🇻🇪 At today’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on U.S. actions in Venezuela, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul clashed over how the U.S. justifies the military operation that kidnapped Nicolás Maduro from Venezuela. Rubio defended the mission as a law‑enforcement style action when asked whether the operation was an... act of war, saying, “We just don't believe that this operation comes anywhere close to the constitutional definition” — even as critics argue the bombing, capture of a foreign head of state, and blockade clearly resemble an act of war. The administration insists there’s no war and no occupation, despite ongoing military and naval involvement. Paul pressed the point: if a foreign power did the same to the U.S. — bombing air defenses, capturing a president, and blockading the country — of course it would be considered an act of war. Rubio refused to concede that. Senators also pressed the secretary on the White House's long-term vision for Venezuela. Sen. Murphy asked about a timeline for a "democratic transition" but Rubio did not take a firm position, only committing to updating Congress on progress on U.S. priorities in the coming months while also walking back his recent threats of future military action against interim President Delcy Rodríguez. Rubio insisted that Trump reserves the right to act in the case of an imminent attack, repeatedly offering the hypothetical of an Iran-built a drone factory inside Venezuela as an acceptable justification for a new attack. Rubio insisted that the focus of the U.S. in the South American country right now is "stabilization, recovery, and transition" and not regime change, adding, "We should not confuse stabilization with transition."show more

Loading video...