FLASHBACK: 1989 JOE BIDEN would love what President Trump just did:
— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) January 5, 2026
"Let's go after the drug lords where they LIVE! With an international strike force. NO safe haven for narco-terrorists."
pic.twitter.com/XlrSGiHnoZ
January 5, 2026
"Let's go after the drug lords where they LIVE!"
Posts
161 comments:
There are all kinds of video out there of Progressives saying things like that. They seem to forget there is video of their hypocrisies!!
So Joe is using the word narcoterrtorism. Checking wikipedia:
The term itself was coined by former President Fernando Belaúnde Terry of Peru in 1983 when describing terrorist attacks against his nation's anti-narcotics police. The Peruvian coined the term in English? Back when crack topped the list.
The tea gets weaker by the day. If a 35-year-old quote can authorize war, Congress might as well pack up and go home.
Proving that the average politician, lacking any strong principles except promotion of self -- e.g. Joe Biden -- will say anything at any time that may promote himself. Biden is the rare case of the hack politician that eventually got the opportunity to do things with chief executive power; and he did little and mostly wrecked things with what he did do.
That's what can happen when free elections fail. Anything can happen. And more will continue to happen from his greatest achievement, bringing two new Los Angeleses' worth of illegal aliens into our country.
Biden was paid not to do a thing.
One of the many things I love about President Trump is how he frequently contrasts his Presidency with that of Joe Biden. He also calls a spade a spade when he says Biden is the worst President in our history. That is objectively true.
Biden did nothing about the drug trade. He never would have served an arrest warrant on Manduro.
Here’s a thought experiment: Imagine if Kamala was our President today. Where would we be?
The price of coke is headed up. Hunter is not happy. Same for many other Dems. Dems love their drugs.
Indeed. Most of the complaints about Trump’s action seem to be Trump did what Democrats just a few decades ago said they would do.
Theres not enough alcohol, to consider that option begley
“International strike force” seems like an important distinction.
Joe Biden was just negotiating with the drug lords.
He was getting 5% before but decided he wanted 10%.
Ironically biden authored thr drug czar legislation
Ronald J. Ward said...
The tea gets weaker by the day. If a 35-year-old quote can authorize war, Congress might as well pack up and go home.
The Tea is getting weaker every day.
Nobody cares about what traitors like you say anymore.
"wendybar said...
There are all kinds of video out there of Progressives saying things like that. They seem to forget there is video of their hypocrisies!!"
No, they just don't care, and know they don't have to worry about it because the MSM has their back, their followers will never see the truth.
"Dave Begley said...
Biden did nothing about the drug trade. He never would have served an arrest warrant on Manduro."
Biden was a potted plant the whole four years of his presidency. He did nothing about anything. You can blame him for everything but he directly did nothing.
"“International strike force” seems like an important distinction."
Well yes, in that an international strike force would be entirely unable to capture Maduro. That is what you meant I assume?
you should hear 1990's Joe Biden talking about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction!
Biden did nothing about the drug trade. He never would have served an arrest warrant on Manduro. [sic]
The original indictment was handed down in 2020, so it isn’t a case of Biden’s administration “never would.” It’s a case of they had four full years to do it but didn’t do a thing.
Dave Begley says; “Biden is the worst President in our history. That is objectively true.”
“Objectively true” assigns the quote a task it cannot possibly accomplish in any reasonable or historical evaluation.
“Biden did nothing about the drug trade. He never would have served an arrest warrant on Manduro.”
In light of of Trump’s recent admitted rationales for taking over Venezuela, along with releasing and returning major drug kingpins back into the market, only the most gullible of the goobers would still believe this is about doing something about the drug trade.
Potted plants are useful
cdb - "Coalition of the Willing". You all would shit on it no matter the facts.
"The price of coke is going up..." That's an interesting point. I'm not sure where you'd go to evaluate the price of cocaine or fentanyl. No doubt there are some street corners where you could track this info. Probably the DEA has a notion but its not the sort of thing they comment on. A marker for drug supply could be number of fatal drug overdoses. Dead is a fairly definitive data point. 12 month period ending July 2023, 111,000. 12 month period ending April 2025, 73,000. It's almost as if something happened in 2024. Month by month numbers are harder to find, but the trend is downward by all accounts. Most of the deaths btw are fentanyl. That's going to be impacted (kinetically no less) by Policy, as you'll not be cooking that stuff in an RV out in the desert.
Only the most gullible of goobers would believe that taking us the the brink of WWIII in a war that he could have prevented by picking up the phone and accepting a compromise on NATO and Ukrainian neutrality with Putin, which would leave Ukraine intact, a deal we can only dream of now, is not worse by an order of magnitude to anything that Trump has done in Venezuela.
Every Leftist Big Idea comes with an unwritten expiration date and a big catch 22 that if Republicans (esp. Big Orange) adopt said position in the future then the Democrat response will be to repudiate their prior statements and claim they never said/meant it/thought it would happen.
And in fond memory of Drago let me add, this only happens every time a leftist calls for action like the Biden clip. Not always, just every time.
Ronald J. Ward said...
In light of of Trump’s recent admitted rationales for taking over Venezuela, along with releasing and returning major drug kingpins back into the market, only the most gullible of the goobers would still believe this is about doing something about the drug trade.
The drug "kingpin" from Honduras is popular in Honduras.
Biden worked with the Marxist government that just lost the last election to frame him and clear their way to power.
Maduro on the other hand has lost multiple elections and ordered the military to shoot his own people multiple times.
The people of Venezuela are dancing in the street now that Maduro is gone.
The people of Honduras elected the party of your drug kingpin framed by Biden back into power.
Really you are just a marxist piece of shit who will only support the most evil scum in the region.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2026/01/04/after-trumps-venezuela-operation-a-former-fox-news-host-posted-the-perfect-tweetand-it-wrecked-biden-n2668842
And years later as President he, instead, opened up our borders and invited the world to come in, en masse and unvetted. Venezuela, more than most, took him up on the offer, sending tons of drugs, hundreds of gang members, cartel members, and other assorted criminals.
