposed’ as indicating he believes they are fake.
The real position is that many will be happy he’s gone, many won’t. How that’s even controversial is beyond belief. All tyrants have true believers, pretending otherwise is silly.
You continue showing your bias, like I expressed in other threads. Pro-Maduro protests are a sham. A lot of those people you see manifesting in Venezuela are either paid or coerced to be there, they're still under a brutal dictatorship. Remember also that right now any anti-Maduro or pro-USA manifestation is not allowed in Venezuela, the regime still stands. There's military presence everywhere and they even check people's phones.
And a lot of the time the regime will use footage from older marches, when the regime still held some popularity among the people (even if they still did what I mentioned above), or from when Chavez was still alive.
The true believers of the regime are the ones that are gaining financially from it. Like the high command or those around them, they are people that are living off of the suffering of millions. This isn't to say that you will indeed find some poor soul that truly believes the regime, but they're very few and far between at this point. And those people are incredibly propagandized, basically abused and gaslit into still believing in them.
I am begrudgingly coming around to accepting Trump's view on foreign policy as better. the man might be a liar on many accounts, but he is blatantly transparent on his foreign policy. Venezuela & Cuba have been perennial hemispheric problems for decades now, & where did constant finger waving from the UN get us? We may not be doing it for democracy, but I suppose no one would have believed that either.
I did notice that a few countries in Latin America (Argentina, El Salvador) have come out in favor of the raid. I wasn’t in favor of it, but so far the US government has been acting very cautious, so I’m cautiously optimistic.
I really do like K&J, but I think they’ve become a bit too blinded by their hatred of Trump (and Vance and Elon). And I say this as someone who had six separate opportunities to vote for Trump and chose not to each time. The Somali immigrants comments from this episode are a good example of this—the fraud story seems right up BARPod’s alley, yet they’re ignoring it.
The funny thing is, despite being pretty strongly anti-intervention, I’ve always seen a certain logic in the US military going after the cartels (with the Mexican government’s approval) since the cartels wouldn’t be able to kidnap and blackmail them the way they do Mexican law enforcement. I know it’s something that’s been discussed between the two countries, and Mexico’s president hasn’t officially come out against it.
I was listening to the Not Even Mad podcast and one of the guys said this would lead to a lot of Latin America siding with China. But most other countries in the region were not happy with the Venezuelan government. They were not thrilled about Venezuelan migrants in their own countries. Maduro also was trying to seize part of Guyana. Throw in the drug trafficking destabilizing the entire region and it's not obvious that Latin America would swing towards China. The US is not an ideal partner, but China isn't either.
I saw all this happening re Venezuela/Venezuelans on threads as well. Had to laugh that within a day quite a lot of the American comments (at least, on Venezuelan people’s threads) were about how Americans are the real victims. Rather predictable.
Guys, as a Venezuelan, thank you so much for this. It means a lot, truly, if you're ever in Mexico City, drinks are on me (I’ll get you a joint, Katie).
I'll start by saying that it's very obvious, at least to us, that those were drug boats, how do we know? Because the regime never said anything about them, if just one random fisherman was killed you would have seen them plastered everywhere as the regime deploys its propaganda. Now, I understand the issue of attacking these boats under a false premise, but in the end this was about choking the regime resources which might be equally, if not more at this point, from cocaine and not oil.
I will also add that even though the legality of the entire operation is very tenuous, we had no other choice. Over the last 27 years we have exhausted every democratic option available to us, we protested endlessly, moved mountains to vote the regime out and we failed. There's only so much you can do against a regime that holds all the weapons and it took someone that is rather unpalatable to come and help us be free. It had to come to this because our cries for help were ignored, every leftist government in LATAM is at the very least aligned with the regime and at the most propped up with our oil, as were: Evo Morales in Bolivia, the Kirschner/Fernandez in Argentina, Lula Da Silva in Brazil, Ortega in Nicaragua, Petro in Colombia, Mujica in Uruguay, Correa in Ecuador.
Cuba also aided vastly in the architecture of our regime with their decades long experience in propaganda, counter intelligence and civil repression. Something made very apparent by the fact that about half of Maduro's guards were Cuban soldiers.
Again, thank you, so much.
P.S: happy to answer any questions I’m able to.
Yes, I was very put off by the segment about the boat strikes, which came across as quite condescending. I had watched the Triggernometry episode about this and Francis (whose family is Venezuelan) went into a lot of detail about the drug trade and Maduro’s personal connection to the cartels.
Something that I don’t think enough people are looking at is how the crisis in Venezuela has significantly contributed to the migrant crisis. If living standards improve now that Maduro is out of power, fewer people are going to flee the country. Many expats would also like to return. Marco Rubio has mentioned this in the interviews he’s done this past week, so I definitely think it was at least part of the rationale for removing Maduro.
Your assessment is correct.
And to go deeper, people underestimate just how many repercussions and benefits to the US taking out the regime has. Not only as you say the migrant benefit, but the security benefits Venezuela can provide because of our position to the US.
The toppling of the regime weakens China and Russia, that used our oil and also breaks Russia's heavy crude monopoly since it's the same type of oil Venezuela possesses.
It also weakens Iran, that had Hezbollah presence in our country and I found out today that part of our oil revenues were being funneled into their nuclear program.
The Cuban regime is as good as dead without our oil, as I said they propped up the chavista regime, Castro wanted Venezuela since the 70s and allied himself with Chavez to achieve this goal and succeeded. They won't endure without the boon our oil gave them.
