Trump’s Alex Pretti Problem Just Got Worse. New Video Sparks Pre-Meditated Murder Concerns
PDS Published 01/29/2026
-
We’ve gotta talk about this new Alex Pretti video, not from the moment he was killed, but 11 days earlier, on January 13.
Right, it was apparently during a protest just four blocks from the spot where Renee Good was killed a week prior, and Pretti’s family has confirmed that it’s him in this video. [B roll, 00:00 - 00:06]
You hear cars honking and whistles screaming, then what sounds like Pretti yelling at agents in an unmarked vehicle.
[Clip, 00:01 - 00:14]
With him eventually seen spitting on and then kicking its tail light as its about to move away, and with the second kick you hear it shatter. [B roll, 00:06]
At which point a heavily armed agent in tactical gear gets out of the car and tackles Pretti to the ground, where several more agents piled on as well. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:47 - 00:54]
With other agents firing tear gas and pepper balls into the surrounding crowd, who’s shouting at them. [B roll, 00:57]
And then, after a brief scuffle, Pretti apparently breaks free from the agents, then stands there as they get back in their car and leave without trying to apprehend him again. [Same B roll, 01:04]
And in the process of escaping, his jacket apparently came off, exposing what looks like a gun in his waistband. [Same B roll, 01:17]
Now it’s not clear whether this was the same incident, but sources previously told CNN that about a week before his death, Pretti suffered a broken rib when a group of federal officers tackled him while he was protesting their attempt to detain other individuals. [Quote, find “tackled”]
With the outlet citing records that seem to corroborate the story, showing that he received medication consistent with treating a broken rib. [Quote same link, find “medication”]
And in a quote that’s just chilling given what would happen to him days later, a source said that during this earlier encounter, Pretti “thought he was going to die.” [Quote same link]
Now in the wake of this latest video, a lawyer for Pretti’s family said, “A week before Alex was gunned down in the street – despite posing no threat to anyone – he was violently assaulted by a group of ICE agents. Nothing that happened a full week before could possibly have justified Alex’s killing.” [Quote]
And reactions from the left were similar, with many saying that whether or not he kicked a taillight 11 days earlier is totally irrelevant to his later execution by the state. [B roll, 00:33]
Some arguing that if anything, this video exonerates him even more, because he never appears to go for his gun during this altercation either. [B roll]
But from the right, this feels like vindication, with the likes of Megyn Kelly commenting: [B roll]
“Alex Pretti was itching for another confrontation with Border Patrol, whom he’d been stalking, harassing and terrorizing. HE had been victimizing THEM. His felonies are on tape. He was reckless, and it cost him his life. Find another poster boy, illegal-loving Leftists.” [Same B roll and Post]
You also have Alex Jones calling Pretti’s actions “a case of extreme ICE Derailment Syndrome,” adding, “Just imagine how many other attacks he carried out that were not caught on tape?” [B roll and Post]
And then our president Donald Trump reposted another user’s caption of the video that reads: “This wasn’t some ‘peaceful protester.’ He was a domestic terrorist!” [B roll] []
So yeah, I guess all of the backtracking this week from White House officials on their initial statements about Pretti being a terrorist assassin looking to massacre agents was for nothing, because now the president’s apparently on board with it.
Meanwhile, Trump still hasn’t condemned the attack on Ilhan Omar Tuesday, nor has he apologized for suggesting that she staged the whole thing.
Speaking of which, forensic examiners determined with high probability that the liquid in the attacker’s syringe was apple cider vinegar — which, you know, odd choice, but okay.
But even if Trump’s moved on from this, Omar hasn’t, and she said last night that every time her name leaves his mouth, death threats against her “skyrocket.” [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 02:19 - 02:34; Clip, 01:07 - 01:21, 01:24 - 01:33] Caption: “I wouldn’t be where I am at today, having to pay for security, having the government to think about providing me security, if Donald Trump wasn’t in office and if he wasn’t so obsessed with me. … And last night the man that attacked me was specifically upset that Trump’s order to deport Somalis was not yielding enough deportations of Somalis. … So he wanted to come get the person he thought was protecting Somalis. Well we are protected by the Constitution.”