Biden was the face of US impotence. Trump is the face of renewed US power and our oversight on this hemisphere.
"Nobody cares about what traitors like you say anymore."
It's proof of his low IQ that he keeps coming back after being humiliated time after time, just as confident as before, the usual pattern with his type is that they stop making statements that can actually be evaluated for truth value, and crawl back to just throwing out opinions, which, as we know, are like turds, every asshole produces them in copious quantity.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2026/01/03/so-thats-how-delta-force-was-able-to-capture-maduro-so-easily-n2668837
Jaq said...
Only the most gullible of goobers would believe that taking us the the brink of WWIII in a war that he could have prevented by picking up the phone and accepting a compromise on NATO and Ukrainian neutrality with Putin, which would leave Ukraine intact, a deal we can only dream of now, is not worse by an order of magnitude to anything that Trump has done in Venezuela.
We should have traded Ukraine for Cuba/Venezuela/whatever decades ago.
There was no good reason to try to add Ukraine to NATO.
It only served the imperialistic impulses of the globalists running Europe and the chickenhawks here.
“International strike force” seems like an important distinction.
Really? Where is it? Who makes up this mythical warfighting entity? The same Euros who said "OK we'll handle Ukraine" but cannot field an army there? The same ones who couldn't solve Kosovo?
Really, your side should just stop trying to wrangle with Big Ideas in public like this until you can simply understand your own form of Constitutional Republican government.
Big Mike says: “The original indictment was handed down in 2020, so it isn’t a case of Biden’s administration “never would.” It’s a case of they had four full years to do it but didn’t do a thing.”
Because indictments don’t authorize invasions. Biden respected that limit.
“Let’s get one thing straight: there should no longer be any debate about Maduro’s lack of democratic legitimacy. The Trump administration is right to put restoring Venezuelan democracy at the center of our approach to this crisis. A return to a stable democracy is in the interest of the Venezuelan people, the United States, and the hemisphere.”
Chris Murphy
LOL: only the most gullible of the goobers would still believe this is about doing something about the drug trade
Here's one who heard the message loud and clear, Dummy: Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo
The head of the other nearby Narcoterrorist State. That Goober probably shit her pantsuit.
On the Mary Tyler Moore Show they did an episode in which one of the subplots was devoted to the station becoming more serious. They were going to take stances on issues and have editorials read by Ted Baxter. When they introduced the first topic it was on drunk driving. Ted's only question was "Are we for it or against." The shocked reply "Against it," was greeted with "Good, good." Joe Biden=Ted Baxter. Then and now. You put it in front on him, he'd read it. To quote Joe Biden, "This is a big fuckin' deal."
I wonder if part of Maduro's plea deal is going to include outing the traitors he worked with in the US.
Because indictments don’t authorize invasions. Biden respected that limit.
Cmon man you can't really be that dumb.
Well, that's terribly unsporting of your, using something as simple as videotaped proof to refute criticism. You should be ashamed of yourself.
'Thats just your opinion' man
If Biden's handlers thought of it first, doesn't that make it a bad idea? Marco mentioned this in general in one of the clips that were posted yesterday about how people talk about making major moves against drug cartels but never doing anything practical.
Achilles said...
I wonder if part of Maduro's plea deal is going to include outing the traitors he worked with in the US.
This is incredibly naive. If they won't go after Epstein pedophiles and power they certainly aren't going to go after people who make money from the drug cartels that are extremely powerful.
The corruption on both sides of the aisle is so thick and so deep that exposing it is akin to starting a nuclear war. It doesn't happen because of the prospect of mutually assured destruction.
With near-zero opposition in Venezuela itself (and only if you count the late Cubans who manned the AA guns after they acted as secret police for Maduro), I am curious about the people who keep insisting we are "at war" in this comment section.
With whom do you allege we are at war?
Because indictments don’t authorize invasions. Biden respected that limit.
True enough. Biden was also against the raid to get Osama Bin Laden. Biden respected limits placed on him by international bad actors. See also how Biden treated the Afghanistan withdrawal and the limits on time placed on him by the Taliban.
America doesn't do wars anymore. Since nukes proliferated, the primary goal has been to prevent actual wars.
Since WWII we have only done police actions. Congress passed resolutions on some conflicts, but it has always given the President wide latitude to conduct police actions going back to Jefferson and the Barbary pirates.
If Biden's handlers thought of it first...
They did not. Trump called for Maduro to step down in 2018, (Haley announced it) the year before Maduro was indicted. Rubio had been saying so in the Senate for years prior. Obama and Biden made some noise about Chavez, but did squat.
That’s quite a stretch @ 7:51 Achellies. Senator Murphy did say Maduro lacks democratic legitimacy, but in the same article he explicitly warned that there is no credible military option and called for diplomacy and international cooperation. Using only the legitimacy line to justify a unilateral invasion ignores the broader context of his argument and his later condemnation of this intervention as illegal.
https://www.murphy.senate.gov/newsroom/in-the-news/democrats-should-stand-for-democracy-in-venezuela_and-democratic-values-in-america
Biden even blamed Trump for Maduro.
Now the collective left are all losing their collective minds - collectively. in unison/lockstep/paid chi com ngo riot.
Don't acquiesce Leland. None of that is true. The FBI can serve a warrant anywhere in the world. Leftists always lie. Especially RJW.
Bob @ 8:14. “Police action” isn’t a legal category — it’s a label presidents use to avoid the word “war.” The Constitution still requires Congress to authorize hostilities, and Jefferson himself sought that authorization against the Barbary states. Airstrikes, regime capture, and coercive control aren’t law enforcement, no matter what we call them.
Fun to read the spin of glowing praise for Democrat incompetence when faced with people wanting to harm US interests. They recognized bad acts but knew to stay out of the way of those committing them. See Minnesota for recent example.
Well, unless it was a grandma walking between the ropes while uninvited at the Capitol.
Let's go after the drug lords where they LIVE!