Every other leftist government in the hemisphere, which are allied with the regime and oppose the US will also be weakened from this: Colombia, Mexico, Nicaragua, etc.
The benefits to the US are many.
Came here just to post the same! You all beat me to it.
Those were def drug boats form Tren de Agua. The article Katie cites doesn't mention the actual purpose of the boats much, it looks at fentanyl death stats, which is far, far down the chain of events and not a good way to analyze the question.
They were Tren de Agua boats carrying drugs probably fentanyl but also maybe cocaine in it's liquid form.
Did you see the one with the guy, can't remember his name but he's Venezuelan and has been making the rounds on the Free Press and the Moynihan Report? I found his explanations very telling and provided a lot of context to the situation.
Probably Thor Halvorssen Mendoza.
Most recently on Conversations with Coleman.
Daniel Di Martino was his name I just looked it up.
Check out Mendoza too!
He was the first CEO of FIRE and founder of the HRF (Human Rights Foundation).
I've listened to him on the Fifth Column.
Removing one corrupt asshole at the top isn’t going to save Venezuela.
It's a first step of many. This is going to be a process of months if not years even, and we're willing to wait and pay whatever price we have to if it will secure our freedom.
Don't mind him, he's European.
Even if they were drug boats, that’s not justice. Your identity doesn’t give you authority on that.
It's justice to us. It ended with Maduro in jail. Those people aren't worth the time of day, they're drug runners for a heinous regime. Blowing them up was a mercy.
If that’s your idea of justice, then I worry for the future of your people.
Yes, for regime operatives that is my idea of justice. You care so much about law and justice for people that had zero consideration of that for us.
And don't mistake me, I want rule of law, proper accountability, restored in my country.
You at least need a trial, proof of guilt, and to follow the laws of war, like for example, not executing people that are surrendering.
Lol surrendering, they were speeding away every single time.
Thank you for explaining due process to me, I forget I'm just some backwards brown savage.
There is plenty of legal justification, there are 3 main ones the admin and military has put forward.
If the 'gang' works closely with the government it stops being a law enforcement issue and starts becoming a military one. Essentially it comes down to the fact that the drug gang worked as an arm of a UN recognized government.
Here's Google Gemini's explanation:
The legal justification used by the administration to shift from traditional law enforcement "interdiction" to kinetic military strikes relies on three primary pillars:
1. Declaration of a "Non-International Armed Conflict"
The administration informed Congress in September 2025 that the United States is now in a "non-international armed conflict" (NIAC) with drug cartels and Tren de Aragua.
The Logic: By framing the "War on Drugs" as a literal armed conflict similar to the Global War on Terror, the administration argues that the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) applies rather than domestic law enforcement standards.
Targeting: This allows the military to treat gang members as "unlawful combatants" or military targets who can be neutralized with lethal force (airstrikes) rather than being arrested and afforded due process.
2. Article II Commander-in-Chief Powers
President Trump invoked his authority under Article II of the U.S. Constitution, asserting his inherent power to protect U.S. national security and interests abroad.
The administration characterized the flow of narcotics (specifically cocaine and fentanyl) as an "assault on the American people" and a "national security threat" that justifies a military response to prevent "poison" from reaching U.S. shores.
The War Powers Resolution was also cited in reports to Congress to justify these unilateral strikes without a formal declaration of war.
3. National Self-Defense (Narco-Terrorism)
The administration and Secretary of State Marco Rubio framed the strikes as acts of national self-defense.
By designating Tren de Aragua as "narco-terrorists," the administration argued that the group's activities constitute a hybrid threat of terrorism and organized crime.
They claimed the group works in tandem with the "Maduro regime" in Venezuela to "invade" the U.S. with drugs and criminals, thereby meeting the threshold for defensive military action under the administration's i
Fuck your AI mush.
Not credible. We’ll see how it holds up at The Hague.
You ignored my comments...and It's not mush, it's accurate to what the admin and military claim.
You don't have to agree with it (or like the style) but it is accurate.
I hope you understand the difference between describing something and advocating for it...
I think it's fine to bomb drug gangs working closely with corrupt foreign governments...that's my opinion
You copied it from AI instead of using your brain.
The arguments are nonsense and were already litigated in the 90s. I don’t have time to argue with fascists anymore.
lol that's called providing sources...I wrote my thoughts, right there at the top for you, and then provided the info to back it up which was info from gemini, which has it's own sources.
you're welcome you commie bootlicker
What do Venezuelans think will happen now? It doesn't look like Trump will commit to installing Machado and Delcy Rodriguez is a Maduro loyalist. The Venezuelan military still seems committed to upholding the dictatorship.
The regime still stands, taking out Maduro was simply a first step, a fantastic first step.
The sad reality is that the regime are the ones that know where the bodies are buried (literally). Trump misspoke, as he's wont to do, when it came to MCM, what he meant when he said she doesn't have support is rather that she holds no real power within the country at the moment, even if she has wide popular support, the army isn't loyal to her and she holds no sway over the Colectivos (the regime's paramilitary groups). So putting her in place would rather be detrimental to our cause. It's better to leave the regime in their place for now, boot on their neck, and have them dismantle themselves basically.
Another thing is that part of the reason we are so supportive of MCM is that she never compromised, she never cut deals with the regime, she never gave up the fight and never gave them an inch. So it would be VERY off brand to her to be put into a position where she has to negotiate with them. It's very smart on her part as well how she's played this, even offering Trump her Nobel, as Katie commented.
The truth is this will be a process of months, if not years. It's been 27 years of the destruction of our way of life and our country, the recovery will be slow.