But in a very striking contrast to Omar’s more progressive, more belligerent stance toward the Trump administration, today you have Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar making an appeal for unity. [Continue B roll, then lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:39 - 00:52, 01:47 - 01:54] Caption: “These times call for leaders who can stand up and not be rubber stamps of this administration, but who are also willing to find common ground and fix things in our state. … That’s why today I’m announcing my candidacy for governor of the state of Minnesota.”
With this coming after the current governor, Tim Walz, abandoned his reelection bid amidst the renewed focus on Medicaid fraud. [B roll]
And by default, Klobuchar’s gotta be considered a serious contender for his office.
Right, she’s won elections by double-digit margins before, she ran for president, and over two decades in the Senate she’s cultivated an image as a common-sense centrist who loves bipartisanship. [B roll]
Though it’s hard not to notice that in over four minutes of speaking, she never mentioned a single specific policy proposal besides getting ICE out of the state and rooting out fraud. [B roll]
So we’ll have to see if that brand of calm moderation appeals to a Minnesota that’s reached such a boiling point under siege by Trump’s thugs. [B roll, 00:14]
Speaking of which, y’all remember how I mentioned Tuesday that Minnesota’s chief federal judge declared, “The court’s patience is at an end?” [Headline]
Right, he ordered acting ICE director Todd Lyons to personally appear in the courtroom Friday to answer for his agency’s disregard for the law unless they release a man who was still detained despite the judge ordering him released two weeks ago. [Image and Quote, find “two weeks”]
Well apparently they did finally release the man, albeit only after being threatened, so now the judge has called off the hearing with Lyons, but he also wrote an absolutely scathing note about the agency.
With him listing 96 court orders that he says ICE has violated just since January 1st, then adding: [Quote, find “96”]
“The extent of ICE’s noncompliance is almost certainly substantially understated” because “the list was hurriedly compiled by extraordinarily busy judges.” [Quote same link]
In fact, he goes so far as to write that “ICE has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence.” [Quote same link]
Then finishing by pointing out the obvious: “ICE is not a law unto itself.” [Quote same link]
With him warning that if ICE keeps ignoring court orders, he will order Lyons or other government officials to appear in his courtroom again.
But the fact this judge has kept his cool for this long is really a testament to his patience.
Because ever since Trump’s storm troopers poured into Minnesota, court dockets have been flooded by hundreds of cases from migrants who have been detained or citizens who allege their rights were violated.
And as we’ve heard from local officials, police have been overwhelmed with 911 calls and chaotic unrest on a daily basis throughout the twin cities.
But Lyons isn’t the only one getting spanked by a judge, because another one lit into Attorney General Pam Bondi yesterday. [B roll]
This after she posted photos of 11 defendants who are accused of assaulting immigration agents on social media just before a hearing, calling them “rioters” and declaring: [Post]
“I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: NOTHING will stop President Trump and this Department of Justice from enforcing the law.” [Post]
But when the judge saw that, she said she was “deeply disturbed” that Bondi would publicize images of people who are presumed innocent. [Quote]
With a lawyer for several of the defendants jumping in, pointing out that “They don’t get the same courtesy as masked agents.” [Quote same link]
And when prosecutors asked the Judge to barr the defendants from contacting the federal agents they allegedly assaulted, she was like, bro, you won’t even reveal who these agents are! How are they supposed to contact them? [Quote same link, find “contact”]
But while that’s playing out in Minnesota, Democrats and anyone else who cares about the rule of law and human decency are fighting another front down in Texas.
Because Liam Ramos [Rah-mose], the five-year-old boy who was allegedly used as “bait” by ICE agents to lure his own family out of their home and sent to Texas, is still there in detention. [Image]
In fact now, his school’s superintendent told Huff Post she spoke to his mother Tuesday, and explained:
“Unfortunately, Liam’s health is not doing great right now,” said Stenvik. “He’s been ill. I’ve been told he has a fever. So I’m very, very concerned about his well-being in that facility.” [Quote]
This after his mother told NPR herself that “Liam is getting sick because the food they receive is not of good quality. He has stomach pain, he’s vomiting, he has a fever and he no longer wants to eat.” [Quote]
So yesterday two Democratic lawmakers — Joaquin [Wah-keen] Castro and Jasmine Crocket — went to visit Ramos for themselves, with Castro telling reporters afterward: [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 05:20 - 05:28, 05:43 - 05:52, 06:15 - 06:21]
So with shit like that going on and not seeming to slow down despite the events of the past week, it’s no surprise that Democrats are willing to shut down the government to reign ICE in.