"My home! In my bedroom where my wife sleeps. Where I come to play with my toys."
Americans in general tend to approve of military actions that are successful and disapprove of those that are not. Trump's action in Venezuela was in the first category. The controversy around it is purely political and Americans in general are used to that, but not impressed by it.
Trump will have to keep up his success in Venezuela or the approval will turn to disapproval. Just ask W.
All corrupt modern day paid off Walzian mobster leftists are cut from the same cloth as the world's corrupt authoritarian dictators.
So Biden respected that limit. it didn't "limit" Biden from invading Honduras and kidnapping their president. The contradictions inherent in leftist argument is too much to overcome, Ron. You gave it the old JV try though!
The original indictment was handed down in 2020, so it isn’t a case of Biden’s administration “never would.” It’s a case of they had four full years to do it but didn’t do a thing.
I cannot remember the source, but my (possibly mistaken) understanding is that the original indictment was done in 2011. That would be the Obama Administration.
Mike, I was agreeing with Biden recognizing limits self imposed on him. Another example was Biden respecting that he could do nothing about illegal immigration. He could. But he decided he was limited and needed Congressional approval to act. Interesting what restrictions Biden respected.
Chuck said: The Constitution still requires Congress to authorize hostilities,
Maybe, as a putative lawyer, you can point us to the part of the Constitution that requires congressional approval for "hostilities".
For me, I just don’t get what the plan is if Delcy Rodriguez
refuses to play ball sufficiently with Trump, or gets rolled by regime hardliners. Are they going to keep snatching Venezuelan leaders until an acceptable one comes along?
In short, Trump wants to replace a corrupt and illegitimate government with which he cannot do business with a corrupt and illegitimate government with which he can do business.
Lovely gray area you leftists created between "declare war" and "police action." Such a shame that you wish it wasn't there, now that you are not in control.
Maybe we were wrong to remove Hawaii's queen in 1893 too. Or Haiti's president in 1915. Or Chile's Allende in 1983...
You can sail one of bezos yachts through the gap
Ah. Unfortunately Leland the subtleties of irony are lost in plain text. I see it now. Nicely said.
Haitis president was massacred on the steps of the presidential palace
For Biden, the concern was his 10%.
Allende was 1973, he brought in cuban intel officers as his inlaws btw pedro pascal is part of that brood
In Venezuela, if the armed forces continue to back Maduro, then last week’s move may come to look feckless, while offering Maduro the opportunity to rally his domestic and foreign backers against U.S. intervention. Reckless talk of military options only compounds this problem — there is no credible U.S. military option to invade Venezuela, and it would be dangerous and destabilizing to do so...
The United States should be working with international partners to support negotiations with all of Venezuela’s factions in pursuit of a transitional government that can hold new elections. In addition to being led by a coalition of like-minded countries, that effort will have to include dialogue with countries such as Cuba and China who have influence in Caracas. We should continue to tighten sanctions on Maduro and those around him, and work with other countries to ensure that they have the maximum impact. We should also be working in forums that this administration has abandoned — the U.N. Human Rights Council and the International Criminal Court — to further isolate Maduro and open new avenues for accountability.
--Chris Murphy (and Ben Bradlee*) Press Release 2019
Read the whole thing, Weasel.
--The "armed forces" don't "continue to back Maduro.
--The absence of a credible military option seems to have been disproved by the events of the past week.
--the "international partners" such as Cuba and China (and Russia and Iran) were the ones propping up Maduro. "Diplomacy and international cooperation" mean that nothing changes. Even an organization as liberally hidebound as the Nobel committee recognized that Maduro was not a legitimate head of state.
--He doesn't seem to understand what "feckless" means.
*Lest there was ever any doubt as to what the WaPo actually is.
"hostilities" isn't a legal category either.
The President’s war powers under the Constitution is a subject of significant disagreement. Whether a President overreached or not is ultimately decided by the people, which something the Framers seemed to prefer generally.
Maybe you can persuade the people to change their minds and disapprove of Trump's actions by boring them with your semantic nit-picking. Personally, I think the call on the field will stand.
Chris “Liver Lips” Murphy (D-DumbAss) defending Manure-OH!… sounds about right.
Mike @ 8:20. The FBI cannot serve warrants worldwide on its own authority. Abroad, arrests require host-nation consent or extradition. Once you add airstrikes and troops, it’s no longer law enforcement — it’s war, regardless of what anyone calls it.
Leland @ 8:24. Yes, Biden relied on the rule of law rather than illegally bypassing Congress on asylum seekers. I took note of Trump bragging of this during his prime time campaign speech.
What’s unfolding is precisely what I predicted when Trump was reelected. The Basket at that time was in no mood to destroy our Constitution but would eventually evole into a boiled frog under the premise that some state of emergency would elevate them into the next phase- that “maybe a dictatorship is better than what we now have”. And here we are.
It is like the school yard “hide and seek” game. If a bad guy being sought could get to “home”, then Biden respected “home” and would stop pursuit.
Putin saw this and called Ukraine “home”.
I remember when “the basket” eroded the Constitution to push for the arrest of Mohammed Aidid.
Have another margarita chris
Obviously the people around Maduro -- including his VP/now the new president -- cut a deal with Trump and gave Maduro up.
Ignore what she is saying publicly
She will fall in line.
Kakistocracy said...
“For me, I just don’t get what the plan is if Delcy Rodriguez
refuses to play ball sufficiently with Trump, or gets rolled by regime hardliners. Are they going to keep snatching Venezuelan leaders until an acceptable one comes along?“
Exactly. Are there criminal warrants against Rodriguez?
Only the most gullible of the goobers would still maintain this is about protecting Americans from drugs.
THIS is exactly why we laugh at Progressives....
Gad Saad
@GadSaad
·
When
@BarackObama
dropped innumerable bombs on everyone and their mother (without congressional authorization), it was diplomacy.