I sincerely hope your optimism is correct. But I don't trust Trump to keep up the pressure (at least if Rodriguez gives him the oil he wants) and the American people don't want to launch a real invasion or occupation of Venezuela.
A real invasion won't be necessary if this continues its course. And believe me, if the US actually invades it will be over quite soon. Consider you guys literally captured the head of the regime, lost no soldiers and killed only 1 civilian. Our army is a joke, they're trained to repress unarmed civilians, not fight wars.
And I don't like Trump more than you do, I just choose to believe what he says, more so I choose to believe what Marco Rubio says.
Even in the worst case scenario: Trump just aligning himself with the regime and getting the oil. It's good for us, because now the regime has no ideological standing, all their anti-imperialist bullshit falls apart, they're subject to the whims of the US when we were already subject to the whims of China and Russia. Not that much changes for us, except that now all those lefties that provided free propaganda for the regime everywhere will be calling them US puppets.
That's nonsensical. If the regime submits to Trump, it will be kept in power by increasing tyranny - that's what happens when puppet governments rule; They are inherently illegitimate and put in place to be run in interests of the controlling power - which means they can only be maintained by force.
If the regime doesn't submit to Trump, the country will be continually destabilised by further attacks.
This first step, if it had been accompanied by the strong message to implement a democratic process and the return of MCM to compete within that process, it could have been.
As it is, it is at best the replacement of domestic kleptocracy with a foreign kleptocracy which is not an improvement by any means.
You're wrong on pretty much everything you said. And it's demonstrable by both what we have seen and what people like MCM and Rubio have stated.
And having the dictator out, the regime with a boot on their neck and the political prisoners being released is a VAST improvement to us.
So please, keep your condescension and attempts to explain the situation about OUR country to yourself, we're not ignorant to what's happening and we fully understand the possible consequences and prices we must pay with what's happening.
Nothing I said relates specifically to your country - it is about the dynamics of political power. Maybe it will turn out your Vice President is some kind of political genius, but the natural outcome of the current situation is not likely to be positive for Venezuelans unless she is.
Dude, our "Vice President" is a fucking demon, she's the head of torture in the country. She's one of the most ideological and radical people in the regime. We want her in prison or dead just as much as Maduro, but seems we'll have to conform ourselves with her being exiled to Russia or similar since the Trump admin has their boot on her neck forcing her to collaborate. They threatened to kill her unless she complied, they threatened all of them, when they should've taken them or executed them on the spot.
I'm telling you you're wrong because you're wrong in every single way you view this situation.
Thor Mendosa's been making the rounds and he pointed out that we have no idea how much and what kind of drugs are being produced in Venezuela. In all other countries, there's cartels and government corruption. But there are government raids, arrests, fields are found, international collaboration to capture cartels.
So we get some idea of the scope and scale of it.
In venezuela, the cartel IS the government. It's in the wide open. What looks like a factory could be a full production cocaine refinement plant. We just don't know.
My concern is that a, it wasn't done in a legal or constitutional way, b, Hegseth is a piece of shit, c, everything that Trump does is done to benefit himself in someway. They are going to put someone in charge of venezuala that will allow Trump and his cronies to benefit from Venezuala's natural resources, which also includes Russia.
Hegseth is so beefed up on HRT and whiskey that god knows what other rash decisions he'll make because that's what real men do! Hell, he probably ok'd the invasion so he'd have a clearer connect to coke.
That to me is what is terrifying - the people overthrowing your dictator are not much better than him, I don't trust any of their motives, and there are no checks and balances to make sure they don't run completely off the rails.
The motives don't matter, because we're aligned on outcomes. I understand your concern, the legality is a little tenuous but there is a legal case that can be constructed.
We're a little concerned about it being Trump that did this, of course. But you guys are definitely way more worried about what he might do than we are. Partly because of what he did and also because the people that were already doing imperialist things to us are way worse.
Was Pepe Mujica particularly aligned with Venezuela? The most I can find about his presidency suggests that he intentionally distanced himself during the campaign from Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales, and then I find little about Uruguay-Venezuela relations from his actual presidency. Just being "leftist" doesn't strike me as the strongest correlate, and in terms of being "propped up" with Venezuelan oil, data suggests that Uruguay's crude oil imports don't come from Venezuela (looks like Brazil, Argentina, Nigeria and the U.S. are the top producer sources for their imports, based on what I find).
We suspect Pepe Mujica was propped up by Chavez as well. You're mistaking that by propping up I mean direct oil imports, it's shadow money, moved even using diplomatic luggage to smuggle it.
We knew this for years but it recently came out in cases like Hugo Carvajal's (former Venezuelan intelligence chief) https://www.infobae.com/venezuela/2025/10/17/desde-lula-da-silva-a-los-kirchner-y-petro-el-pollo-carvajal-revelo-como-el-chavismo-financio-a-la-izquierda-latinoamericana/
https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2008/sep/21/usa.venezuela
There's nothing definitive about Mujica, but there is smoke and we Venezuelans suspect it. Even with how he put distance between himself and Chavez.
https://www.diariolasamericas.com/america-latina/piden-se-investiguen-negocios-del-expresidente-jose-mujica-venezuela-n4121242
Fuerza pana! Comeré una arepa para ti!
Vaya, mi rey, va a saber mejor esta vez.
From what I've heard, which makes sense both logistically and geographically, the drug boats which do originate out of Venezuela are usually carrying cocaine (likely from Columbia, unless there's a mountainous portion of Venezuela), and mostly heading for Europe, but it's entirely possible also Florida or any other part of the gulf coast.
