"What Trump did NOT do was even purport to show a single ineligible voter voted in the 2020 election, or..."

"... that any voting machines were actually compromised, voting machines or voter registration databases breached, or election results inaccurately reported. Overall, this was an underwhelming announcement delivered with low energy that changes nothing about how state and local election administrators should run elections. If his government had actual evidence of noncitizen voting, there would be indictments; Trump has been hounding US attorneys to bring such cases, and the fact that he hasn’t shows that these claims likely have no legs.... He also did not offer anything new by way of policy proposals...."

Writes Rick Hasen, in "Trump’s Underwhelming Announcement on Voting Does Not Even Purport to Show That Any Illegal Votes Were Cast in the 2020 Election or That Voting Machines Have Been Hacked or Vote Totals Inaccurate; He Also Made a Pitch to Pass the SAVE America Act But Offered No New Federal Mandates" (Election Law Blog).

See for yourself: 

He started off as if he really wanted to give a State of the Union speech:

"Mr. Rubio could be the next leader of Venezuela, Mr. Trump suggested. And while the president’s aides say he was joking... the fact is that Mr. Rubio does not need to move to Caracas."

"He already runs Venezuela from Washington.... While he has not visited Venezuela in person since the U.S. took over, the secretary of state is deeply involved in the country’s day-to-day operations, keeping in close contact with Delcy Rodríguez, who was Mr. Maduro’s vice president and now leads her country on an acting basis, with the imprimatur of the United States. The two exchange messages in Spanish on WhatsApp, trading gossip, birthday greetings and selfies. Despite the banter, the relationship between Mr. Rubio and Ms. Rodríguez is far from a partnership. It is a manifestation of Trump-era American power, in which the winner takes all regardless of sovereignty and international law.... In the early hours of Jan. 3, shortly after Mr. Maduro was captured, Mr. Rubio reached Ms. Rodríguez by phone. Speaking in Spanish, Mr. Rubio told her that she had a choice between working with the United States or witnessing a broader attack targeting Venezuela’s infrastructure, military bases and senior officials. After some negotiation, Ms. Rodríguez agreed...."

From "How Marco Rubio is Running Venezuela From Afar/The secretary of state effectively controls Venezuela’s finances, the distribution of its natural resources and its government. His grip on the country is a vivid manifestation of American power in the Trump era" (NYT).

"At my direction, the United States Southern Command delivered a swift and lethal kinetic strike to successfully execute Niño Guerrero, the infamous leader of Tren De Aragua..."

"... one of the most bloodthirsty Terrorist Organizations on Planet Earth.... This action was coordinated closely with our friends in Venezuela, with whom we are working very well. As a result, Tren de Aragua terrorists no longer have safe haven in Venezuela or anywhere else and, under my leadership, we will find these vicious murderers and drugs lords anytime, anyplace, and send them to the depths of hell where they belong. GOD BLESS AMERICA! President DONALD J. TRUMP"

Writes Trump, at Truth Social.

"At some point in the not too distant future, we will be taking Kharg Island, and other oil infrastructure points, and assume total control of their Oil and Gas Markets..."

"... much like we have with Venezuela, which is working out brilliantly for both Venezuela and the United States of America. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP"

Trump at Truth Social.

UPDATE: At Truth Social:

Based on the fact that discussions with the Islamic Republic of Iran have been brought to the highest level of Iranian leadership and approved, I have, as President of the United States of America, cancelled the scheduled strikes and bombings against Iran this evening. Discussions and final points have been, in both concept and great detail, approved by all parties involved, including the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Turkey, Pakistan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, and others. The Naval Blockade will remain in full force and effect until this Transaction is finalized — Time and place of the signing to be announced shortly.

DONALD J. TRUMP
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

So "discussions" have been approved. That doesn't sound like an agreement. But there is "this Transaction." That too doesn't sound like an agreement, and yet it is something that can be "finalized" and signed, which does sound like an agreement. 

"President Trump Gaggles with Press on Air Force One En Route Palm Beach, FL, Jan. 31, 2026."

I'm going to pick through the transcript and will update in about an hour. Meantime, you can pick over the text and pull out your favorite highlights

ADDED: From the YouTube transcript:

"I presented the President of the United States the medal of the Nobel Peace Prize as a recognition for his unique commitment with our freedom."

That's María Corina Machado, who had the power to make a gift of the object, the medal, but cannot cause Trump to become the prize-winner.

Presumably, she did not give him any of the money — about $1 million — that came with the award. That money means much more to her than to our billionaire President, but more important, visitors to the President can't be handing over piles of money. And she wants something from him. She wants a lot.

He wanted something too, the Nobel Prize, and now he's in the ambiguous position of sort of having it. You just have the medal. It's like Putin's Super Bowl ring.

