Trump weighs land strikes in Venezuela following attacks on suspected drug boats
The U.S. military destroyed a fifth boat in the Caribbean Sea this week that the Trump White House alleges carried narcotics bound for the U.S. Now, President Trump has raised the prospect of striking Venezuela on land. Amna Nawaz has two views on the actions from John Feeley and Sergio de la Pena.
Read the Full Transcript
Notice: Transcripts are machine and human generated and lightly edited for accuracy. They may contain errors.
Amna Nawaz:
The U.S. military destroyed another boat off the coast of Venezuela this week that the White House alleges was carrying narcotics bound for the U.S.
Both in his first term and his current one, the president and his team have made clear they want Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro out of power. And now Mr. Trump has raised the prospect of striking Venezuela on land.
Off the coast of Venezuela, strike after strike in the Caribbean sea targeting small boats allegedly carrying illegal drugs and headed to the U.S., since early September, five such U.S. military strikes, four of them on boats from Venezuela.
This week, an escalation.
Donald Trump, President of the United States: We are certainly looking at land now, because we have got the sea very well under control.
Amna Nawaz:
With President Trump confirming yesterday that the CIA is conducting covert operations inside Venezuela.
Donald Trump:
I authorized for two reasons, really. Number one, they have emptied their prisons into the United States of America. And the other thing are drugs. We have a lot of drugs coming in from Venezuela. And a lot of the Venezuelan drugs come in through the sea.
Amna Nawaz:
It’s an expansion of what the Pentagon has called a counternarcotics and counterterrorism mission, an armada of U.S. warships already deployed off the Venezuelan coast and B-52 bombers to nearby international airspace.
Nicolas Maduro, Venezuelan President:
Not war, yes peace.
Amna Nawaz:
A defiant President Nicolas Maduro responded to Trump’s remarks yesterday.
Nicolas Maduro (through translator):
No to regime change. No to CIA-orchestrated coup d’etat. Latin America does not want them, does not need them, and repudiates them.
Amna Nawaz:
In a statement, Venezuela’s foreign minister said the escalation seeks to legitimize regime change with the ultimate aim of seizing Venezuela’s oil resources.
For years, Venezuela’s economy has been in freefall. An estimated 80 percent of residents live in poverty, and nearly eight million people have fled Maduro’s regime. He was sworn in for his third term earlier this year, despite evidence he lost reelection by a landslide.
Just last week, one of Maduro’s fiercest foes, Maria Corina Machado, won the Nobel Peace Prize. The opposition leader, who lives in hiding, has spoken in favor of outside intervention in Venezuela. After her win, Machado dedicated the prize to President Trump for his — quote — “decisive support of our cause.”
Late today, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced that the Naval officer in charge of U.S. operations for Latin America would leave by the end of 2025. Admiral Alvin Holsey will end a 37-year career after less than a year in charge of U.S. Southern Command. No reason was given for his impending retirement.
Now we get two views on the Trump administration’s actions against Venezuela.
John Feeley had a 28-year career in the Foreign Service, where he focused on Latin America and served as ambassador to Panama. And Sergio de la Pena was deputy assistant secretary of defense for Western Hemisphere affairs during the first Trump administration. He was the Army’s attache to Venezuela in the 1990s and is a retired Army colonel.
Gentlemen, welcome to you both. Thanks for joining us.
So, Ambassador Feeley, let me begin with you.
The news of President Trump confirming covert CIA operations in Venezuela, threatening military strikes on land inside a sovereign nation, what’s your reaction to that?
John Feeley, Former U.S. Ambassador to Panama: My reaction is that this is unfortunately more of the improvisational amateurism that we have kind of come to expect from the Trump administration’s foreign policy.
I mean, first of all, let’s stop and think, Amna, announcing a covert action. That right there is kind of an oxymoron. Why the president did it, I cannot explain. The fact of covert CIA operations being recognized gives away any tactical element of surprise that it might have had.
And what it does do, however, is, it makes very clear that the pretext of a counternarcotics operation here really isn’t what this is all about. It’s about regime change on the cheap.
Amna Nawaz:
Colonel de la Pena, what do you make of that? Is this about regime change in Venezuela for President Trump?
Sergio de la Pena, Former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Western Hemisphere Affairs:
Well, I think President Trump has been very clear on his goals. He says this is a counterdrug operation and this is also an operation to have the Venezuelans accept the immigrants that they have allowed to come into the United States.
He’s made that very clear. One of the other things he’s also doing in the process is reestablishing deterrence that was seriously damaged in the previous administration. We have got to have that deterrence. And how he uses the tools at his disposal are up to the president.