The logistics of Mexican made drugs being taken to South America or a multi-stage trans-shipment when it's relatively easy to get people and cargo into the USA over land without leaving territory where the Cartels have at least strong influence is the kind of thing that the US Government (or the State of California) might do, but for any organization with an interest in efficiency or expedience it just wouldn't make sense to try it.
Not sure what you’re referring to, my friend.
i left some other comment below and i was following up and i fucked up somehow. I have troubling typing on substack on my phone. It doesn’t always show me the space i have to type
The quality of your Venezuela explainer makes me wish you covered more serious topics... Seriously, thank you for speaking to actual Venezuelans and not oversimplifying it.
Katie saying someone needs to tell BLM's founders that home ownership is a tool of white oppression is why I subscribe to this podcast.
One problem, Katie was dead wrong on the boat strikes...those were gang members using fishing boats and it's not in question.
They were Tren de Agua boats, Tren de Agua works as an arm of the Venezuelan government, which is still in power even if Maduro is gone.
Just don't make it the only one you hear. Ezra Klein's interview of Jonathan Blitzer and the Triggernometry interviews fill in some much needed context.
Thanks! I am married to a Venezuelan academic and proofread his research on Venezuela so already have some context, but I am interested in how the Anglosphere is grappling with this.
After the last decade the doublethink is no longer surprising, but I am curious how progressives attacking Venezuelans for celebrating Maduro's arrest would answer these questions:
1. Is violent repression of political opponents only bad when Trump does it?
2. Is extractivism good, actually?
3. Is rigging elections fine, actually?
4. If Venezuelan migrants are bourgeois, did the ruling class in pre-Chavez Venezuela comprise 20% of the population?
5. Do developing countries have any political agency or unique internal tendencies, or are they just stages on which US politics plays out?
The answers are what you'd expect them to be.
The Triggernometry guys did great bringing Di Martino. But they have a Venezuelan as a cohost so it would be impossible to not get a good opinion on what's happening with them. Ezra on the other hand, I couldn't finish that interview.
Coleman Hughes also had a great interview on how Cuba infiltrated our country.
Jesse: I hope California doesn't have gas leaks
PG&E: hold my infrastructure
I am curious what Jesse thinks is the correct way to overthrow dictator
I *cannot* *believe* that Jesse - Jesse Singal! Of all people! - has a mealymouthed political opinion mostly based on not wanting to be seen as supporting Trump!
I was curious what the solution was in general, in his opinion, regardless of Trump. He couldn't possibly think some abstract people should continue to suffer because those willing to interfere don't have a right to
Without a false word, harming no innocent soul, and with solemn reverence for the sacredness of the international legal order. That’s how I’d do it.
I googled it and apparently dictator or dictatorship isn't even defined by UN and also there several member of UN who would be considered dictators, if it was defined.
What is the international order for removing a dictator?
First I would file a Declaration of Intent to Submit an Application for Resolution of Initial Finding on Humanitarian and Climate Impacts with the UN. Next I would…
Lol
As a serious answer, the closest thing that comes to mind was the UN body that tried Slobodan Milosevic. Of course it's not a 1:1 parallel as he had already been deposed and was voluntarily handed over by Serbian authorities before being tried.
NATO intervened way before the trial
Exactly. The correct way is to step in once the dictator has been overthrown and take credit for bringing him to justice.
Miloshevich was a war criminal
Challenging him to a duel playing "Slay the Spire."
Unfortunately many resort to what can best be described as bureaucratic moralizing. In the end nothing can be done about most problems.
maybe like involving Congress and his decisions would help
so you do think it's appropriate for a country to interfere with internal affairs of another sovereign country, as long as their follow their internal lawful process
My biggest problem with Trump is that the executive branch is basically running the entire country and if we make a decision, like to get rid of a leader that can prompt a lot of instability in the region, then we need to involve Congress. it would be helpful if we had the government actually discussing the benefits in the downsides to going into the Venezuela, so there was actual representation from the majority of the country in a decision that involves our resources. Instead, I get all this bullshit propaganda and very little explanation and we’re just seeing this all litigated on Twitter.
i don't know if the honest discussion on that level is even possible with all sides being so partisan. Another thing is, was Trump's action even illegal? I don't know, other presidents seem to have done similar thing before
there has been a long time problem of leaving Congress out of decisions that are warlike. I think some of our instability in this country in the last 20 years has really been related to this executive branch being superpowered, including doing military actions and that includes democrats and republicans.
The partisan thing is a problem because it is true that we don’t know who to trust and we can’t make any decisions as a country and I wish we had anyone other than Trump as a leader just because he’s incredibly divisive and refuses to work with Congress. I don’t know how we change the culture of all of this, but it’s just so damaging because we’re just caught up in partisan warfare and they’re just not helping Americans who they’re supposed to represent
ok but let's say the congress approves. Would you be OK with what happened then? I am just trying to understand if the issue is with the action itself or the way it's done
I value internal US legality equally or more so than "international legality" in this case, largely because the latter has been so bastardized. But our internal US standards should remain high. Not saying this incident was definitely illegal (I don't know), but it is an important standard.
Do we know for sure if what Trump did was illegal?
I'm not sure, so I'm not taking a firm position on that yet. I do think it's an issue that if Congress thought it were illegal, they weren't consulted to say so.
I'm butting in here, but....yes. 100%
Here's the inverse for you to consider:
Do you think its appropriate to break the laws of your own country just because the country youre acting against considers your actions to be unlawful?