What do you have when you have the token of winning and you did not win? It's not the token of winning with respect to you, so what is it? 

"Republican leaders were able to garner enough support for their procedural maneuver to kill the resolution after Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Todd Young of Indiana flipped their position..."

"... and joined the effort to stop it from coming up for a vote. The shift brought about a 50-50 tie, which was broken late Wednesday in favor of Republican leadership by Vice President JD Vance, in his role as president of the Senate."

From "Republicans Block Effort to Check Trump’s Power in Venezuela/G.O.P. leaders succeeded in pressuring fellow senators who initially supported the measure that would have limited President Trump’s military authority in Venezuela" (NYT).

That was close. Sufficient garnering occurred.

"[Rand] Paul, the sole Republican to cosponsor the resolution, said that he too had spoken with Mr. Trump but was unmoved. He criticized party leaders for 'playing games' and accused the administration of misleading lawmakers. 'Oh, it’s a drug bust. Oh, we’re going for drugs. Oh, it’s not really drugs, now it’s oil,' he said. 'So see, the bait and switch has already happened.'"

"He wields a replica of a prehistoric club as he rages against enemies of the revolution..."

"...on his weekly television programme. He is rumoured to be one of the richest men in Venezuela, but insists he is but a 'humble soldier.' At night he tours Caracas in his bulletproof Toyota, rifle at the ready, reassuring his millions of TikTok viewers that all is calm in the homeland. This is the mad, bad and dangerous-to-know world of Diosdado Cabello: interior minister, head honcho of the security forces and possible roadblock to the Trump administration’s vision of a vassal-state Venezuela."

The London Times reports.

And look at that club! "Prehistoric," indeed. It's Flintstonesque:

(What is the origin of the phrase "mad, bad and dangerous-to-know"? It's something Lady Caroline Lamb wrote about her lover Lord Byron in 1812.)

"In a wide-ranging conversation with four Times reporters, President Trump talked about the Minneapolis ICE shooting, immigration, Venezuela and even his plans for further White House renovations."

I see "Trump Sits Down With Times Reporters for Two-Hour Interview," the headline in the NYT.

There's no substance, just an announcement:

The Times’s coverage of the president’s remarks will include stories, newsletters and videos over the coming days, as well as an episode of The Daily on Friday. A transcript of the interview will be published.

Very bold of Trump to give all that access — and right in the middle of a week packed with quickly unfolding action and with only the full transcript to protect him. I like that the Times is breaking out the material in separate bits.

The first bit is: "We Pressed Trump on His Conclusion About the ICE Shooting. Here’s What He Said. The exchange was a glimpse into the president’s reflexive defense of his federal crackdown on immigration." It could have been a much more reflexive defense of the ICE agents. His first take was balanced: "I want to see nobody get shot. I want to see nobody screaming and trying to run over policemen either." And later, he says: "She behaved horribly. And then she ran him over. She didn’t try to run him over" — I would say that's a reflexive defense of the woman. How does he know she didn't try to run the agent over? 

Also, the NYT writes "When we pressed Mr. Trump on his conclusion that the victim, Renee Nicole Good, tried to run over the agent," but technically, the first quote is not a statement that she tried to run anyone over. It's a distanced, abstract statement: "I want to see nobody get shot. I want to see nobody screaming and trying to run over policemen either." I'm not seeing the follow-up question quoted, but I think it shouldn't have been "Why are you concluding that Good tried to run over the agent?" but "Are you saying you've determined that Good tried to run over the agent?" [Or better, to avoid ambiguity: "Are you saying you've determined that Good intended to run over the agent?"]

The second article based on the interview is "Trump Says U.S. Oversight of Venezuela Could Last for Years/In a wide-ranging interview with The New York Times on Wednesday, President Trump said 'only time will tell' when it comes to how long the United States aims to control the country" (NYT).

"Some of the rules, some of the unthinkables, some of the things that we wouldn't have previously imagined being part of the operation are now on the table as options."

"What I think is clear is that we're entering a new phase of great power competition."

Said Ryan C. Berg, the director of the Americas Program and head of the Future of Venezuela Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, quoted in "How could Trump's move against Venezuela impact China, Russia, Iran and Cuba?" (CBS News).

"María Corina Machado, the Venezuelan opposition leader, repeatedly praised President Trump on Monday during a prime-time appearance on Fox News...."