Go to Proton and sign up for Proton Mail's awesome service FOR FREE today.
-
And on that note, this morning we actually just got closer to a partial shutdown, but it is still not guaranteed.
Because a handful of Republicans just joined Senate Democrats in voting against a funding package by 55-45, with 60 votes needed to pass it.
And the deadline to pass this package to keep multiple parts of the government afloat is…tomorrow.
But negotiations are still ongoing, and things could change between now and then.
For some background, one of the bills in this package includes over $60 billion for DHS, and $10 billion of that goes to ICE. []
And for many obvious reasons, Democrats do not want to give ICE more money right now, with Chuck Schumer saying earlier this week that:
“In the wake of ICE’s abuses and the administration's recklessness, Senate Democrats will NOT pass the DHS budget until it is rewritten.”[]
And so some level of overhaul could be underway.
According to the New York Times, Schumer and Trump worked together last night on a deal that would avoid a shutdown.
With sources saying that this potential plan would split the DHS funding away from the remaining bills funding the government.
That way, those bills can get passed by Friday, and they can buy some time to figure out what to do with DHS.
Because Democrats want to add a slew of restrictions for ICE, including blocking agents from wearing masks, mandating that they wear body cameras, stopping random sweeps, and preventing any searches without warrants.
And today, Trump suggested that a deal could be on the horizon, saying:
“Hopefully we won’t have a shutdown. We’re working on that right now. I think we’re getting close. The Democrats, I don’t believe want to see it either.”
With Senate Majority Leader John Thune likewise saying that he is hopeful and has been part of “very constructive discussions.” []
But of course, even if the Senate does get its act together in record timing, that does not mean a shutdown will fully be avoided.
Because the package would need to bounce back to the House for approval, and the House is currently in recess until next week. []
So depending on how things play out, we could be looking at a partial shutdown starting this weekend.
Which would be a big deal, because the longest government shutdown in the country’s history only ended like, two months ago.
So we will have to see how this plays out, and if we get back to back chaos.
-
The FBI’s raid of an election center in Fulton County, Georgia, is unlike anything we’ve ever seen before — but it could be a terrifying look at what’s to come as we head into the midterms.
That is what numerous experts are saying about the unprecedented actions taken yesterday in a county that was at the center of Trump’s false claims about the 2020 election.
Right, we touched on this briefly in yesterday’s show, but it was breaking as I was recording, so there was still a lot we didn’t know.
But since then, we’ve gotten a bit more information about the search warrant the FBI executed, which said that the raid was part of a criminal investigation into possible violations of two different federal laws:
And specifically, the warrant authorized the FBI to search for all physical ballots from the 2020 general election, all images produced during ballot scanning, all voter rolls from that year, and all tabulator tapes — which is basically a receipt for the vote totals recorded by voting machines.
Right, and with that, you had Mo Ivory, a Democratic commissioner for Fulton County, saying in an Instagram post that the FBI’s first warrant had an error, but once the error was resolved, FBI agents returned later in the day with a second warrant, and county officials complied.[]
With agents then surrounding the facility with lines of trucks and spent hours taking away boxes of old ballots and other materials.
But, at least for right now, that’s basically all we know — there haven’t been any more details about the investigation or even what the exact allegations are here.
But, regardless, you have many Democratic lawmakers and experts speculating that this is just a dramatic escalation of the same baseless bullshit we’ve been hearing for the last six years, and yet another example of Trump weaponizing the DOJ to do his personal bidding.
Right, three recounts, multiple investigations, numerous courts, and countless state and local officials have all debunked Trump’s claims about the fraud in Georgia.
But Trump has refused to shut up about it, and now that he’s in office again, he’s using his power to revive the case, going after Georgia by throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks.
Right, back in December, Trump’s DOJ sued Fulton County over it’s refusal to turn over the same 2020 election records that the FBI seized yesterday.
A request county officials initially denied because they records are sealed and can’t be produced without a court order.
That same month, DOJ also filed a separate lawsuit against Georgia in an effort to obtain voter rolls containing highly sensitive information like voters’ names, birth dates, addresses, drivers’ license and partial Social Security numbers.
And also last week, you had Trump using his speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos — probably one of the biggest possible platform he could have — to further his election lies.