Amna Nawaz:
So, Colonel, are you saying these increased military actions, these are meant as a pressure tactic on Maduro to, as you say, accept deported Venezuelans and take actions on drug traffickers, has nothing to do with ousting Maduro?
Sergio de la Pena:
Well, there’s a maximum pressure campaign to remove someone that has to be removed by the Venezuelan people who is an authoritarian, I would say, borderline totalitarian.
This gentleman is there illegally. It was obvious in the last election that he lost by about 70 percent of the vote. And so he has been there without the will of the Venezuelan people. He is there illegally. And so he is the head of an organization that’s involved in criminal activities against the United States.
It’s his stated policy to do anything in his power to be able to affect the United States from the inside, to include sending immigrants that can also cause problems. And the stated policy in Venezuela that, if they can drown us in drugs, they’re going to do that.
Amna Nawaz:
Ambassador Feeley, we have even heard the opposition leader there, Maria Corina Machado, call publicly for greater U.S. support to stop Maduro. What do you make of this? Does this justify further U.S. intervention if it does lead to regime change?
John Feeley:
Look, Amna, I agree completely with Sergio that Nicolas Maduro — I will go beyond that. He isn’t a totalitarian leader. He is an illegitimate president.
I think, however, that the United States should be pretty clear about its intentions. If this really is a counternarcotics mission, then let’s do it under the rule of law with counternarcotics. If you really want to go in and do regime change, and that may not be the worst outcome for the Venezuelan people, an external invasion by the United States, but then let’s not do it under the cover, a paper-thin cover of a counternarcotics mission, where you’re schwacking a couple of boats and threatening that you’re going to launch a few missiles in there.
Let’s go get an authorized use of military force from the Congress. And I think the reason they don’t do that is because they know they don’t have the support of the American people to do it. There was a resolution under the war powers — or war powers resolution that was brought in a bipartisan manner last week, and it was voted down 51-48.
But this is hotly debated. America doesn’t want another foreign war. And so what they’re doing is they’re using this pretty pathetic pretext of going after drug traffickers, when their own DEA says that Venezuela is a drug trafficking country, make no mistake, but it is by no means trafficking the drugs that are killing Americans, which is fentanyl.
So this is the wrong force for the wrong mission under the wrong pretext.
Amna Nawaz:
Can I just get both of you to briefly weigh in on this allegation we heard from Venezuelan officials that this is about the oil and seizing the oil reserves?
We know Venezuela is home to the largest known oil reserves. Ambassador Feeley, what do you make of that? And then, Colonel, I will come to you.
John Feeley:
No, I don’t believe this is about oil. I don’t believe the Trump administration would ever risk American blood and treasure just to get a commercial advantage.
I do believe that this responds to politics within the MAGA base that seeks to remove Nicholas Maduro.
Amna Nawaz:
Colonel, what about you? Venezuelan officials say it’s about the oil. Is it?
Sergio de la Pena:
No.
There’s been oil companies that have been there the entire time that have never left, and there’s at least one. And, as John pointed out, there’s two now that have licenses to take oil. And Venezuela and the United States have had a very long history of collaboration in extracting oil from Venezuela.
Amna Nawaz:
Gentlemen, if I can ask you. If you had one line of advice to deliver to this president right now about how to proceed when it comes to Venezuela, what would that be?
John, to you first.
John Feeley:
Be level with the American people. Let’s do this under the rule of law. We know how to stop drugs under the rule of law. It’s U.S. Code Title 21 and it’s U.S. Coast Guard interdiction. Marco Rubio says that doesn’t work, so we’re just going to go ahead and blow them up.
You’re cheapening the service of those Marines who are sitting off the coast, aren’t going to invade and are just wasting time. So be level with the American people. Go to the Congress, get an authorized use of military force if what you want to do is punish Nicolas Maduro and give the Venezuelan people a chance.
But let’s stop with the charade of announcing your own covert presidential findings and that this is a drug operation.
Amna Nawaz:
Colonel, what’s your line of advice for the president?
Sergio de la Pena:
My line of advice is keep up the pressure campaign on Mr. Maduro. He’s an illegitimate president. He’s a criminal. He is the head of a criminal cartel. And the Venezuelan people need to remove him from his office.
Amna Nawaz:
That’s former Ambassador John Feeley and retired Colonel Sergio de la Pena joining us tonight.
Gentlemen, thank you so much for your time.
Lauren Boebert Suggests Worst Person Ever to Re-Investigate Epstein
Boebert’s suggestion came just a few hours after she voted against releasing the Epstein files.
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images
https://instaread.co/player?article=lauren-boebert-suggests-worst-person-ever-to-re-investigate-epstein&publication=newrepublic&pay_wall=false&article_url=https%3A%2F%2Fnewrepublic.com%2Fpost%2F198017%2Flauren-boebert-matt-gaetz-epstein-special-counsel&version=1768383300000
Who better to re-investigate the Epstein case for the Trump administration than another alleged sex trafficker?
That’s apparently Colorado Representative Lauren Boebert’s line of thinking. Speaking with far-right commentator Benny Johnson on Tuesday, the QAnon-friendly Republican suggested that former Representative Matt Gaetz could serve as special counsel.
“I think moving forward, we need a special counsel,” Boebert said, offering up Gaetz’s name. “There has to be a special investigation into this if we aren’t going to be provided information.”
Gaetz was Trump’s original pick for attorney general before his candidacy fell apart over a string of controversies, including allegations that the 43-year-old Florida politico had paid for sex with a minor.
“I hope it doesn’t become a false idol to Republicans where we lose sight of everything else, but that doesn’t mean we don’t want answers,” Boebert underscored.
The lawmaker doubled down on the request after the interview, asking Gaetz directly on X if he would consider the post, despite hours earlier joining her party in blocking a Democrat-led effort to release the Epstein files. The final vote was 211 to 210—just one dissenting Republican would have tipped the scales.
Much to Trump’s chagrin, the botched rollout of the Epstein files has continued to plague his administration. A Morning Consult poll conducted earlier this month found that Trump’s popularity had tanked by six points since the Justice Department contradicted Attorney General Pam Bondi on the existence of Epstein’s so-called “client list.” The fallout has been so substantial that the president directed Fox News and some far-right influencers such as Charlie Kirk to stop discussing the topic altogether.
QAnon believers—who turned out at the polls in November to re-elect Trump—have believed for years that the 79-year-old billionaire would rid the world of Satan-worshiping, liberal-minded pedophiles who run the government and media. But Trump’s sudden refusal to offer up what he has promised his conspiratorial followers has cast his messiah-like status with the group into doubt.
Trump has told his Epstein-focused supporters to “move on,” claiming that the unreleased files are a political concoction that “nobody cares about.” On Tuesday, Trump told reporters that those still invested in uncovering the associates of the notorious child sex trafficker are—according to him—“pretty bad people.”
A reminder that Trump was named and photographed as an associate of Epstein, who even described Trump as a “best friend,” and reportedly slept with his now-wife Melania for the first time aboard Epstein’s plane, the “Lolita Express.” But Trump has a terrible track record with how he treats women outside of Epstein’s world, as well: the current president was found liable by a jury for sexually abusing Elle columnist E. Jean Carrol last year, was convicted as a felon for crimes relating to his affair with porn star Stormy Daniels, and famously boasted on a hot mic before his ascent to America’s political vanguard that he grabs women “by the pussy.”Share This Story
Read more about the Epstein case:
Trump Spirals After Being Asked if His Name Is in Epstein Files
July 16, 2025/9:17 a.m. ETShare This Story
Trump Warns MAGA: Those Still Interested in Epstein Are “Bad People”
Donald Trump is trying to get his MAGA base to stop talking about Jeffrey Epstein. It’s not working.
Al Drago/Bloomberg/Getty Images
https://instaread.co/player?article=trump-warns-maga-those-still-interested-in-epstein-are-bad-people&publication=newrepublic&pay_wall=false&article_url=https%3A%2F%2Fnewrepublic.com%2Fpost%2F198012%2Ftrump-those-interested-epstein-bad-people&version=1768383300000
President Trump thinks his own supporters are “pretty bad people” for demanding full transparency on the Jeffrey Epstein case, which his Justice Department effectively closed.
“I know you’ve urged people to move on, but I’m curious, why do you think your supporters in particular have been so interested in the Epstein story, and so upset about how it’s been handled?” a reporter asked Trump on the tarmac on Tuesday.
“I don’t understand it, why they would be so interested. He’s dead for a long time, he was never a big factor in terms of life. I don’t understand what the interest or what the fascination is, I really don’t,” Trump replied. “And the credible information’s been given. Don’t forget, we went through years of the Mueller witch hunt … all that information was fake. But I don’t understand why the Jeffrey Epstein case would be of interest to anybody. It’s pretty boring stuff, it’s sorted but it’s boring. And I don’t understand why it keeps going. I think really only pretty bad people, including fake news, wanna keep something like that going.”
The Epstein case is still of interest to Trump’s supporters because he and multiple people within his administration allowed it to fester. Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel, Deputy Director Dan Bongino, and Vice President JD Vance have each questioned the outcome of the Epstein case multiple times. Bongino claimed outright that Epstein didn’t kill himself a few years ago, and Bondi claimed that she had the client list sitting on her desk just a few months ago. Now all of those people have reneged on basically everything they’ve said about Epstein, much to the chagrin of the MAGA supporters who expected them to expose the deep state, not become it.
“Remember when we learned that our wealthiest and most powerful people were connected to a guy who ran a literal child sex trafficking ring?” Vance wrote in 2021. “And then that guy died mysteriously in a jail? And now we just don’t talk about it.”
Now they don’t want anyone to talk about it. The reasons for this are varied. But it’s not a stretch for Trump’s supporters to assume he saw something that incriminated himself or one of his friends, especially given that he has well-recorded connections with Epstein going back to the 90s. In a 2002 New York Magazine piece, he called Epstein a “terrific guy” who likes “beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”
Even if he’s telling the truth, Trump has damaged a significant amount of goodwill with the base that got him here. Time will only tell how they react to his betrayal.Share This Story
More on the Epstein files:
Trump Spirals After Being Asked if His Name Is in Epstein Files
July 16, 2025/5:23 p.m. ETShare This Story
Homeland Security Agents Stunned by Pro-Palestine Arrest Orders
Agents said they couldn’t remember receiving similar requests before, and double-checked if the orders even had legal bases.
Selcuk Acar/Anadolu/Getty Images
https://instaread.co/player?article=homeland-security-agents-stunned-by-pro-palestine-arrest-orders&publication=newrepublic&pay_wall=false&article_url=https%3A%2F%2Fnewrepublic.com%2Fpost%2F197999%2Fdonald-trump-homeland-security-pro-palestine-arrest-orders&version=1768383300000
Officers from the Department of Homeland Security who arranged the arrests of foreign university students over their pro-Palestinian speech claimed that the orders they received were so unusual, they weren’t sure if they were legal, Politico reported Tuesday.
U.S. District Judge Willliam Young heard testimony from four veteran DHS officers as part of a lawsuit alleging that the Trump administration is implementing a policy of “ideological deportation,” violating the First Amendment rights of non-citizens in the United States. Across the country, federal judges have ordered the release of multiple students and faculty detained as part of Donald Trump’s crackdown on pro-Palestinian speech.
Darren McCormack, a special agent with Homeland Security Investigations, said orders to arrest Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University grad student and green card holder, came from the very top.
“Somebody at a higher level than the people I was speaking to had an interest in him,” said McCormack, who oversaw Khalil’s arrest. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had attempted to justify Khalil’s months-long detainment and pending removal by claiming he was a threat to U.S. foreign policy interests because he would create a “hostile environment” for Jewish students.
McCormack said he’d been instructed to surveil Khalil ahead of his arrest, leading McCormack to consult with ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations office in New York, which typically handles deportation arrests.
“We historically in recent times had not enforced those laws,” McCormack said. “I wanted to confirm there was a legal basis for arrest.”
When asked why ERO wasn’t responsible for carrying out the arrest, McCormack said he didn’t have an answer. “I wondered why HSI was effecting this arrest and not ERO,” he said. “I still don’t know.”
Brian Cunningham, an assistant special agent at HSI in Boston, said there had been “a lot of hands in the fishbowl” regarding the horrific arrest of Rümeysa Öztürk, the Tufts University grad student who was swarmed by six masked plainclothes officers on the street in Somerville, Massachusetts.
Cunningham also said the orders for that arrest came from somebody high up. “I can’t recall a time that it’s come top-down like this with a visa revocation, under my purview anyway,” he said. “I did contact our legal counsel to make sure that we’re on solid legal ground.”
“The operation kind of developed pretty quickly,” he added.
Öztürk was detained over an op-ed she’d written for the school paper that advocated for the school to make good on student resolutions to acknowledge the genocide in Gaza and to divest from Israel.
Cunningham, who said that he’d skimmed the op-ed, testified that he “didn’t see anything in the op-ed that suggested she’d committed a crime.”
He admitted he didn’t have “much experience, if any” with conducting a deportation arrest. “Most of my career as an agent and as a supervisor has been in enforcement of drug laws, drug smuggling, money laundering,” Cunningham said.
“That’s changed recently,” he added. He said that shortly after Trump entered the White House, HSI had several meetings about prioritizing immigration enforcement.
Inside ICE, staff members from the HSI division, which typically focuses on transnational crime, are now being moved to ERO, in what some perceive to be a retaliatory move for HSI distancing itself from the agency’s deportation arm.