I dont want to be trite here, but two wrongs dont make a right.
Are the people of Venezuela funding US intervention or is the US taxpayer? Should the tax payer, through their elected reps, not get a say?
could you explain "Do you think its appropriate to break the laws of your own country just because the country youre acting against considers your actions to be unlawful?
If - and its a presently debated question - but if the president is required to get authorization from congress to invade a foreign country and capture its dictator, should the president simply ignore such a requirement imposed on him by his own country just because invading another country and capturing a dictator violates THEIR laws?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your original question/response to someone else.
no, i don't think he should ignore that. I don't know if the authorization was required under these circumstances.
My question is not about that, exactly, it's about how should a dictator be removed, theoretically, without some outside force. Isn't it a bit of a catch 22
I would ask, what’s the correct way to do foreign policy? Every country should go around overthrowing the governments of other countries they don’t like?
Idk, you tell me
I’d say, no that principle won’t fly. Some kind of system of international law with universal rules to prevent chaos. Your turn.
Is there a system in place now?
Yes, Socrates, there is. Maybe you could comment on it.
i don't understand. I am asking if there is an international law currently in place to handle these things
I could probably benefit from reading Jesse's twitter because of how low my blood pressure usually is
You should probably have a plan for what to do next with the rest of the regime, although that’s a level of object permanence beyond the cognitive capability of the Trump administration. You’d think it’d take more than 5 years after the fall of Kabul for people to forget that ‘we’ll just get rid of the Bad Guys and everything will turn out great!’ is not a strategy, but here we are.
Comparing Venezuela to Afghanistan is a bit of a stretch. Yes, they are both countries...
I think it's actually fairly debatable whether Afghanistan is a country.
It is probably a place.
Probably. This is something international orgs should be helping with
Your idea of sound foreign policy and military strategy is ‘have some fun, make some noise, kidnap heads of state and leave it to the maid to clean up the aftermath into something that actually serves our national interest’? Jesus wept.
I don't think I ever said what my idea of foreign policy and military strategy was
Maduro was negotiating for free passage so he could go into exile in Belarus, I think that would have been better than killing a hundred people but what do I know.
Venezuelan and Cuban soldiers defending the dictator don’t count as people though.
Only one civilian, regrettably, died in the operation.
That's cold
When these people have been repressing, torturing, disappearing and killing you, stealing your resources, forcing you into exile, breaking up families and all around destroying your country for 27 years how would you feel towards them? Do you still think it's cold in that circumstance?
Not if it were those specific people, who were torturing, no
All Venezuelan soldiers are part of this apparatus, and the Cubans even more. And how loyal to the regime you think you have to be to guard Maduro?
Now why would he ever want to go into exile, Slob
Jesse, if you don't think it matters whether or not they were fishing boats, then stop calling them fishing boats. If it doesn't matter to your argument, and you *also* refuse to address the extremely ridiculous nature of the hypothesis that the US bombed random fishermen, then you can't also casually insert "fishing" in front of every mention of the boats. This is intellectually dishonest.
If you want to say its bad to bomb drug boats, then say its bad to bomb drug boats, you can't have it both ways.
They also never said why they think the US would want to bomb Venezuelan boats if they weren’t transporting drugs.
I think they were probably all drug boats, but come on, it's not ridiculous to think the Trump Admin might act on *suspicion* of some of them being drug boats. Especially since they're making no effort to convince us or provide intel/evidence.
I think that's roughly what I said, but you said it better.
Do we (the American people) know at this point they were all drug boats? Genuine question. Not trying to imply "fishing boats" is defensible.
Blowing up boats in the Caribbean without providing any information about it is a big deal. A large portion of the naval chain of command is in the know about it. There are a *lot* of boats in the water, and we're targeting very few of them. Every detail points towards this being a precise operation, and you have to do a lot of confabulation to even come up with a scenario in which the intelligence is bad. It's not impossible, but it's very very unlikely.
My argument to Jesse though, is that if your position is that you don't know, then you must, in order to participate in good faith, assume that your opponent is correct about things you are explicitly unwilling to consider. This was purely an epistemic complaint.
That's reasonable. In situations where there isn't dispositive publicly available intel (assuming that is the situation here, as far as I know?) I think it's equally level-headed to say that one doesn't know, without assuming XYZ politicians are being both truthful and correct. I'd assign weight based on their track record of trustworthiness.
we have a not insignificant venezuelan diaspora in metro detroit and they have been all over our local news with their happiness. I have a venezuelan student (grade 6) who was so excited he literally wanted to discuss it in class. I was able to lay out criticisms of the trump admin over the questions of legality and discuss the economic damage that maduro has done to
venezuela. We talked about infant morality rates and ridiculous inflation and how the oil infrastructure was just used and abused. He talked about his relatives and talking to them over the weekend. I teach social studies and this is one of those rare organic teachable moments with young kids where they can literally see impact but also be able to appreciate the complicated questions surrounding it. We were also able to let our friend show his perspective and the kids gave respect and listened. All of them. this is my most difficult hour with known behavior problems. I’m a trump hating shitlib and i get the criticism. I also see the happiness of our community here. Btw it is not hard to lay out positive and negatives and criticisms and open questions without getting opinion of your own
in there. It is very possible to make it easy and accessible for young kids age 11 to appreciate. I used to show pictures of the dramatic weight loss of venezuelans around 2017 because our textbook was so fucking old it was showing that venezuela was a successful country. We got rid of it eventually
and inflation-it was a good lesson and the boy discussed some of
And do we think this 11 year old’s views on Venezuelan politics are his own?
Of course not.
Shit if it was Greta at 11 this forum would be frothing at the mouth with contempt.
You know, of course not, but consider that that child was born with his country in a dictatorship. I was 12 years old when Chavez took power, and when I was 14, in 2002 after the oil strike, Chavez fired all the striking oil workers, my father included.
By the time I was 16 I had seen my father go a year and change without work, because not only did he fire them they were blackballed from working in their field in the country, Luis Tascón composed a list of all the oil workers that was circulated in the country for this purpose, the famous Lista Tascón. My father fell into a deep depression, we were subsisting because of my mother's dessert business, selling jewellery, our cars, anything of value in order to get the necessities: food and continue me and my younger brother's education in school.
We were an upper middle class family, and we got there due to my father's hard work and my grandmother's hard work, a single mother who raised 3 children on a secretary's salary and managed to put them all through college, a testament not only to her fortitude but also to how prosperous our country was back in the 70s and 80s.
We lost everything over time except our home which luckily we owned, my father managed to find work through friends managing restaurants. But before that he spent almost 2 years unemployed and in a deep depression. His pension was taken, his savings with the company, everything he dedicated 20 years of his life to building.
So you can imagine we as a young teen, and my brother 5 years my junior, witnessing this and how that shaped our worldview. And now think what it means for a kid that was born during the dictatorship, living in it perhaps and seeing that chaos and suffering or living the hardship of immigration through his parents telling him why they had to leave. Children are not dumb, they understand more than we think.
P.S: Greta is a dumbass.
Thank you for your story. Thatcher did something similar to my father. Life is hard.
Your point about Greta makes my point exactly. 11 year olds aren’t truth tellers, they are parrots. There is nothing but schmaltz in using them as examples.
Lol. Lmao even.
Funny how I thank you for your story and you laugh at me. Telling.
I'm laughing because you think anything Thatcher did is remotely comparable to what we lived. I also laugh at you because of the kind of person you clearly are based on the other thread. You don't care about tyranny, you care about ideology.
they absolutely reflect those of his community -parents and relatives. Not sure what you mean about greta at 11
these reactions. Just saying the kids were able to understand how bad maduro was for venezuela but also see why some legal experts may call it into question
oh yeah and we also discussed how he refused to leave after elections
I'm married to a Cuban woman (Jesse, I'm the guy that just randomly shows up around the world to say hi). And yeah, we were at the Venezuelan celebration in Madrid. It was great. I brought my US flag and literally had 100 people celebrating me as "El Gringo".
And yes, I can say that my very non-white Cuban in-laws are very much in favor of the US intervening. I've been hearing for years complaints that the US doesn't invade, especially as they have a base on the island already. That breaks the head of so many people.
But yeah, we end up in this situation where "what if this extremely good thing was done for nebulous reasons" and frankly, I don't care at this point.
One more point, people really misunderstand the whole "we're taking their oil" part. Trump speaks with all the precision of an imperial stormtrooper, but if you listen to people who are actually running things, they will use the term that the us is "marketing" Venezuelan oil. That's a massive difference, and basically boils down to the fact that PDVSA is the motor of Venezuelan corruption and letting money go through there would just be letting all the worst people have funding.
Something many seem to not understand is that we Venezuelans don't care about the oil, it's just been used to finance our oppression and sold, and even gifted, to heinous regimes to finance their own horrible endeavors. We care more about our lives and freedom than our oil, and we understand that there is a price to pay for those things are and happy to pay it.
Jesse - "crumbling rent stabilized building" And why might that be? Maybe costs are higher than revenue Einstein?
The example in the NYT article is an excellent illustration of the problem: if you're not allowed to charge more than $1000 for a studio in an older building, the rent is not going to cover the maintenance. A tenant organizer is going to go after the landlord who is probably in violation of the law, but most tenant organizers are very much for continuing rent control and rent-stabilization. In general they tend to be younger people who don't understand that building maintenance costs money and even more so for an older building that probably has asbestos everywhere and plenty of lead paint.
I thought Jesse's comments in that section are balanced and he understands how rent controls can lead to crumbling buildings. He says that there are bad landlords who really do let their buildings go. I don't think anyone in the world thinks that isn't true. Jesse also says he likes his landlord. I'm not sure where your statement or the venom is coming from.
I'm sure he does but that statement without pause was, well, illustrative in a freudian slip kinda way I think. BTW, Love you Jesse.
My landlord is reasonable. There are bad ones. But there are whole communities on Reddit (not surprised) that think landlords should be put to the wall on shot regardless of whether they are good.
What do you think is the main driver of rent increases: rising maintenance costs, or demand for housing?
For older budlings in bad repair, maintenance can absolutely be the main driver or rent increases sometimes.
The market doesn't value them much because they suck, so that doesn't drive increases, but they might need $5 million in work on their heating plant, or $20 million in work on their elevators. If rent control has lead to maintenance reserves being underfunded and rents so low they don't cover maintenance expenses some of these high ticket items can cause an immediate financial crisis for a building and its owners.
greed
This is just beyond silly. Everyone is greedy.
It as a shockingly dumb section of the podcast. Paraphrasing:
"These people have a lot of pretty extreme views and are very pro rent control"
"And look they have a point, there are examples of rent control buildings that are practically falling apart where the owners are going bankrupt"
Ummm that is the opposite of evidence their approach works. It is evidence it doesn't work.