When
@realDonaldTrump
surgically removes a dictator without any bloodshed, he is a rogue dictator.
https://x.com/GadSaad/status/2007850571181773262?s=20
Venezuelans dancing in their streets with tears of joy in their eyes over the extraction of Manure-OH mean nothing to the rotten-to-the-core Democrats Socialists of America.
They’ve received their clown act orders from Commie Central.
wendybar said...
There are all kinds of video out there of Progressives saying things like that. They seem to forget there is video of their hypocrisies!!
1/5/26, 6:40 AM
I’ve been saying that Trump should play these “gotcha” videos of things Dems said before they decided to go crazy.
Just play the clip and at the end say, “I’m Donald Trump and I approve this message.”
There are hours of these clips on every topic by every Democrat out there. Keep showing the people how far left the Dems have gone.
“btw pedro pascal is part of that brood”
That explains a lot about that clown.
Bad Hombre
@Badhombre
·
15h
Liberals on X change the flags on their profiles more often than Tim Walz swaps out his tampon.
https://x.com/Badhombre/status/2007957064384221206?s=20
Bad Hombre on X: "Get familiar with the Ker–Frisbie Doctrine. It will be relevant in Maduro's trial when his legal team motions for dismissal on grounds of "unlawful abduction." In 1886, SCOTUS ruled unanimously in Ker v. Illinois that "a fugitive kidnapped from abroad and brought to the U.S. may" / X https://share.google/wcfY6iUCStQ6lc8gz
Well RCOCEAN II, you were right, Grok and I were wrong:
“92-Year-Old Clinton Judge Who Denied Trump’s Hush-Money Removal to Federal Court and Blocked Venezuelan Gang Deportations Now Assigned to Preside Over Maduro Case in New York”
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/01/you-cant-make-this-up-92-year-old/
The Gell-Mann amnesia is strong the people who get their information from Democrats. Yesterday they said something directly contrary to what they say today and people take them serious every day, over and over. They never really mean what they say. It's all dependent on party and who is doing what. Just stop listening. They abandon values and people so readily that it's just stupid to take them seriously.
Yep these are dodgy character
Congress does not need to act on illegal immigration.
We already have LAWS on the books - that the entire Biden regime ignored.
Would that we could abort the baby, cannibalize her profitable parts, sequester her carbon pollutants, and have her, too, in a state of sanctuary where "burdens" are planned.
LOL ooops.
it's early and my keybrd and fingers are not aligned yet.
Bagoh # 9:03
AMEN to that.
Ward: "If a 35-year-old quote can authorize war, Congress might as well pack up and go home."
You do realize that has nothing to do with the point being made, right?
Regardless, I agree with your conclusion.
Ronald J. Ward said...
That’s quite a stretch @ 7:51 Achellies. Senator Murphy did say Maduro lacks democratic legitimacy, but in the same article he explicitly warned that there is no credible military option and called for diplomacy and international cooperation.
Well.
It seems like there is a credible military option now doesn't it. Could you be any more stupid and dishonest? We are going to get international cooperation.
And we will have international opposition. You are the opposition.
You are a traitor who worked with Maduro to bring drugs and guns and foreign fighters into the US to attack Americans. Democrats danced with illegals burning American flags and attacking ICE agents.
You took money from Americans and gave it to the people who are attacking ICE agents and National Guard.
Trump better get on the real problem or we will elect someone who will. The real problem is inside the United States.
“The ‘armed forces’ don't continue to back Maduro.”
CTH: “According to the latest news from the government of Cuba, two days of official mourning have been declared as they announce 32 members of the Cuban military and Intelligence services were killed in Venezuela while protecting Nicolas Maduro.”
In other words, Maduro didn’t trust his own armed forces to protect his personal safety.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2026/01/05/cuba-govt-says-32-cuban-military-and-intelligence-officers-killed-during-maduro-capture/#more-279439
"We can't do anything about illegals rushing the border until congress acts!"
IS A LIE.
a REMINDER: Puppet Joe - Demanded the Border be rushed and our Asylum laws be abused. Right here.
If you want Congress to make every decision, then you don't want anything done, especially hard things, things that require courage, or things that save money, which is basically everything important, but if you need a post office renamed or a boondoggle started, you've come to the right place.
The second Iraq war and regional conflict changed gears with a well-placed missile up an Iranian asset.
Ronald J. Ward said...
Kakistocracy said...
“For me, I just don’t get what the plan is if Delcy Rodriguez
refuses to play ball sufficiently with Trump, or gets rolled by regime hardliners. Are they going to keep snatching Venezuelan leaders until an acceptable one comes along?“
Exactly. Are there criminal warrants against Rodriguez?
Only the most gullible of the goobers would still maintain this is about protecting Americans from drugs.
The only people listening to Rodriguez or thinking she has any legitimacy are traitors like you.
Rodriguez is not even in Venezuela and is supported by foreign powers and is only VP because the army shot people and voided the election she lost.
Rodriguez is not even part of the conversation. Nobody cares about what Rodriguez says, especially not the people of Venezuela. The only people who give her any legitimacy want the United States to fail.
bagoh20 said...
The Gell-Mann amnesia is strong the people who get their information from Democrats. Yesterday they said something directly contrary to what they say today and people take them serious every day, over and over.
Right out of Orwell’s 1984. We have always been at war with — whomever we started fighting with at 9:00 this morning.
Well aktually she did make it back but shes on a short leash
People in the U.K. are begging Trump to take their leader too.
There should be an Island for unwanted national leaders. I'd put the requirement at 30% or less approval rating, so our entire Congress could go there.
I like this:
John Carter
@martianwyrdlord
"Hegseth is the most effective SecWar the US has had in a very long time.
But he doesn't talk with the bland polish of a managerial class striver, which is the only thing that matters to the hollow men."
Starmer is just another corrupt leftist... using the illegal and imported violent male Islamic supremacist population for money laundering and votes.
It took the removal of that pencil pusher admiral holsey to make this mission possible
Pro tip: If you find yourself defending a lying weasel like Sen. Chris Murphy you may want to rethink things. Trump may be an a**hole, but he generally says what he means and means what he says. That's appealing to many people, but is something Democrats just can't seem to wrap their head around.
bagoh20 said...
“People in the U.K. are begging Trump to take their leader too.
There should be an Island for unwanted national leaders. I'd put the requirement at 30% or less approval rating, so our entire Congress could go there.”
Now that Rudolph, Hermy, and Yukon Cornelius convinced Santa to find a home for all of its denizens, the Island of Misfit Toys is available.
The US is adopting the Defeated Doctrine.
If Trump wants to emulate the spheres of influence interests of the world's two largest autocracies, the US has geopolitically defeated itself. It is writing its own Defeated Treaty.
If China and Russia were to geopolitically defeat the US, the new Versailles Peace Treaty II would require the US to limit its influence to the western hemisphere while ceding all of the eastern hemisphere to the new Aligned Powers, Russia and China. This happens to be about where the Republican party was in 1920 on the debate on the first Versailles Treaty. The reach of their foreign policy aspirations in 1920 were to make the Caribbean a lake for the United Fruit Company.
To cede the entire Far East to Chinese suzerainty is the equivalent of the US ceding all of Europe to Wilhelmine Germany in 1914 or Nazi Germany in 1940--the control of the world's dominant industrial region to one non-democratic power. To further cede a neutralized Europe to Russia-China domination is to create an expanded Warsaw Pact trade area that would end 500 years of North Atlantic trade. Europe could become the northern provinces of a new expanded Ottoman Africa-Muslim Empire.
So just what would the point be of this new American Autarky? Certainly not broad-based prosperity. Certainly a couple tens of thousands families across the Americas might enjoy gilded and glitzy aristocratic lifestyles in the plantation economies of the Americas trading bananas and other commodities for Far East manufactured goods. The grass would grow in the streets of New York.
Should not there be a debate about the foregone opportunities that American Autarky involves? Or does special envoy Steve Witkoff just get to write the Defeated Treaty on his own subject to ratification at a Sunday afternoon luncheon party at Mar-a-Lago, the new foreign policy ratification center since the Senate ceded these powers to the executive?
Greenland will be available
Most of the drugs coming into America come from China and Mexico, not from Venezuela, especically the extremely dangerous ones like fentanyl, heroin, and methamphetamine. Yet you can be damn sure that Trump is never going to bomb Mexico City or Beijing, or capture their leaders.
https://share.google/RAUrAwnoXX36qZtaf
bagoh20 said...
If you want Congress to make every decision, then you don't want anything done, especially hard things, things that require courage, or things that save money, which is basically everything important, but if you need a post office renamed or a boondoggle started, you've come to the right place.
1/5/26, 9:11 AM
^^^^THIS^^^^^^
IF US can extract a corrupt dictator from a 3rd-world country as easily as Maduro, then hell, go for it. Far more cost-effective than paying billions to USAID to promote supposed "freedom and democracy" to underprivileged people held captive by their military juntas.
“The price of coke is headed up. Hunter is not happy. Same for many other Dems. Dems love their drugs.”
Fentanyl at least has near substitutes, like heroin. It was just cheaper, but killed more of its clientele. It’s going to be interesting to see how this all plays out. Esp in urban hellholes like NYC, Chicago, etc. Habits are going to be more expensive, which means more theft, in an era where the libs are ever softer on crime, and NYC, at least is banning private property. Looking forward to watching this unfold, at a long, safe, distance, surrounded by my gun collection.
I am not as worried about Hunter and his cocaine. Just cook it and you have the more potent crack. The real physical addiction is with narcotics, like fentanyl and heroin. Maybe some abusers can move to meth, which can be made almost anywhere…
lonejustice said...
Most of the drugs coming into America come from China and Mexico, not from Venezuela, especically the extremely dangerous ones like fentanyl (sic)
Wow. That’s insightful. Perhaps you can explain the mechanism in which China gets those drugs into the US.
“Bob @ 8:14. “Police action” isn’t a legal category — it’s a label presidents use to avoid the word “war.” The Constitution still requires Congress to authorize hostilities, and Jefferson himself sought that authorization against the Barbary states. “
No. The Constitution only requires Congress to declare WAR. And we haven’t been at WAR in over 80 years now.
List of U.S. presidents who have authorized airstrikes or military actions without specific Congressional approval:
-Harry S. Truman Korea (1950) – Deployed U.S. forces and authorized airstrikes in Korea without formal Congressional declaration of war.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower Lebanon (1958) – Ordered U.S. air and naval forces into Lebanon to stabilize a political crisis.
-John F. Kennedy Cuba (1961–1962) – Bay of Pigs (though indirectly supported), and later the Cuban Missile Crisis military posture.
-Lyndon B. Johnson Vietnam (1964) – Gulf of Tonkin airstrikes occurred before the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passe d.
-Richard Nixon Cambodia & Laos (1969–1973) – Conducted secret and unauthorized bombing campaigns as part of Vietnam War.
-Jimmy Carter Iran (1980) – Operation Eagle Claw failed attempt to free hostages
-Ronald Reagan Libya (1986) – Bombed Tripoli and Benghazi in retaliation for the Berlin discotheque bombing. Grenada (1983) – Invasion and airstrikes without prior congressional approval.
-George H. W. Bush Panama (1989) – Invasion and airstrikes to oust Manuel Noriega. Iraq (1990–1991) – Airstrikes began before Congress passed a resolution approving Desert Storm.
-Bill Clinton Bosnia (1995) – NATO airstrikes in Bosnia without Congressional approval. Iraq (1998) – Operation Desert Fox airstrikes against Saddam Hussein. Kosovo (1999) – 78-day NATO bombing campaign without Congressional approval.
-George W. Bush Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia (2001–2009) – Authorized drone strikes relying on the 2001 AUMF but without specific country-by-country authorization.
-Barack Obama Libya (2011) – Air campaign as part of NATO action to topple Gaddafi, without Congressional approval. Syria, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen (2014–2016) – Airstrikes against ISIS and other terror groups under 2001 AUMF, no new authorization sought.
-Donald Trump Syria (2017, 2018) – Airstrikes against Assad regime over chemical weapons, without Congressional approval. Iraq (2020) – Ordered airstrike that killed Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.
-Joe Biden Syria (2021, 2022) – Airstrikes on Iranian-backed militia groups. Somalia & Yemen (ongoing) – Continued air campaigns under prior AUMFs.
Bruce Hayden said:
Fentanyl at least has near substitutes, like heroin. It was just cheaper, but killed more of its clientele. It’s going to be interesting to see how this all plays out. Esp in urban hellholes like NYC, Chicago, etc. Habits are going to be more expensive, which means more theft, in an era where the libs are ever softer on crime, and NYC, at least is banning private property. Looking forward to watching this unfold, at a long, safe, distance, surrounded by my gun collection.
Good points.
Leland said...
“I remember when “the basket” eroded the Constitution to push for the arrest of Mohammed Aidid.”
Not to let that nonsense get lost in the fog, that was collective security under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, not unilateral action. It was also funded by Congress.
It’s like the goobers go out of their way to just make up stupid shit. I can remember when you at least seemed to try.
It seems obvious that clear majorities of both houses of Congress (including a significant number of dems) approve of the Venezuela operation. It's also clear that advance notification and Congressional approval would have endangered the operation, placing American lives in danger. Finally, even the Venezuelan people seem to approve of it. So all of the supposed outrage over it in the U.S. is really stupid.
Well, as is the case with so much of Joe Biden, the Scranton Scrapper, that was then and this is now. He's just not up to facing Corn Pop these days.
“No. The Constitution only requires Congress to declare WAR. And we haven’t been at WAR in over 80 years now.”
Heck, with this Supreme Court, it’s likely that the War Powers Act is unconstitutional, and this little overnight grab and arrest of Moduru probably didn’t even trigger that statute and it’s 72 grace period.
narciso said...
“Greenland will be available”
I thought about that, but wouldn’t want to foist the politicians on the native Greenlanders. Not sure that the island is truly large enough to keep the two groups separate.
Diddy welcomed Maduro to prison and said, "I feel your pain Bro. They took my oil too."
collective security under Chapter VII of the UN Charter
I wasn’t aware of the UN Charter’s supremacy to the US Constitution. I stand by my comment in regards to eroding the Constitution. Also, Congress appropriated funds for the US military last year.
narciso said...
“Greenland will be available”
Yeah, but putting politicians in a cold snowy place like Greenland…. Well, that’s pretty much how the movie The Thing starts.
Paul, @ 10:09, tell us how any of that equates to regime removal and occupation.
Dogma, @ 10:12, you’re repeating a false dilemma that the MAGA crowd keeps trying to sell. The reality is that congressional authorization doesn’t mean announcing a date and time of attack. It means debate, limits, objectives, and accountability. The U.S. sought authorization before Afghanistan and Iraq without “telling the enemy we’re coming,” and presidents and military leaders still retained tactical surprise.
Also, Trump mentioned in his presser that the Maduro regime knew they were coming and were ready for them.
Most of the drugs coming into America come from China and Mexico...
Nice of you to notice the Big Picture, which Trump has addressed in speeches and EOs several times. China was building up assets in Venezuela and benefitting from their oil (700,00 barrels per day): that's done. China's secondary route into the USA is Mexico, as you note. President Sheinbaum is presiding over a narco-terrorist government, and Trump has said so.
The current discussion is whether MX will wise up and partner with their neighbor to clean out the neighborhood or stick with their multi-cartel coalition to see what shakes out.
So one who is truly concerned about the drug flow would see the VZ move as a strong signal to MX to shape up. Trump has already designated the several cartels on the border as "narco-terrorist organizations."
Finally, one data point you did not mention is US Armed Forces recruiting. We are recruiting fighters* because we may have another fight coming, with Mexico.
*Army ads are once again allowed to show white guys!
Chuck said: The Constitution still requires Congress to authorize hostilities,
I am still waiting for our resident legal beagle to point out where in the Constitution it says that Congress has to authorize "hostilities".
Bruce Hayden said...
“No. The Constitution only requires Congress to declare WAR. And we haven’t been at WAR in over 80 years now.”
What would you call it if Xi Jinping successfully kidnapped Trump, flew him to China, told us they’re taking over, told Vance he’d be gone to if they gave him any shit, and then said they’re confiscating our resources for compensation?
Hypotheticals about China do not change the fact that the President has Article 2 powers as Commander in Chief that cover an extremely broad range of options short of war. Every single president exercises them, some more than others. You cannot point to any president since Roosevelt who has adhered to the Ron Ward War Doctrine.
Just show us one president who adhered to your proscription, Ron. One example would shut us up. LOL
I suggest do some reading: United States v. Alvarez-Machain (1992) "confirmed the US can sometimes assert power extraterritorially, even if the method (abduction) is controversial, hinting at executive power beyond traditional war."
Seems like more than a "hint" when it keeps happening.
Mike, you can cite every extraterritorial “success” case all day — it doesn’t make it legal to declare yourself governor of Venezuela.
The point isn’t that presidents never act abroad — it’s that the Constitution vests war-making authority in Congress. Repeatedly bending minor precedents doesn’t erase that requirement. Otherwise, Article II would swallow Article I entirely.
It probably would have been better if we'd let Europe resolve the First World War on their own, rather than intervene and try to remake Europe. In the Cold War years, our concern with "our own backyard" didn't make us any less willing to intervene elsewhere. Will there be a "neutralized Europe"? More likely, Europe will arm itself and be a match for a crippled Russia.
the Constitution vests war-making authority in Congress.
Where is that “war-making” authority?
The DoJ with support from the judiciary can declare a foreign leader a criminal, yet Congress “makes war”?
Still laughing my ass off at Ronald, Freder, and Kak- there is no international law that makes this action illegal. Maybe it would be a good thing if there were but there isn't. The strings of "international law" would have left Maduro in power until the day he died just like Castro.