Claiming that the 2020 election was “rigged” and adding:
“People will soon be prosecuted for what they did. That’s probably breaking news, but it should be. It was a rigged election. Can’t have rigged elections ” 00:12 - 00:23
But, even with all that, you have many experts saying that this raid in Fulton County is entirely unprecedented.
Like Rick Hasen, a professor at the law school of the University of California, Los Angeles, who said:
“I’m not aware of something like this happening ever before,” adding:
And adding: “This just looks like a way to use the might of the federal government to further Trump’s voter fraud narratives.”
And that’s something that has also been echoed by many top Georgia officials, including Mo Ivory, who said she and her colleagues were working on a legal plan to stop Trump’s efforts, adding:
“This is an attempt to take your vote away. This is all about November 2026. About the primary on May 19th and then the November election. He does not want the midterm elections to takeaway his power, so he’s trying to create chaos. So this is what he does: chaos in Minnesota, chaos in Fulton County. We are a target. Protect your vote at all costs. I’m telling you, everyone always says ‘your life depends on it’ — oh, your life does depend on it this time.” 1:02 - 1:27
With Ivory also arguing that what we saw in Fulton County yesterday — that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
Claiming that Fulton County is just the blueprint, and Trump is simply showing us what he’s capable of and what he’s willing to do in other states:
“Fulton County is right now the target, the only county right now fighting over an election that already happened. But it is coming to a place near you. This is the beginning of the chaos of 2026 that is about to ensue.” 00:01 - 00:16
And she’s not alone — you also had Sen. Jon Ossoff issuing a very similar warning:
“This is a seismic event. This should have people across the country absolutely shook. This is a huge deal. This is an FBI raid on the Fulton County Elections office. His conspiracy theories about the 2020 election have been based in Georgia from the very start.” 00:30 - 00:50
“This is a shot across the bow at the midterm elections. He tried to steal power when he lost it in 2020. We have to be prepared for all kinds of schemes and shenanigans. We have to be prepared for him to deprive people of their voting rights.” 1:51 - 2:09
Right, and I think it’s important to be 1000% clear about what’s happening here: what we’ve seen so far is only a preview of what’s to come this year.
This raid, the lies he tells to cast doubt on election security, his red state gerrymandering campaign — it’s all an appetizer for the main course served by a chef who cooked up a full-blown insurrection last time we sat around the dinner table.
And the only way we can fight it is to do what Ivory said and vote like your life depends on it — and also pray that the MAGA civil war divides Republicans enough that their voters turn on them.
And, speaking of the MAGA civil war, Candace Owens has even more alleged leaked footage of Erika Kirk… [feeding into Maddie’s Candace write-up]
Go to: Fabric and apply today, risk-free.
-
Then, in other news, Candace Owens has even more alleged leaked footage of Erika Kirk.
This time, it's from a Zoom call with TPUSA staff that apparently took place just 6 days after Charlie was shot.
Right, yesterday we talked about audio Candace shared where, following Charlie’s memorial, Erika is boasting about merch sales, she sounded very happy.
Those clips faced a lot of backlash, and now, with this Zoom call, Candace is again taking issue with Erika’s tone, and how often she uses Charlie to encourage people to work harder.
Like this clip, where Erika gets emotional talking about TUPUSA’s future:
“TPUSA will continue like my husband always wanted.” (18:10-18:13)
“We are going to work hard because that is what he would want.” (18:20-18:23)
“I will fight like hell to make sure all of you have a job here. (crying) I don’t want anyone to think they job is in jeopardy, because you are family.” (19:03-19:15)
“I think Charlie’s just, I’m not trying to say that he would be, he is obviously celebrating in heaven, but he is so proud of all of you.” (20:00-20:15)
“I just feel so blessed and honored.” (22:02-22:06)
And so that was more of a mixed bag, but you did have Candce thinking:
1. It is odd to suggest Charlie would be “celebrating” after being assassinated.
And 2: it is also weird to hear a widow say she feels blessed.
Tons of others have also been talking about this moment where Erika is smiling very big as the Zoom call starts.
“Look at all the thumbs up! Look at how cute that is! Sorry this is a little more informal than probably Charlie would be reacting, how sweet! I didn’t know they could do that, I hate Zoom. Sorry guys. I just wanted to start by saying my heart is broken just as much for you guys as it is for our family.” (23:55-24:17)
At another point, Erika also encourages people not to judge people for how they grieve.