I think a pretty important thing happened yesterday, and few seem to be picking up on it — Little Marco allowed some Venezuelan oil to be sold *in exchange for emptying a prison full of Maduro’s political prisoners.*
The US has the awful government in a straitjacket. I anticipate it’ll remain that way until there’s real free elections and a new government takes over.
On the city protests, the CBS affiliate in DC deserves dishonorable mention. In their afternoon newscast, the field reporter stumbled upon a supportive rally, and interviewed many happy people.
For the night show, go to the Cuban Embassy with Code Pink mourning the guards who died.
Musty smell could possibly be a dead rodent in your walls. Lasts for a couple of weeks depending on the size of the rodent, not much you can do about it but ask your landlord to look for rodent entry points in the basement or attic to prevent recurrence.
There's many dead pigeons.
Don’t ask my how I know this but dead pigeons smell different. I think is the fur vs feathers.
Damn - you get there first with it. The description reminded me of when I was a high schooler and a mouse died somewhere under the floorboards but near a radiator. Ewww.
Jesse Jesse Jesse. The most direct thing that led to the woman’s tragic demise was the democratic policy of letting so many undocumented immigrants into the US. So many that many normal people decided to elect trump to fix the border issue. Which he did. Of course the admin is using enforcement as a tool against the liberal cities that allowed and encouraged this. I also think the media and dems riling up their base and supporting excessive disruption of legal enforcement is CRAZY. Moms and people in general should peacefully protest as is their right. But putting your life in danger to block, disrupt and antagonize federal officers is wild. Trumps regime and the officer play a role in this. It will come down to what the officer was trained to do in that situation. If he wasn’t allowed (based on protocols/training) to draw down with a car accelerating at him then he should be charged. But let’s apportion responsibility equally to all involved. I cannot fathom for one second using my car to block law enforcement and then NOT following an order to get out of the car.
Jesse, I think the causation chain for the Minnesota shooting extends past Trump's election in 2024. After all, we didn't see a similar ICE presence during his first term. His policies now are a reaction to Biden's open border policy. If Biden had not been elected in 2020, or if he'd not been so lax, Trump either would not have been reelected or his policies now would be similar to the past.
People who flee a state are going to be against that state shocker. Jesse’s takes all seem to be Jessica’s and her sources are ‘exiles I know’. His take is ‘everyone is glad he’s gone and non-Venezuelans don’t get it’. Which is clear nonsense.
Posts talking of 27 years of hurt obviously ignoring Chavez won massive landslides in 4 elections in that time (2000-2013).
All power structures create winners and losers and the winners will mourn Maduro, the losers will cheer. Each will hope to replace the other. I come from a land where this exact dynamic plays out between Protestant and Catholic.
Yes, Chavez won handily many times, but there were also many irregularities in how those elections went: bribes, extortion, coercion, etc.
Also, how would you feel if people told you that everything happening in your country is ok because "Trump won by a landslide"?
Also bear in mind you said yourself 4 elections, why the hell did he run 4 times? Before Chavez rewrote our Constitution in 99 with his mandate we had no immediate reelection. 1 term and you were out and you could eventually run again but after someone else had been president. He increased the presidential term to 6 years with immediate reelection, to then change it again to allow for public officials of any level to be reelected an indefinite numbers of times. This last thing he held a referendum for, was rejected and then with his grip on all branches of government made it happen anyways.
How would you feel if Trump did the same thing? How would you feel if then people minimized your experience as an American, living under this tyrant, by saying "but he won multiple times by popular demand"? Does it make it right?
And this is just talking about the electoral nature of Chavez.
First of all I thankfully am not an American.
Secondly it would seem to me that one-term presidents is an inherently unstable situation and likely leads to its own set of manipulation problems as political blocs seek to retain power.
Thirdly the man won 4 elections. His politics -which Trump hates - is incredibly popular across South America - and equally detested by people of your standing - which is fine, that’s democracy. Rewriting the history of leftist populism in South America to say maduro is 27 years of hurt is clear propaganda.
Fourth - nothing I’ve said supports Maduro’s turn to dictatorship.
Fifth -nothing Trump did was about Maduro being a dictator.
That's your answer to what I said? Really? I'm telling you how someone eroded the balance of power to perpetuate themselves in the presidency indefinitely, because they're a tyrant, and you comment on how one term presidents are unstable when we had 40 years of democratic rule with power alternating hands until chavismo came along and barricaded themselves in power? Really?
What's wrong with you? It's not that he's "detested by people of our standing" HE PERSECUTED, IMPRISONED, TORTURED AND MURDERED US. He just died before all the shit he did could come to light so people just remember him in a better light but he is the architect of our destruction. He plundered our country, his daughters are BILLIONAIRES.
Watch this video on our torture center https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI00QRXK6q4 this was created under Chavez' tenure, he was a tyrant, as bad or worse than Maduro, just more charismatic.
Also, fuck off.
You started off strong on this thread, but you’ve devolved into a frothing nut. Maybe should have quit while you were ahead.
You try being online while having foreigners 24/7 in the last few days demean you, insult you, call you a liar, a bot, a CIA asset, a nazi, fascist gusano, denying things you lived in the flesh, denying what this ideology did to your family, your friends, your country.
Better yet, try that for 27 years, and see how well you fare. I took the time to explain to this person everything, I explained how Chavez violated our system to entrench himself in power and their response is just even more ideological drivel.
So yes, it infuriates me.
Luis, the hostile comments are mostly coming from Euro-peons who are taking out their deferred anger towards America on you. It's got little to do with you. I appreciate you taking your time to share your perspective here.
I get along with Alphonse most of the time, but if he gets out of line, report his online harassment to the UK and they'll put him in jail for a 30-day time out. He'll love it and deny that it even happened.
Don’t worry, Alphonse does this to everyone. Just remind him that the UK arrests people for tweeting and you’ll be fine.
Mature
More than you that can't even look beyond your own ideology.
What ideology is that Luis? Do tell. Feel free to quote where I’ve supported Maduro or even Chavez.
Of course you can’t because stating facts about election results isn’t a statement of support. All you have is wild accusations and slurs and insults.if doing that to a stranger on the internet helps you then knock yourself out buddy. I can take it.
> Also, how would you feel if people told you that everything happening in your country is ok because "Trump won by a landslide"?
I’d feel the way I always feel when I check the BaRPod comments section.
It's my first time here.
I’m honestly shocked by the number of war hawks in the comment section cheering on a blatant breach of international law. Ethics seem to vary a lot depending on whether you stand to make a profit from such a violation or not. And this obvious propagandist doing the rounds, what the hell. I know FdB was having a breakdown when he insulted J&K, but having been absent from this comment section for a while and returning these last few days, I feel like the lefty portion of commenters here has dwindled markedly.
Do you believe that Maduro won the most recent election?
I nothing I’ve said indicates the slightest support for Maduro.
Yeah your comment above says otherwise, and don't excuse it as support for Chavez, Chavez was the architect of every he just left Maduro in his place. So yes, you do support Maduro, because you support Chavez and leftism and Maduro was just the continuation of his project.
Typical right-wing nonsense.
I'm not right wing, I'm a liberal person. And you have shown your true colors, just like every lefty that defends the regime.
Sure buddy. More projection.
I don't think that's what Jesse said at all. I think that whole section of the podcast is about, per usual for BARpod, how people on the internet have different opinions on Maduro's removal, and people responding to the other side both argue that the sentiments of the other side aren't "wrong," they're "fake."
No, to criticise anyone’s position as misrepresentative he has to adopt a standard of what he believes to be the case - which is standard in BARpod - 100s of times Jesse and Katie both say ‘this isn’t what’s happening here’ in any topic.
Jesse’s repeatedly takes the ‘venezuleans are happy he’s gone, non-venezuleans arent’ stance - pro-Maduro protests are even called ‘supposed’ as indicating he believes they are fake.
The real position is that many will be happy he’s gone, many won’t. How that’s even controversial is beyond belief. All tyrants have true believers, pretending otherwise is silly.
You continue showing your bias, like I expressed in other threads. Pro-Maduro protests are a sham. A lot of those people you see manifesting in Venezuela are either paid or coerced to be there, they're still under a brutal dictatorship. Remember also that right now any anti-Maduro or pro-USA manifestation is not allowed in Venezuela, the regime still stands. There's military presence everywhere and they even check people's phones.
And a lot of the time the regime will use footage from older marches, when the regime still held some popularity among the people (even if they still did what I mentioned above), or from when Chavez was still alive.
The true believers of the regime are the ones that are gaining financially from it. Like the high command or those around them, they are people that are living off of the suffering of millions. This isn't to say that you will indeed find some poor soul that truly believes the regime, but they're very few and far between at this point. And those people are incredibly propagandized, basically abused and gaslit into still believing in them.
Just like the halcyon days of Twitter and good whites yelling at brown people and calling them fascists, we are so back!
I am begrudgingly coming around to accepting Trump's view on foreign policy as better. the man might be a liar on many accounts, but he is blatantly transparent on his foreign policy. Venezuela & Cuba have been perennial hemispheric problems for decades now, & where did constant finger waving from the UN get us? We may not be doing it for democracy, but I suppose no one would have believed that either.
I did notice that a few countries in Latin America (Argentina, El Salvador) have come out in favor of the raid. I wasn’t in favor of it, but so far the US government has been acting very cautious, so I’m cautiously optimistic.
I really do like K&J, but I think they’ve become a bit too blinded by their hatred of Trump (and Vance and Elon). And I say this as someone who had six separate opportunities to vote for Trump and chose not to each time. The Somali immigrants comments from this episode are a good example of this—the fraud story seems right up BARPod’s alley, yet they’re ignoring it.
The funny thing is, despite being pretty strongly anti-intervention, I’ve always seen a certain logic in the US military going after the cartels (with the Mexican government’s approval) since the cartels wouldn’t be able to kidnap and blackmail them the way they do Mexican law enforcement. I know it’s something that’s been discussed between the two countries, and Mexico’s president hasn’t officially come out against it.
I was listening to the Not Even Mad podcast and one of the guys said this would lead to a lot of Latin America siding with China. But most other countries in the region were not happy with the Venezuelan government. They were not thrilled about Venezuelan migrants in their own countries. Maduro also was trying to seize part of Guyana. Throw in the drug trafficking destabilizing the entire region and it's not obvious that Latin America would swing towards China. The US is not an ideal partner, but China isn't either.
>six separate opportunities to vote for Trump
Were you and he on survivor together or are you admitting to voter fraud?
No, I’m talking about the primaries. Three elections, one primary and one general each.
Ah, right. I forgot about those. (I was also just jokingly trying to figure out what I was forgetting)
I saw all this happening re Venezuela/Venezuelans on threads as well. Had to laugh that within a day quite a lot of the American comments (at least, on Venezuelan people’s threads) were about how Americans are the real victims. Rather predictable.
Threads has a really aggressive algorithm though so for every post I opened to see comments, I saw seven more.