"Ms. Machado... even offered him the Nobel Peace Prize she was awarded in October, a prize Mr. Trump has coveted for years..... 'She doesn’t have the support within, or the respect within, the country,' Mr. Trump said of Ms. Machado on Saturday. 'She’s a very nice woman, but she doesn’t have the respect.' Senior U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, had persuaded Mr. Trump that Venezuela could be further destabilized if the United States tried to back the opposition. A classified C.I.A. intelligence analysis reflected that view, according to a person familiar with the document.... Mr. Trump has not indicated if new elections will be held in Venezuela, saying only that the United States was 'in charge' of the country. Ms. Machado said on Monday that the opposition would win 'over 90 percent of the vote in free and fair elections.'..."

The New York Times reports, in "Venezuela’s Machado Praises Trump in Fox News Interview/María Corina Machado, the Venezuelan opposition leader, offered to share her Nobel Peace Prize with President Trump. He has refused to back her."

Here's the interview:

ADDED: There's some good background in this other NYT article, published before that Fox News interview, "Why Trump Refused to Back Venezuela’s Machado: Fears of Chaos, and Fraying Ties/U.S. intelligence suggested María Corina Machado, Venezuela’s opposition leader, would struggle to lead the government. But her relationship with Trump officials had been souring for months" (NYT)(gift link). Excerpt:

"For us, this is a very happy day when we see a dictator who has been part of oppressing and abusing the Venezuelan people for 25 years, when we see him in handcuffs..."

"... and held to some sort of accountability, it brought me to tears. It brought me great joy.... I think you can still celebrate that this murderous, corrupt, sadistic son of a bitch is out of Venezuela....”

SHOCKING: The View’s Ana Navarro: “For us, this is a very happy day when we see a dictator who has been part of oppressing and abusing the Venezuelan people for 25 years, when we see him in handcuffs and held to some sort of accountability, it brought me to tears. It brought me… pic.twitter.com/chyUkZ22DP

— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) January 5, 2026

There's also this from Navarro:

“Did Hell Freeze Over?”… @ananavarro Praises President Trump for Getting Rid of Maduro… pic.twitter.com/dJ3iw24yKG

— 𝕰𝖒𝕲 (@Emilio2763) January 4, 2026

The President of Mexico and the President of Colombia react quite differently to Trump's posturing.

The NYT reports on Colombia President Gustavo Petro:

After Mr. Trump said that U.S. military forces in the Caribbean could be used against Colombia and other countries, and accused Mr. Petro of being involved in cocaine production, Mr. Petro said: “If you detain a president whom much of my people want and respect, you will unleash the people’s jaguar.”... 

He added that Colombia has deployed more than 30,000 troops along its border with Venezuela to prepare for potential destabilization, a surge of migrants or confrontations with drug cartels that he said would “very likely feel increased pressure and attempt to harm the Colombian people.”

The NYT reports the Mexican president Claudia Sheinbaum:

President Claudia Sheinbaum brushed aside President Trump’s warning that Mexico must get its “act together” on drug trafficking or face possible U.S. action. 

“This is just President Trump’s manner of speaking,” Sheinbaum said at a news conference on Monday. She acknowledged that the White House had pushed for military action on Mexican soil, but said that the problem of organized crime could not be solved with foreign intervention.

Whose rhetoric is likely to be more effective with Trump? I see that Petro hotly deployed vivid language — "the people's jaguar" — and Sheinbaum coolly observed that Trump deploys vivid language. To Sheinbaum, Trump is a blustery beast, but she can handle him. To Petro, the people are a fierce powerful beast and they will rise up and defend him against Trump. 

"Let's go after the drug lords where they LIVE!"

FLASHBACK: 1989 JOE BIDEN would love what President Trump just did:

"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

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) January 5, 2026

"You can't turn Venezuela into the operating hub for Iran, for Russia, for Hezbollah, for China, for the Cuban intelligence agents that control that country."

"That cannot continue. Those things cannot continue to be in place. You cannot continue to have the largest oil reserves in the world under the control of adversaries of the United States, not benefiting the people of Venezuela, and stolen by a handful of oligarchs around the world including inside of Venezuela, but not benefiting the people of that country. You know, we've seen how our adversaries all over the world are exploiting and extracting resources from Africa, from every other country. They're not going to do it in the Western Hemisphere."

Said Marco Rubio, on "Meet the Press" this morning.

"'The task in front of him is stupefying,' said a senior U.S. official, noting the dizzying array of policy decisions related to energy, elections, sanctions and security that await."

"This person, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to respond freely. The moment marks the realization of a long-held goal for Rubio, who has voiced his criticisms of Maduro and desire for change in Venezuela for well over a decade. Those who have worked closely with Rubio, whose parents left Cuba before the Communist takeover in 1959, say the issues of the region are close to his heart. 'Marco’s parents’ experience … is hardwired in him,' said Cesar Conda, a Republican strategist who worked as the former senator’s chief of staff between 2011 and 2014.... His Spanish proficiency, familiarity with Latin American leaders and the Venezuelan opposition make him a natural point man for Trump, said another senior U.S. official...."