“Be soft with one another. Everyone grieves differently. So if someone is acting differently and weird, don’t read into that.” (27:00-27:06)
“I wish I could hug all of you. But again, there’s a lot of them in the office today? The fact that a lot of you guys are here, that’s what he would have wanted, the mission, he doesn’t want you sitting alone in your room.” (27:40-27:50)
And so one of Candace’s biggest issues with this was that employees apparently thought this “hustle through the tragedy” messaging felt cult-like.
“They were only given Erika as this symbol that you guys need to work harder. That Charlie’s wife is telling employees it is now a mandate handed to them by god to work harder, to sacrifice.” (16:27-16:40)
And reactions are a little more split here than with yesterday’s clips, right you again have people thinking Erika does not sound like a grieving widow. [][]
Others thinking it’s not that weird, that she is putting on a brave face, that yes she smiled but she was just reacting to her team supporting her. [] []
And arguing that if smiling while grieving is illegal, well, you can also see Candace smiling on camera in the aftermath of Charlie’s death, too.[]
But of course, as always when it comes to Candace, it is worth noting it is to her direct benefit to try to get people to turn on Erika Kirk, especially amid this MAGA civil war.
Because the less people on the TPUSA side, the more people on hers.
With the New York Times previously saying that this is:[]
“a story about conservatives creating a monster they can’t control.”
“Having elevated her in large part for her willingness to say outrageous things about her opponents, people on the right are now surprised by her willingness to say outrageous things about them.”
So I would love to know your thoughts on this, both on these clips of Erika, and Candace’s agenda in sharing them.
-
Donald Trump has given two companies with a history of bribery and corruption the right to buy Venezuelan oil;
he’s holding the money from these sales in an offshore Qatari bank account;
and he has the final say over whether all those funds are given to the Venezuelan government.
That’s the plan Secretary of State Marco Rubio had to defend before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday in his first public testimony to Congress since the abduction and arrest of Nicolas Maduro.
But let’s start with these two companies who have been awarded confidential licenses to buy and sell Venezuelan oil with little independent oversight – despite continued sanctions.
Their names are Vitoll (V-tall) and Trafigura (Trah-fig-you’re-uh - AUDIO).
They’re actually two of the three largest oil trading firms in the world.
And they’re getting this deal about one year after the Trump administration absolutely gutted the foreign corrupt practices unit at the Justice Department.
And that’s notable because that DOJ unit? It brought charges against the two companies and their traders in 2020 and 2024.
V-Tall ended up paying $135 million in criminal penalties to settle accusations it bribed officials in Mexico, Ecuador and Brazil.
And Trah-fig-you’re-uh ended up forking over fines and forfeitures totaling $126 million part of a plea deal in which it admitted guilt.
With the case specifically involving payments being funneled through shell companies and offshore accounts in order to conceal bribes to Brazilian officials that the DOJ said netted the company over $61 million in profits. []
And that’s just the tip of the frickin’ iceberg.
In 2024, for example,Trah-fig-you’re-uh agreed to pay another $55 million in civil penalties to US regulators over allegations that it acquired confidential information about gasoline contracts, manipulated prices, and impeded potential whistleblowers. .
A month later, V-Tall and another firm also coughed up a cool-fifty mil to deal with a case brought by the California AG involving allegations that they had “secretly worked together to tamper with and manipulate” gasoline prices in the state.
Another month later, an individual V-Tall trader was convicted of bribery.
And, last year, Trah-fig-you’re-uh was convicted on corruption charges in Switzerland for having bribed an Angolan official for oil contracts – although the company is now appealing.
And with all that, you have people like Robert Bachmann, an analyst at a Swiss NGO investigating commodities traders, saying:
“Trump is taking advantage of firms that know how to circumvent regulation.”
“They were previously hunted down by the U.S. Department of Justice” but that “does not seem to matter” to the current administration.
Now, that said, there are other reasons to go with these guys.
Right, you’ve reportedly had administration and industry officials arguing that their existing networks of tankers and storage facilities across the Caribbean made them an obvious choice. []
With the head of the Latin American Energy Program at Rice University saying:
“They are probably among the few companies that can in short notice allocate such a large number of barrels — 30 million to 40 million — so it’s a very convenient way for the administration to solve what would have been a much more complex problem.”
And with that, the licenses these companies have been awarded reportedly enable them to buy tens of millions of barrels of oil already in Venezuelan reserves or that is pumped while sanctions remain in place.
And, according to the Washington Post, it may even let them trade other natural resources in Venezuela, such as iron ore and agricultural products – potentially making it even more lucrative than previously believed. []
As far as the oil, though, you have administration officials stressing that the deal requires the firms to sell at least half to buyers in the States.
While they also say the money going to Venezuela will be used to stabilize the economy and benefit the Venezuelan people.
But, notably, Trump gets to decide whether the money is disbursed.
And in this case, the firms have reportedly already paid $500 million up-front, and Venezuela has so far confirmed receipt of the first $300 million last week.
The rest may still be sitting in a Qatari bank.
And this seems to be a way of keeping the money away from creditors with pending claims against Venezuela and its state-owned oil company.
But, of course, we’re talking about potential corruption, you hear Qatar, and you’re like: isn’t that the country that “gifted” Trump a $400 million luxury jet?
And with that, while it’s a much smaller amount, it’s worth noting that a senior trader at V-Tall donated $6 million to political committees supporting Trump’s 2024 election.
Although the company has emphasized that the donations were made by the individual and not the business.
Also, I will say, at least according to one expert, the US taking control of another country’s oil sales and routing payments to an offshore account?
It’s not without precedent.
Right, the U.S. actually managed sales of Iraqi oil using foreign bank accounts in the 2000s.
But notably, you have this expert adding:
“There is also precedent for corruption scandals popping up around these schemes.”
And that’s concerning not just because of what I’ve already talked about but the fact that so much about all this seems to be shrouded in secrecy.
With an economist who is also a member of the Venezuelan opposition saying:
“The Venezuelans are the owners of the oil, and we know nothing. There is no transparency.”
“In a normal condition, a sovereign country sells oil and the exact number of barrels and the price are known, and goes to the central bank. Again, right now, we know nothing.”
And with that, just today, you had California Rep Robert Garcia s ending a letter today to the CEOs of V-Tall and Trah-fig-you’re-uh asking for answers about any agreements made with the Trump administration in Venezuela.
You’ve also had Senator Elizabeth Warren claiming in a statement that “The Trump administration is funneling another country’s oil revenues into handpicked accounts with virtually no oversight” – adding:
“Congress cannot allow Trump to treat Venezuela’s oil profits like his personal slush fund.”
And with that, Warren, along with four other senators, has actually launched an investigation asking for information from 15 major American banks to figure out whether they were approached by the administration before the military action in Venezuela.
Right, because, before you’ve actually had Trump straight-up telling reporters he had spoken with oil executives “before and after” the military operation.
But yesterday, you had Rubio doing damage control – denying that that had ever happened: :
Rubio: “That never happened. I could not be with him because it never happened. The oil executives were not involved whatsoever in any of the planning on this matter” (2:25:08-2:25:16)
Rubio: “All of those executives learned about this operation at the same time everybody else did.”
Van Hollen: “President Trump has said the opposite in public.” (2:25:22-2:25:16)
But getting back to what’s happening now, Rubio did maybe clarify a little bit what the plan is regarding Venezuelan oil.
Right, he confirmed that the proceeds from sales are held in an offshore account in Qatar but said they will eventually be transferred to an account in the United States that the US can block with sanctions if necessary.
And to get the money in this account, he explained that Venezuela’s interim government has agreed to submit a monthly “budget” request.
Meaning that it would have to request the use of those funds for a set of very specific purposes that the US would basically need to approve – with him saying the US controls “the dispersal of the money” but not “the actual money.”
Also, according to him, the Venezuelan government has “pledged to use a substantial amount of those funds to purchase medicine and equipment directly from the United States.”
But among those with criticism were Democratic Senator Brian Schatz questioned whether the Trump administration had the legal authority to create and manage such an account.
He also complained that the administration hadn’t released the text of whatRubio said was a written agreement with the Venezuelan government.
And outside the hearing, you had Texas Rep Lloyd Doggett saying in a statement that Rubio’s testimony “raised more questions than answers.”
He wanted to know why, for example, the administration had chosen Qatar and not “a country with much stronger banking laws and a history of robust management of oil revenues.”
And he also argued that by shielding the money from creditors through the use of the Qatari account the Trump administration is “unlawfully refusing to honor debts owed to U.S. institutions.” ASSET []
Right, which is also kind of notable, because part of Trump’s justification for “taking” Venezuela’s oil was that he said it was “stolen” from American companies – a claim that we talked about and is misleading at best.
Now, with all that, the pushback didn’t only come from Democrats.
You had Rand Paul, for example, going after Rubio for the attack and arrest of Maduro – rejecting Rubio’s repeated characterization of American military action as a "law enforcement operation”:
Paul: “If we said that a foreign country invaded our capital, bombed all our air defense — which would be an extensive bombing campaign, and it was — removed our president, and then blockaded the country, we would think it was an act of war,” (1:19:08-1:19:17)
Rubio: “We just don’t believe that this operation comes anywhere close to the constitutional definition of a war.”
Paul: “But it would it be a war if………” (1:19:50-1:20:04)
“I think We’re in violation of both the spirit and the law of the constitution by bombing a capital, blockading a country and removing elected officials. And we certainly wouldn’t tolerate it, not would I, if someone did it to us.” (1:23:59-1:24:12)
Now, with that, Rubio denied that they had removed an elected official – saying Maduro was illegitimate.
Right, because María Corina Machado, the opposition leader who was barred from running?
The person seen as her stand-in is widely believed to be the real winner of the last election.
And notably, she has been in the States pleading her case – asking Trump to help her get back to Venezuela as soon as possible.
And she’s gone from flattering Trump and giving him her Nobel Peace Prize to showing a little bit of frustration with what’s happening.
Right, she actually met with Rubio after the hearing yesterday, and she said:
“We are willing to facilitate a genuine transition but not a Russian-style transition where mafias remain in control. Venezuela does not need stability for criminals — it needs justice, truth and freedom.”
And with that, while Rubio said the end goal is free and fair democratic elections, he hasn’t given a timeline.
Plus, it seems likely that Machado returning to Venezuela could disrupt the White House’s plans there.
And, for Trump at least, it’s very clear that this whole thing is about oil and not democracy.
And if you needed more proof, while Maduro is facing charges including narco-terrorism, questions remain about what kind of ties his old ally who replaced him, Delcy Rodríguez has to trafficking networks,
With the Associated Press reporting recently that she has been on the DEA’s radar for years for suspected involvement in drug and gold smuggling, though no public criminal charges have been filed.
But Rubio said that the administration had established a “very respectful and productive line of communication” with Rodríguez - saying:
“It is our belief that her own self-interest aligns with advancing our key objectives.”
Rubio also justified the regime change mission a “strategic” necessity because Venezuela under Maduro had been a “base of operation for virtually every competitor, adversary and enemy in the world.”
With him giving Venezuela’s alleged ties to Iran, Russia and China as examples.
But, notably, Rodríguez hasn’t met the White House’s demand to cut ties with those countries – and you had Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen saying:
“All of the same people are running the country. Maduro’s Vice PResident, now the interim President, has taken no steps to diminish Iran, China or Russia’s considerable influence in Venezuela. Her cooperation appears tactical and temporary, not a real shift in Venezuela’s alignment.” (7:28-7:51).
And with that, U.S. intelligence reports have apparently raised doubts about whether Rodriguez fully on board with American strategy in her country
And over the weekend, you actually had her saying she has had “enough” of Washington’s orders.
And all that brings the question: if she doesn’t end up being compliant, what will the Trump administration do about it?
And responding to a question from Senator Chris Murphy, Rubio made it clear that it’s not ruling out the possibility of military action in Venezuela:
“...the president never rules out his options as commander-in-chief to protect the national interest of the United States. I can tell you right now with full certainty, we are not postured to, nor do we intend or expect to have to take any military action in Venezuela at any time. The only military presence you will see in Venezuela is our marine guards at an embassy. Okay, that is our goal. That is our expectation and that is what everything that outlines towards. That said, if an Iranian drone factory pops up and threatens our forces in the region, the president retains the option to eliminate that threat.” (1:04:19 - 1:04:51)
And with that, you also had Murphy asking if the Trump Administration would get authorization from Congress first if it took military action in Venezuela.
And Rubio responded by claiming that, under federal law, any military action lasting longer sixty days would require congressional authorization, basically leaving the door open for another operation of the sort we’ve already seen.
But, of course, that’s just what he’s saying now.
And, time and time again, we have seen this administration say one thing, then do something completely different.