There are only two considerations for an action like Trump just did- (1) can it be done; and (2) should it be done? No other items matter. I would have more respect for you, Ronald, if you spent more time dealing with #2 and far less time on whether or not it was "legal". I have my doubts about #2 but that bridge has been crossed.
You can take vizzini to water, but you cant make him drink
Was 70s/80s Biden better than 2010s/2020s Biden? Biden's old prejudices yielded to new ones, but incompetence is the thread uniting 20th and 21st century Biden.
Ron you can cry all you want but saying "that's illegal" doesn't make it so. It is in fact happening and there's nothing you can do about it.
You can disagree with SCOTUS but they typically get the "last word" on these things and they say you're full of shit. Now that progressives have chopped down all the laws to hide behind where will you go?
(Unexplained classical reference inserted simply to dunk on the dork)
The man is extremely slow to comprehend that we are not "at war." In the words of Hillary Clinton: "We cam. We saw. He died."
Except in this case we arrested and detained him for trial. You know, trial, that thing you lefties always demand of international criminals. Now you get it and it still ain't enough.
At least name the parties involved in this imaginary ongoing conflict if you are going to speciously write "We are at war."
"We came. We saw. He died." Error corrected.
In that case qaddafi was murdered by a mob, following a fatwa from the qatari iman quradawi
mindnumbrobot's words (9:29am) about Chris Murphy are eloquent, but even better is this comment I found on Twitter (here), by one Vincent Charles, replying to Murphy's tweet. It's long, but I'll quote the whole thing, since it made me laugh out loud when I got to the end:
"Let me tell you a story, Chris…
"The Amazon river runs for thousands of miles.
"At some points, it runs through areas of the rain forest that are almost untouched and have been barely explored.
"Because of the porous limestone in these areas, the river water leaks through the stone and travels deep into the earth, forming underground pools over a mile below the surface.
"Over thousands of years, small blind transparent fish have lived and evolved in these pools.
"These fish have never seen the sun or surface and have never been seen by the human eye . . .
"These fish care more about this tweet than I do."
What would you call it if Xi Jinping successfully kidnapped Trump, flew him to China, told us they’re taking over, told Vance he’d be gone to if they gave him any shit, and then said they’re confiscating our resources for compensation?
Your point is apparently that Americans wouldn't like it if Xi did to us what Trump did to Venezuela, but Venezuelans do like it. They love it. They are jubilant and celebrating all over the country and thanking Trump for his bold action.
Good try though. I like that you're thinking.
The President's war powers have long been and will continue to be a subject of disagreement and the focus of political wrangling. Repeating your own opinion of the current example does not resolve the issue.
Not getting Congressional approval does not make a President a dictator. He is still subject to the approval or disapproval of the voters which is a higher court, so to speak.
Most voters understand why going to Congress on this one was not an option. They approve of Trump's decision in that regard.
@ Yancy
IMHO, there is no such thing as “International Law”. It is an oxymoron.
There are international agreements, but they have little, if any, policing power.
You know, a former prime minister of Italy has claimed that NATO shot down a civilian airliner because they thought that they had a shot at Qaddafi.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/italy-france-plane-crash-itavia-1980-muammar-qaddafi-libya-us-nato-macron/
Apparently the US cooked up an "exercise" in which a live missile was supposed to be "accidentally fired" to take dow the Libyan leader's aircraft. Instead we got a disaster similar to when that Air Malaysia flight shot down over a combat zone in Ukraine where aircraft had been shot down in the previous weeks. Only worse, more reckless.
The Itavia jet had no idea that it was in a combat zone, since it wasn't a combat zone until NATO cooked up this assassination plot.
As usual, whenever Jaq's Putinite propaganda is refuted in detail, he just waits a few weeks and repeats it again as if the passing of time would somehow restore its validity. One more time: MH370 was flying over Ukraine at 33,000 feet and the Russians had assured the world that they were not involved in the Donbas, that it was a popular rebellion by locals, not a Russian invasion. If that had been true, the airliner would have been perfectly safe, since a popular rebellion would have had no weapon capable of shooting down an aircraft flying that high, not even close. It could only be shot down because Russian KGB colonel Igor Girkin brought an advanced Russian anti-aircraft missile system across the border, shot down the plane, and then took it back. It was in fact a war crime, an atrocity, and 100% the fault of the brutal invading regime of Vladimir Putin and his Russian tools like Girkin. Only a complete swine or another Russian tool would blame anyone else.
As for the alleged NATO shooting, why not identify who was president at the time? It was Jimmy Carter. If you want to blame Carter for a war crime, it's fine with me.
You guys can shine that Trump turd all you like but it’s still a turd. And regardless of how you want to label or spin it, this is an act of war.
Partially AI copied and pasted and I’ve double checked so unless I’m wrong, the forcible capture and removal of Maduro by U.S. forces is not a “law enforcement action.” Under international law, that is use of armed force against the political independence of a sovereign state, which squarely triggers Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.
That alone places this in the category of international armed conflict.
Trump’s statement that the U.S. will “run the country until a proper transition” meets the definition of belligerent occupation under The Hague Regulations (1907)
and The Fourth Geneva Convention.
Once a foreign military exercises effective control over territory, it is an occupation — whether the word “war” is used or not.
Warning Rodríguez that she will “pay a very big price” unless she complies is coercive regime control, not diplomacy. International law does not permit installing conditional leadership, dictation terms under threat of force, or punishing noncompliance absent UN authorization.
This reinforces that the U.S. is acting as a belligerent power, not a neutral enforcer.
Openly stating that the U.S. will confiscate Venezuelan oil is one of the clearest markers of war.
Under international humanitarian law:
Pillaging or appropriating natural resources of an occupied state is illegal.
Resource seizure is a classic war objective, not a policing function.
Calling it “recovery,” “stabilization,” or “theft restitution” does not change its legal character.
This action is not:
Self-defense (no imminent armed attack by Venezuela)
UN-authorized (no Security Council resolution)
Consent-based (the Venezuelan state did not invite U.S. forces)
That leaves unilateral armed intervention, which is exactly what the UN Charter was designed to prohibit.
It’s an act of war regardless of congressional approval but the fact Trump went it alone makes it illegal here at home in addition with around the world.
Who is at war with us Ron?
Venezuela was not, and is not yet, a "sovereign state". Its brutal dictator stayed in power with the help of foreign troops, primarily Cuban (his bodyguard), but also Russian Wagnerites, Iranians, Hezbollah, and Chinese. He was a Cuban satrap, and Venezuela a Cuban colony.
“The point isn’t that presidents never act abroad — it’s that the Constitution vests war-making authority in Congress. Repeatedly bending minor precedents doesn’t erase that requirement. Otherwise, Article II would swallow Article I entirely.”
No. Congress Declares war and pays for it (Article I). The President wages it (Article II § 1 ¶ 1 Executive and CIC powers). This little snatch and grab didn’t even violate the probably unconstitutional War Powers Act, because it took less than 72 hours. Less than 24. Next time do your homework first.
"And regardless of how you want to label or spin it, this is an act of war."
If so, why hasn't Venezuela declared war on the U.S.? Maybe it's because they too recognize that this operation was not of a sufficient nature, scale, or duration to deem the two countries to be in a state of war.
Anyway, given that lefties like yourself are real sticklers when it comes to the Constitution (hah!), wouldn't you agree that the only constitutional remedies for this supposed upheaval of constitutional order are (a) impeachment, and (b) the voters' right to toss out of officeholders who support the action in the next election?
“ That leaves unilateral armed intervention, which is exactly what the UN Charter was designed to prohibit.”
Luckily for us (and Trump) the use of the US military force is typically not controlled by the UN. We could have made it so, when we joined the treaty, but didn’t. The Senate has the power to ratify treaties. And sometimes they agree to subordinate US law to a treaty. Sometimes they don’t. This time they didn’t.Of course, if we had, that would probably be unconstitutional, as Congressional encroachment into the President’s core Article II powers, under this Supreme Court.
Next time do your research.
Besides, what could the UNdo if we had, indeed violated its rules? It can’t send any of its blue helmeted troops. That requires Security Counsel action, and we have a permanent veto there. And the General Assembly has no real power. Maybe send a sternly worded letter?
For there to be a legal cause of action recognized by a US court, the treaty must be self executing.. That takes specific US legislation, passed by Congress and signed by the President. It wasn’t ever enacted in regards to the UN treaty, and wasn’t going to be, because by then, we were essentially in the Cold War, and didn’t trust the Soviet Union, which had a seat in the General Assembly for each of its republics.
At this point what can/could Maduro do?He might be able to beat the charge now against him, in US court in front of a 92 year old Carter judge.And he could join his colleagues in Moscow.
But he isn’t getting his country, or his old job there, back.The Venezuelans don’t want him. The official government there doesn’t want him back, except to try him for his crimes. If the 92 year old Carter judge orders it, the Trump Administration would laugh at him, and the Supreme Court would order that he stay in his own lane, and suggest retirement.
“If so, why hasn't Venezuela declared war on the U.S.? Maybe it's because they too recognize that this operation was not of a sufficient nature, scale, or duration to deem the two countries to be in a state of war.”
Why would they complain? Maduro is out, and they are in power right now, with a government acknowledged by the US.
Ronald J. Ward said...
"The FBI cannot serve warrants worldwide on its own authority."
Just did, Bro.
But, I think it was actually DEA.
"As usual, whenever Jaq's Putinite propaganda is refuted in detail,"
Just because you claim to "refute" something doesn't make it so. the fact is that aircraft were being shot down over the area, and as far as I can see, that was reason enough to close off the airspace to civilian traffic, just because the cowboys in Kiev or Brussels, or wherever didn't think so has no bearing on my judgement.
Gary Powers got shot down over the USSR believing that his plane was flying over the AA ceiling of the Soviets too.
And here's Jaq repeating his stupid defense of Gerkin's war crime. Yes, the airline should have guessed that the Russians were lying about not having any Russian troops or weapons in the Donbas. But Gary Powers knew he was flying over actual Soviet territory defended by its most advanced weaponry: an entirely different situation, that only a lying weasel would bring up.
So wait a minute, on every other occasion, Ukrainians believe that the Russians lie about everything, but this. time they were willing to stake the lives of thousands of people a day on the word of the Russians.
I like to believe that "an abundance of caution" is the standard that applies to commercial air travel, or should. Hopefully the loss of overflight fees did not factor into Ukraine's decision, and they only made it in an abundance of caution, banking on the Russians being absolutely truthful beyond a shadow of a doubt about operational matters in an ongoing conflict. Because that's what "abundance of caution" means.
Sure, if that's what you are claiming, you are welcome to your opinion.
Cmon man you can't really be that dumb.
Dumb and dishonest.
Has Jaq ever admitted before that the supposed 'uprising' of disgruntled residents of the Donbas was in fact a Russian invasion right from the start, with Russian regulars doing nearly all the fighting? Not so far as I recall.
And has he thought of the fact that Russia not only had to be totally dishonest about what weapons were inside Ukraine, but also had to be incredibly stupid, or vicious, or both, not to check whether a plane flying over at 33,000 feet was an airliner? It was a regularly scheduled flight, so they could have just checked the published schedules and said "oh no, that's a Malaysian civilian airliner, we'd better let it pass", but they didn't.
The fact is that Jaq is incapable of admitting that Putin's Russia has ever done anything wrong, which once again makes him look like a paid propagandist. Perhaps when Putin is overthrown the files will be opened and we'll get all the names.
He forgot that gerkin had turned against putin
Poor Ronald- if no one can enforce these international "laws" then they aren't really laws, dumbass. You got anything else? There is exactly one body that can rein in Trump on this issue and that is Congress through impeachment and removal which isn't going to happen- you won't get but maybe one GOP senator for conviction (Paul). Like I wrote above- it is all about can and should- nothing else matters.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.