In the early hours of Jan. 3, elite U.S. military forces crossed into Venezuelan territory in a highly sophisticated and coordinated operation, capturing narco-dictator Nicolas Maduro. The operation focused solely on arresting Maduro and his wife, Cilia, who now sit in a New York jail cell awaiting trial. In capturing Maduro, President Trump removed the core barrier to the resolution of Venezuela’s years-long nightmare and the hemispheric threat of a narco-regime.During a months-long pressure campaign, Maduro was offered countless offramps by the United States—which could have seen him comfortably living out his days in Turkey or Russia. However, Maduro would not, or could not, take these offers. Taking Maduro off the table alone hasn’t yet ended the narco-dictatorship and the threat it poses to the U.S. Indeed, Venezuela’s Delcy Rodriguez, who claimed the position of vice president under the criminal Maduro regime, has been sworn in by a puppet supreme court as interim president. Arresting Maduro has upended a status quo in Venezuela that favored continuity for the regime and insecurity for the United States.  Several questions and unknowns remain as to what comes next. Many are concerned that the U.S. is about to embark on an Iraq-style nation building exercise, in which U.S. soldiers and taxpayer money are deployed in a long and dangerous effort. That does not appear to be President Trump’s intention, nor would it be necessary to restore stability and security in Venezuela. Indeed, there are no known U.S. troops within Venezuela at this moment. Instead, the Trump administration seems poised to continue its previous efforts to leverage economic, tactical, and diplomatic pressure against the remnants the narco-regime to facilitate a restoration of stability and democracy and end the threat to the United States. Following Maduro’s removal, these U.S. efforts and tools now have renewed power against the weakened remnants of the regime;deploying them opens up a realistic path to an eventual full end to the narco-dictatorship and restoration of democracy.   We can discard the warnings voiced by some critics of the Trump administration—Maduro’s removal will not cause widespread instability and worsen the crisis in Venezuela, nor possibly trigger another mass migration to the U.S. To assume either of this will happen is poorly based; there are no signs that such effects will materialize.   Once Venezuela is able to fully free itself of the shackles of  two decades of narco-dictatorship, there will indeed be a substantial effort required to rebuild its economy and restore stability. However, it’s important to recognize that Venezuela is not Iraq, nor is it Syria, or Libya, despite the claims of some self-described “experts.” Venezuela is a nation which has deep democratic, Judeo-Christian, and western foundations. These values were all upended by a catastrophic socialist experiment turned criminal regime, but the foundations remain and make a return to stability far less treacherous for Venezuela than Iraq.   Additionally, Venezuela was once one of the world’s most prosperous nations, thanks in part to its connectedness to the U.S. economy and sizable oil resources. Indeed, in 1983, Venezuela was the first country in South America to construct a metro train system. These economic resources and foundations can fuel the restoration of stability in Venezuela, while mitigating the costs for any support from the U.S. and international community.  The impact of geopolitics is impossible to ignore with respect to Venezuela. The U.S. mainland is as close to Venezuela as New York is to Texas. That proximity left the American people especially vulnerable to Maduro’s weaponization of drug trafficking and mass migration against the U.S. Venezuela’s proximity to the U.S. also matters because the regime has made Venezuelan territory a base of operations for hostile extra-hemispheric powers, including China, Russia, and Iran.  The U.S. capture of Maduro also comes at a critical moment in the western hemisphere— Latin America is currently experiencing a resurgence of conservative, pro-U.S. leadership with recent elections in Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Ecuador and elsewhere. The new leaders of these nations will be invaluable partners in supporting and ensuring any efforts to rebuild Venezuela and ensure its stability. Given these nations have suffered greatly from Venezuela’s weaponized narco-migration crisis, they will have a keen interest in supporting U.S. efforts there. Along with the U.S., they will be particularly important if there is ever need for a physical stabilizing security force on the ground, but also in advancing eventual reconstruction of public institutions and infrastructure. As with any complex and fluid crisis such as this, we can’t fully predict what the exact path and future for Venezuela. However, what is clear is that the situation in Venezuela and its future prospects for stability have improved dramatically thanks the President Trump’s decision to capture Maduro. The post What Maduro’s Capture Means for Venezuela’s Future appeared first on The Daily Signal.

DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—Secretary of State Marco Rubio told ABC News host George Stephanopoulos on Sunday that Venezuelan cooperation would be judged by the ruling party’s actions after the arrest of the country’s president. American military forces, reportedly including the United States Army’s elite Delta Force, spearheaded the protection of a law enforcement operation which arrested Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife in Caracas, Trump announced in a Saturday morning post on Truth Social. Stephanopoulos questioned Rubio about what would occur next and what Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodriguez told the secretary of state. “We’re not going to judge moving forward based simply on what’s said in press conferences. We want to see action here at the end of the day. Rhetoric is one thing; you see rhetoric for a lot of different reasons,” Rubio said. “There’s a lot of different reasons why people go on TV and say certain things in these countries — especially 15 or 12 hours after the person who used to be in charge of the regime is now in handcuffs and on his way to New York.” When asked if the U.S. views Venezuelan VP Delcy Rodriguez as the legitimate president, Sec. Rubio said: “Ultimately, legitimacy for their system of government will come about through a period of transition and real elections which they have not had.” https://t.co/F2n72YzssB pic.twitter.com/yqxw07Jn6n— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) January 4, 2026 “We’re not gonna be reactive to statements at press conferences and what people say in certain interviews or some media post somewhere. What we’re going to react to is very simple: what do you do? Not what you’re saying publicly, what happens? What happens next? Do the drugs stop coming? Are the changes made? Is Iran expelled? Is Hezbollah … and Iran no longer able to operate against our interests from Venezuela?” Rubio continued. “Does the migration patterns stop? Do the drug trafficking boats end? Do you deal with the ELN and the FARC, two narco-terrorist organizations who control territory and operate with impunity from the territory of Venezuela against the interests of Colombia and the United States? These are the things we want addressed. If they’re addressed that’s how we’ll judge it.” Congressional Democrats decried the operation as an illegal war, with some prominent critics, including podcasters Keith Olbermann and Dean Obeidallah, taking to BlueSky to demand Trump’s impeachment. Rubio said the United States was not ruling out further action. “We retain all the options before this raid and this capture and this arrest was made,” Rubio told Stephanopoulos. “The quarantine is in place right now: if you’re a sanctioned boat and you’re headed toward Venezuela, you’ll be seized either on the way in or way out with a court order that we get from judges in the United States. We’ll continue to enforce our sanctions and that’s going to continue to happen until such time changes are made.” Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation The post Marco Rubio Lays Out How Trump Admin Will Gauge Venezuelan Cooperation appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The successful capture of ousted Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in the early hours of Jan. 3 has sparked a debate in Congress over the legality of the executive branch’s use of military force, especially in the Western Hemisphere. So far, most Republicans in Congress have expressed public support for “Operation Absolute Resolve,” which involved the targeted deployment of aircraft, ground forces, and naval vessels in Venezuela to capture and extradite the dictator to the U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who has long advocated for military action against America’s foreign adversaries, applauded the action Saturday on X, and also called for America to “help the Venezuelan people create a new future full of peace and prosperity.” As we celebrate this amazing achievement by our military commanded by @POTUS, we must remember the consequences of what has happened. An evil, narcoterrorist dictator has fallen, creating a path for freedom for the wonderful, highly intelligent, hard working people of Venezuela.…— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) January 3, 2026 Graham added in a separate post, “I believe the liberation of Cuba from communist, America-hating, narcoterrorist dictators is near.” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, initially expressed concerns about the operation on X on Saturday, stating he wanted to know “what, if anything, might constitutionally justify this action in the absence of a declaration of war or authorization for the use of military force.” However, later that day on X, Lee added that he spoke with Secretary of State Marco Rubio who explained the use of force was to “protect and defend those executing an arrest warrant.” Lee stated that “this action likely falls within the president’s inherent authority under Article II of the Constitution to protect U.S. personnel from an actual or imminent attack.” Republican leadership in both the House and the Senate also cheered on the administration’s actions in Venezuela, albeit without explicit calls for a wider pressure campaign in the region. “Trump’s decisive action to disrupt the unacceptable status quo and apprehend Maduro, through the execution of a valid Department of Justice warrant, is an important first step to bring him to justice for the drug crimes for which he has been indicted in the United States,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said in a Saturday statement. He added that he looked forward to further briefings on the matter. House Speaker Mike Johnson called it “a decisive and justified operation that will protect American lives,” in a statement released Saturday morning. But there is also a camp of Republicans who, although in support of the surgical action taken against the Maduro regime, oppose long-term nation building or foreign conflict without congressional approval. “If neoconservatives planned a mission in Venezuela it would look like Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Instead, laser focused precision… so far,” Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, a former Army Ranger, wrote on X on Saturday. “Nevertheless, neocons will work to reclaim their grip on the war machine and Democrats will work to preserve the warmth of collectivism.” Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, responded, “well said,” to Davidson’s post. Both members serve on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Some Republicans also expressed their opposition to further use of military force without congressional approval. “Now that Maduro has been captured, the president needs to work with Congress to obtain proper authorization for the continued use of military intervention in Venezuela, a power specifically reserved for Congress,” wrote Rep. Tom Barrett, R-Mich., an Iraq War veteran who represents a highly contested district. The Coming Congressional Battle In the coming days, Democrats signaled they will challenge the legal basis of the administration’s foreign military operations. Maduro’s capture “was a military action, and pursuant to the Constitution, only Congress has the power to declare war,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said in on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday.  “And we’ve got to make sure when we return to Washington, D.C., that legislative action is taken to ensure that no further military steps occur absent explicit congressional approval,” Jeffries added. Both Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., are demanding “an immediate Gang of Eight briefing,” wherein the administration would brief both parties’ congressional leadership and the bipartisan leadership in both chambers’ intelligence committees. To be clear, some Democrats in Congress have supported the administration’s actions in Venezuela. Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, released a positive statement on the attack, which he said “deals a significant blow to China, Iran, and Cuba, all of which relied on Maduro as a regional ally.” Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., similarly expressed his gratitude for “our U.S. military personnel that handled these orders in Venezuela with precision,” in a Saturday statement. Per Attorney General Pam Bondi, Maduro will stand trial on federal drug and gun charges, including “Possession of Machineguns.” Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, have been indicted in the Southern District of New York. Nicolas Maduro has been charged with Narco-Terrorism Conspiracy, Cocaine Importation Conspiracy, Possession of Machineguns and Destructive Devices, and Conspiracy to Possess…— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) January 3, 2026 However, President Donald Trump made it abundantly clear Saturday that the operation was not just an extradition but also serves the interests of American industry and statecraft, as he previewed further intervention in Venezuela. “We’ll run [Venezuela] properly. We’ll run it professionally,” Trump said at the press conference on the capture, in which Venezuela’s oil resources were a central topic of discussion. “We’ll have the greatest oil companies in the world going in and invest billions and billions of dollars and take out money, use that money in Venezuela, and the biggest beneficiary is going to be the people of Venezuela.” President Trump: "We're not afraid of boots on the ground." pic.twitter.com/pSyt8sekSp— CSPAN (@cspan) January 3, 2026 Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who has been involved in several congressional efforts to restrain Trump’s war powers, has already slammed the administration’s legal justification for the operation. “If this action were constitutionally sound, the Attorney General wouldn’t be tweeting that they’ve arrested the President of a sovereign country and his wife for possessing guns in violation of a 1934 U.S. firearm law,” he wrote on X on Saturday. Article I grants Congress the authority “To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.” But according to the administration, there is no war against the state of Venezuela. “There’s not a war,” Secretary Rubio said on NBC’s Meet the Press on Saturday. “We are at war against drug trafficking organizations, not a war against Venezuela.” “We are enforcing American laws with regards to oil sanctions. We have sanctioned entities. We go to court. We get a warrant. We seize those boats with oil. And that will continue,” he added. .@SecRubio: "There's not a war. We are at war against drug trafficking organizations — not a war against Venezuela." pic.twitter.com/v71u38vpp2— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) January 4, 2026 “And we will continue to reserve the right to take strikes against drug boats that are bringing drugs towards the United States that are being operated by transnational criminal organizations including the Cartel de los Soles.” Rubio described Maduro as “the leader of that cartel” who is “now in U.S. custody and facing U.S. justice in the Southern District of New York.” There will also likely be discussion, among both Republicans and Democrats, about the nature of coordination between Congress and the White House on military operations. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, has already criticized the administration for not informing Congress earlier. “Congress should have been informed about the operation earlier and needs to be involved as this situation evolves,” Collins wrote Saturday on X. Rubio explained the lack of prior notice at a Saturday press conference, saying, “This is not the kind of mission you can pre-notify.” Trump said that Congress’ “tendency to leak” information contributed to the decision not to give advance notice. Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., wrote on X Saturday that he is “going to force a vote” on his War Powers Resolution to rein in the administration’s use of military force in Venezuela. The post Maduro Capture Prompts Congressional Debate Over Trump’s Military Authority appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Daily Signal senior contributor Victor Davis Hanson is recovering after undergoing surgery to remove a cancerous tumor, according to an update shared by Condoleezza Rice, Hoover Institution senior fellow and former U.S. secretary of state. “Please find an update from my dear friend and colleague, Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Victor Davis Hanson. He remains in our prayers,” Rice wrote on X. In his statement, Hanson shared details of his recovery. “I wanted to share a brief health update. I recently underwent surgery to remove a cancerous tumor and am now recovering. I’m doing well and hopeful as I move forward,” Hanson said. “Thank you for the many messages of support and prayers—they truly mean more than I can say. As I focus on recovery, I may not be able to respond to everyone, but please know how grateful I am.” Please find an update from my dear friend and colleague, Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Victor Davis Hanson. He remains in our prayers: "I wanted to share a brief health update. I recently underwent surgery to remove a cancerous tumor and am now recovering. I’m doing well and…— Condoleezza Rice (@CondoleezzaRice) January 3, 2026 Hanson, the Martin and Illie Anderson senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and the Wayne and Marcia Buske distinguished fellow in history at Hillsdale College, announced recently that he would undergo a major medical operation. “I don’t want to talk about my own problems, but I’ve had people call me and say, ‘You don’t look well, you’re hoarse, or you’re coughing.’ But it’s been a nine-month odyssey because the problem I had for a nonsmoker and nondrinker was a rare type and very hard to diagnose, so it’s no one’s fault other than my own perhaps for not realizing why I was not getting well,” Hanson said. After recently having a biopsy, Hanson decided to proceed with an operation that will interrupt his work—but hopefully not for long, he said. “I’ll be fine. At least I’ll do my best for everybody,” Hanson said. “I think I have an obligation to all of our readers and listeners from whom I get wonderful letters expressing support and good wishes; our listeners and viewers are extraordinarily kind people.” His popular podcast, “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words,” is currently running prerecorded episodes from December with co-host Jack Fowler, who will continue to anchor the show during Hanson’s recovery. In addition to his podcast and syndicated column, Hanson writes exclusive content for his website, Blade of Perseus, at victorhanson.com. The post Victor Davis Hanson Provides Update Following Cancer Surgery appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Two centuries ago, gentlemen routinely carried swords or pistols to protect themselves, their families and their property. On the unlit dirt backroads of England or colonial America, armed highwaymen like Dick Turpin could demand “your money or your life!” without warning. There was no 911. No local law enforcement or highway patrol on the roads. In colonial America, frontiersmen had to protect themselves from hostile Native American tribes, the French and wild animals—sometimes using homemade weapons. In the wild West, there were local sheriffs, and deputies if the town was big enough, but anything exceptional required the sheriff to call up a posse of armed volunteers. This changed with the advent of the police. In 1829, British Home Secretary Sir Robert Peel founded the London Metropolitan Police, which is still headquartered in Scotland Yard. The constables he hired became known as “bobbies” or “peelers” and gradually adopted the blue uniforms with distinctive hats that we know today. American towns, states and cities began to hire their own police forces in the following years. The fundamental deal was that citizens gave the state a monopoly on violence and punishment, in exchange for the state keeping them safe. But is that deal still holding? In Charlotte, North Carolina, in August, Iryna Zarutska was stabbed to death on a train by a fare-jumper who was out on bail after countless prior arrests. Her killer was walking free because a local judge didn’t think his obvious mental illness and violent past merited prison. And transit authorities, like many across America, didn’t enforce the requirement to buy a ticket. In Chicago in November, another young woman, Bethany MaGee, was set on fire on public transport by another recidivist. In December, an illegal immigrant who had previously been deported allegedly stabbed a man on the same light rail line where Zarutska was murdered. These are just three of so many tragic, preventable instances where the state failed its part of the bargain. It failed to keep dangerous, unstable people in jail or institutionalized. To enforce basic civility like having to buy a ticket to access buses and trains. To keep out dangerous foreign nationals who have no right to be here. But though murder and violent crime are the worst things from which the state has a duty to protect citizens, keeping their property safe is important too. In 2014, California passed Proposition 47, making the theft of under $950 no longer a felony but a misdemeanor. Since the police rarely bothered with such cases, thieves had a license to shoplift. And they did, with organized rings targeting specific stores and goods, and re-selling stolen merchandise in a billion-dollar industry. After a decade, even Californians had enough—they voted a new proposition in 2024 to return to saner law enforcement. Many large American cities from Chicago to New York have far-left, “progressive” prosecutors who routinely refuse to prosecute petty crime and shoplifting, with predictable results. In the U.S., stores can’t bring private prosecutions, so if the police won’t help, there is little they can do. In most big cities, police are struggling to keep up with 911 calls. Most chain stores tell their employees not to interfere with thieves. According to one union representative, that’s because the stores fear injury to employees, the thief and other shoppers—and the ensuing lawsuits—more than the cost of losing merchandise, which they can just pass on to customers. Britain has lately experienced an explosion of shoplifting, and a feckless response from police. The British Retail Consortium, a trade group, believes there were 20 million shoplifting cases in England and Wales in the first half of 2025. Official records showed only 529,994 thefts reported to police, but many shop owners don’t report shoplifting as they know the police won’t act. According to British Transport Police, thefts on the London Underground were up 33% this year. In 2024, there were 15,225 thefts across the system. The most the police will do in response is note the theft for the owner’s insurance claim. A natural response to the state’s abdication of duty has been to return to the past: If the state won’t protect you and your property, protect yourself. Even this carries risks. In New York in 2022, store owner Jose Alba was charged with murder after defending himself with a knife. In 2023, also in New York, Daniel Penny was charged with criminally negligent homicide after holding down a man who was threatening passengers on the subway. It’s a scandal when the state won’t protect taxpaying businesses and individuals, but it’s total injustice that it won’t let them protect themselves. And a recipe for chaos. ©2025 Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Originally published by ArcaMax. The post Has the West Given Up Protecting Its Citizens? appeared first on The Daily Signal.