From "Rubio takes on most challenging role yet: Viceroy of Venezuela/The top U.S. diplomat has pushed for regime change for over a decade. Now the hard part begins" (WaPo).

WaPo's use of the word "viceroy" expresses its own opinion — though few readers will have any idea what that opinion is and many will mistake it for an official title that has been given to Rubio. It's not.

Wikipedia says: "A viceroy is an official who reigns over a polity in the name of and as the representative of the monarch of the territory. The term derives from the Latin prefix vice-, meaning 'in the place of' and the Anglo-Norman roy (Old French roi, roy), meaning "king.' This denotes the position as one who acts on behalf of a king or monarch. A viceroy's territory may be called a viceroyalty...."

I guess this is raw meat for the "no kings" crowd. But then again, maybe it's just a tidbit for those of us who enjoy alliteration: Viceroy of Venezuela. Maybe "governor" is a more appropriate word, but save that for the Washington Post headline when we take over Greenland. Just an alliteration joke. I think the right answer is that no title at all is appropriate for what Rubio is doing and a descriptive phrase like "who is taking the lead role" is best.

Things I found when I created a new tag — "Trump and Venezuela" — and went back into the archive to add it to old posts.

From the Althouse archive:

August 2017: Trump said: "I’m not going to rule out a military option.... Venezuela is a mess. We have many options for Venezuela, including a possible military option if necessary."

March 2018: When anti-Trumpers were interpreting Trump's handshake with baseball hero Jose Altuve, I wrote: "I don't know if Altuve talks about politics, but I don't think he's even an American citizen. He's Venezuelan. If I were Venzuelan, I'd be most worried about Venezuela, and looking at Trump, I'd be thinking, is there some way he can help Venezuela?, or, if I was inclined to the hostility anti-Trumpers are seeing in his face — Why hasn't President Trump done something yet about Venezuela?"

February 2019: When Trump was pleading with the Venezuelan military to support Juan Guaido, I wrote: "I was surprised that on the channel I was watching — Fox News — the analysis after the speech was about the 2020 presidential campaign.... People in Venezuela are suffering. They're starving. We need to help. I thought Trump was trying to get something done, but the news folk rush to talk about the damned campaign, as if that's what sophisticated, savvy people do. I found it offensive."

April 2019: Quoting a Swedish journalist in Venezuela: "Two months have passed since I got here and in that time, the possibility of an American intervention in Venezuela has been on everyone’s mind.

I hope James Carville is doing satire.

About 24 hours ago, I said out loud, here at Meadhouse, "I'm waiting for Trump haters to say this was done to distract us from Epstein."

I'd like to think anyone saying that is doing satire, but James Carville really commits:

🚨NEW: James Carville goes on *UNHINGED* rant claiming Trump Admin Venezuela Operation was "ALL ABOUT EPSTEIN"🤦‍♂️

"Come on, people! Wake up! ... Never ever underestimate what Trump will do to try to survive and draw attention away from Jeffrey Epstein."@DailyCaller pic.twitter.com/jRa52gwDwD

— Jason Cohen 🇺🇸 (@JasonJournoDC) January 3, 2026

Mamdani's notion of "collectivism" as "warmth" finds its way into the WaPo editorial about Venezuela.

I'm reading "Trump’s bold capture of Maduro was a victory for America. What’s next?" by The Editorial Board of The Washington Post. That's the front page headline. Inside it's "Justice in Venezuela/The next challenge is setting the country up for long-term success."

The editorial ends: "For years, Maduro was a symbol of the false warmth of Latin American collectivism. Now he should spend the rest of his life in a humane American prison. His downfall is good news."

That can't be unrelated to Mamdani's recent assertion: "We will replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism."

Look for more "collectivism" as "warmth" rhetoric. I'm not making a new tag for that. Not yet. I'm sticking with the tags "socialism" and "hotness." How absurd is that?

Anyway, the WaPo editors seem rather positive about Trump's action in Venezuela. The mood at The New York Times is different: "Trump’s Attack on Venezuela Is Illegal and Unwise." It ends:

"The United States of America has successfully carried out a large scale strike against Venezuela and its leader, President Nicolas Maduro, who has been, along with his wife, captured and flown out of the Country. "

pic.twitter.com/sYG2neeuoc

— Pete Hegseth (@PeteHegseth) January 3, 2026

Just got off the phone with @SecRubio

He informed me that Nicolás Maduro has been arrested by U.S. personnel to stand trial on criminal charges in the United States, and that the kinetic action we saw tonight was deployed to protect and defend those executing the arrest warrant… https://t.co/lXCxhPoKSZ

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) January 3, 2026

AND: From the live updates at the NYT: