President Trump and Elon Musk grabbed dinner together at Mar-a-Lago following the US military’s operation to arrest and remove Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro. 

Trump had dinner with Elon at Mar-a-Lago and within an hour Starlink was being deployed to Venezuela to aid in the transition and the U.S. oil operation.

He never stops working. It’s amazing. pic.twitter.com/4HaSmEKCSh

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) January 4, 2026

Musk called the arrest a “win for the world, that would send “a clear message to evil dictators everywhere.”

Congratulations, President Trump!

This is a win for the world and a clear message to evil dictators everywhere. https://t.co/GRI0XOxQFU

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 3, 2026

During the dinner, which included several Trump advisers and Silicon Valley executives, Trump reportedly praised Musk for his support – noting the billionaire’s offer to provide free Starlink internet access to Venezuelan citizens. 

In support of the people of Venezuela 🇻🇪 https://t.co/JKxOFWsikP

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 4, 2026

The dinner all but solidifies Musk and Trump’s reconciliation after he publicly criticized Trump’s legislative package in June 2025, which added to the national debt and reversed cuts to waste, fraud and abuse found by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Trump hit back, with Musk warning that Trump appears in unreleased Jeffrey Epstein files, to which Trump called Musk ‘CRAZY.” 

Obviously this is water under the bridge, as the two began mending fences at Charlie Kirk’s memorial last year, and Musk offering a public apology along with deleting offending posts that he said went “too far.” 

Maduro was captured by elite Delta Force operators, who stormed his compound in Caracas’s Fuerte Tiuna complex in an overnight raid – with air defenses disabled via precision strikes before they handcuffed and blindfolded Maduro, who was taken aboard the USS Iwo Jima and flown to New York where he faces federal charges for narco-terrorism, cocaine importation, and ties to terrorist-designated groups. 

Top US officials have been eager to capitalize on the Trump-ordered military raid on Caracas, which saw the Venezuelan capital bombed and its longtime socialist leader Nicolás Maduro captured without major incident and transferred to US soil where’s facing federal drug charges related to narco-trafficking and gun-running.

Hawkish pundits are already clamoring for more muscular action targeting Tehran (and other supposed ‘rogue’ actors) at a moment of ongoing economic protests in Iran pressuring Islamic Republic leaders. Trump is issuing veiled threats to the governments of Cuba, Colombia, and Mexico – but many are asking: is Iran next? Various open source intelligence channels (OSINT) on Sunday have highlighted some unusual American military activity in the UK and Europe, for example…

Something unusual appears to be going on today at RAF Fairford near Gloucestershire in the United Kingdom, with at least 10 C-17A Globemaster IIIs with the U.S. Air Force arriving at the base or currently crossing the Atlantic from the United States. Almost all of the C-17s… https://t.co/LfyTSdEsQr

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) January 3, 2026

It’s hard to know if this constitutes the usual Pentagon logistical operations in Europe, but it does indeed raise questions regarding Washington’s force posture vis-a-vis Iran. 

One theme of the last several months of Trump’s military build-up in the southern Caribbean has been that in sending so many warships to Venezuelan waters, including at least one nuclear-powered submarine and the USS Gerald R. Ford carrier group, is that this level of military asset concentration in Latin America means less deadly or long-range assets in the Middle East (CENTCOM) area of operation.

But could we be witnessing a quick pivot, now with Maduro awaiting trial in New York?

There are various things to consider when it comes to potential White House discussions on the matter. First, it must be recalled that Trump wisely declared mission accomplished when US bombers ‘obliterated’ (in the US estimation) Iran’s three most important nuclear development sites at the tail-end of the June Israel-Iran war, which lasted just 12 days. There was no sustained American bombing campaign against Iran, also as Trump knows that “doing another Iraq” would be hugely unpopular at home.

There’s another difficult reality when it comes to US actions targeting Iran, which behind Venezuela also possesses among the world’s biggest proven reserves of crude oil. Iran is a country of over 90 million people, has a large military overseen by the elite IRGC, has long been ‘military tested’ (the 1980’s Iran-Iraq war comes to mind), and has one of the world’s premier arsenals of mid and long-range ballistic missiles. It even posses hypersonic capabilities (which the Israelis also learned). Because of this, last June Israeli warplanes were careful to operate largely outside Iranian airspace, and even though many anti-air missile sites were allegedly destroyed, this threat remains strong.

Reports of more IRGC missile tests over Iran Sunday night into Monday…

First images have already appeared, in Iranian and Israeli media. https://t.co/6BbvbNo9m7

— Conflict Radar (@Conflict_Radar) January 4, 2026

Trump will of course leave people guessing in his ‘shoot from the hip’ fashion. After all, the operation to topple Maduro was held as a tightly guarded secret even from many top Pentagon officials (in terms of the timing and “need to know” details just before it was launched). Here’s what one Conservative, anti-Iran pundit has to say:

First Venezuela, next Iran. These military flights signify a barrel of whoop-ass, not just a can. Likely, these show deployments of the 101st Airborne AND the 1st Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment.

The US Navy Fleet Tracker is oddly dark as well. We have 11 Aircraft Carriers, look at the 12/29/25 update compared to the 03/17/25 update. We are no longer posturing, we are in OPSEC mode. In Kuwait, the USA maintains roughly 13,500 troops at any given time. These troops serve as a Middle East response force (among other missions).

So why are the 1/75 Rangers and 101st Airborne deployments significant? The 75th Ranger Regiment’s primary mission is airfield seizures. The 101st is an Air Assault unit. The USA just moved a huge strategic asset designed to open the gates of hell into whatever country we choose.

And as for keeping people guessing, there was this remark from Trump just days ahead of the operation to kidnap Maduro. “If Iran shots [sic] and violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue. We are locked and loaded and ready to go,” Trump posted on Truth Social last Monday.

Would Russia comes to Iran’s defense if it is threatened with large-scale military action? Certainly the vehement condemnations would fly from Moscow, but Russia’s military is obviously busy doing other things…

Team Trump is tough and cynical in advancing its country’s interests. Removing Maduro had nothing to do with drugs – only oil, and they openly admit this. Lex fortissimum is clearly stronger than ordinary justice, but whether they can run Venezuela remotely is a big question.

— Dmitry Medvedev (@MedvedevRussiaE) January 4, 2026

Regardless of if the US deescalates ongoing tensions with Tehran, or if Trump chooses to soon escalate, the Ayatollah and Islamic Republic leaders just got a lot more nervous and uncomfortable as they helplessly watch their longtime ally Maduro being hauled before a US federal court on American soil.

For now the most likely scenario is that Trump will be content to see where the now weeklong protests inside Iran go, as they threaten societal stability, and as the US-led sanctions regimen continues to wreak devastation. It is also likely that he would unleash Israel first, and not send US troops for direct action – akin to what happened in the last June bombing raids.

* * *

“It’s time”… another Israeli direct threat aimed at Iran:

הגיע הזמן. pic.twitter.com/yejc37zmr8

— Naftali Bennett נפתלי בנט (@naftalibennett) January 4, 2026

Since Trump’s Venezuela operation went down just over 24 hours ago, there’s been an avalanche of reporting detailing the high risk gambit of American forces entering the capital of Caracas to kidnap Nicolás Maduro and his wife.

Admin officials appear eager to spike the proverbial football and divulge the details, akin to what happened after the complex SEAL raid which took out Osama bin Laden, or the later special forces killing of Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in Syria.

First, it has been divulged that President Trump a mere week earlier gave Maduro once last chance to relinquish power willingly in a phone call. “You got to surrender,” Trump told the press Saturday in reference to Maduro. Trump referenced that he actually “came close” to stepping down – whereafter he possibly would have headed to safer climes in Dubai, Qatar, or even Moscow (where he could join Assad).

But at the very moment the Venezuelan leader was on the phone with Trump, a CIA team was already in country monitoring his every move. According to a variety of fresh reporting in NBC and others, the CIA closely watched where he stayed, what he ate, and how he moved.

Likely the CIA would have been developing local assets over a period of years. An ‘asset’ can be anyone from local citizens or military officers – or even high ranking Colonels in Generals in the national army. One thing is clear at this point – the Pentagon had ‘insider help’ within the socialist regime.

Details of what was dubbed “Operation Absolute Resolve” have at this point been revealed by more than a dozen officials across the White House, administration, and Congress. There have also been very clear public remarks, and the obvious fact of the months-long Pentagon build-up in the southern Caribbean.

For example, the Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Dan “Raizin” Caine said Saturday that US intelligence even knew the names of Maduro’s pets.

Elite forces had trained for months, which even involved rehearsals at a mock-up of Maduro’s compound built from intelligence reports, and troops practiced utilizing “massive blowtorches” in the event they would have to breach steel barriers protecting Maduro’s safe room.

One theme of the new reporting on the secretive operations was just how few in the US administration knew about it. The operation was strictly held to only the highest officials. Even Pentagon officials were unaware of the exact timing until Friday night, two US officials told NBC News.

The mission might have been ordered days before if not for unclear skies, but it finally proceeded Friday night when the weather cleared and it was a full moon. “Good luck and Godspeed,” Trump told military commanders upon giving the final order.

The New York Times reports that this is what finally pushed Trump to send Delta Force to storm Caracas and abduct Maduro: https://t.co/e4bmnTgaDy pic.twitter.com/cf1cd03ZCr

— Josh Billinson (@jbillinson) January 4, 2026

Those most directly involved in the planning will also reportedly play roles in governing Venezuela until there is some kind of agreed-upon political transition – including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller.

Below are highlights of different aspects of how the unprecedented successful raid went down in the heart of Latin America, compiled from various sources [emphasis ZH]:

* * *

Brief mission with ‘significant resistance’

The mission took about two hours and 20 minutes and continued into early Saturday, when Mr. Maduro and Ms. Flores “gave up,” General Caine said.

U.S. forces encountered significant resistance, Mr. Trump said. At least 40 people were killed, including military personnel and civilians, according to a senior Venezuelan official who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe preliminary reports. —NY Times

Helicopters flying low after power cut

At least 150 aircraft flew toward Caracas from 20 different bases on land and sea. The fleet included bombers, fighters and craft that specialized in intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance, Caine said. The crews ranged in age from 20 to 49.

Darkness cloaked the Venezuelan capital. Trump suggested that the U.S. had cut the electricity in Caracas to gain an edge in the battle. Flying at 100 feet above the water, helicopters carried the special forces and law enforcement officials who plucked Maduro from his residence, Caine said. Other aircraft fired weapons to disable Venezuela’s air defense systems and clear a path for the helicopters, he added.

Flames were seen billowing from explosions at Fort Tiuna, a large military complex in Caracas. —NBC

High placed CIA assets in govt. coordinated the raid

The assets included a CIA source operating within the Venezuelan government who assisted the United States with tracking Maduro’s location and movements ahead of his capture, one source briefed on the operation told CNN.

The detailed timeline and the revelation that a CIA team has been operating inside Venezuela for so long sheds new light on the administration’s pressure campaign on Maduro for the past several months, even as senior officials publicly stated their goal was not regime change. —CNN

The extraction of a sitting head of state

The helicopters with the extraction team reached Maduro’s compound at 2 a.m. local time in Caracas, the general said. Upon arrival, the helicopters came under fire and one was hit but remained flyable. The US returned fire in defense, Caine added.

“As the operation unfolded at the compound, our air and ground intelligence teams provided real-time updates to the ground force, ensuring those forces could safely navigate the complex environment without unnecessary risk,” he said.

Caine said Maduro and his wife “gave up” to the US military personnel before being flown out of the country. Maduro and Flores were placed aboard the USS Iwo Jima… —CNN

* * *

More information on the highly secretive op is likely to come out in the next days and weeks, as the history books are already being written.

Authored by Eric Peters,

It is six years now since the advent – and normalization of – sickness psychosis (also known as weaponized hypochondria) and it shows a remarkable persistence.

Because of course it has been normalized.

More than that, actually. It continues to be affirmed as a reasonable rather than aberrant behavior.

This business, that is, of seeing but pretending not to notice people walking around with a surgical mask over their porthole.

More finely, of normal (in the head) people seeing such people – interacting with them, even – and pretending they’re not seeing something indicative of serious mental illness.

Seeing a person wearing a “mask” and pretending not to see it is not unlike seeing a person who is in the process of wetting their pants while talking to you and pretending not to see it.

We saw three such “maskers” the other day at the supermarket. One was working behind the counter, where food is handled.

They are becoming a more common sight – probably because they’ve been told about the Super Flu that’s flitting about.

It’s no longer just the flu, of course. Just as it’s no longer just raining – or snowing. Or winter now – and then summer. It’s a bomb cyclone or some other fearful-sounding term, engineered to arouse panic.

Keeping the masses in a state of perpetual panic being the ideal state – from the point of those engineering these now-endless panics.

One follows the next like the night follows the day such that the masses never get a breather from the panic; such a breather might result in them calming down and using their heads again.

H.L. Mencken wrote about this a century ago. Unfortunately, probably not one in a hundred Americans knows who H.L. Mencken was.

Hospitals – those dens of science – are re-imposing “mask” requirements on visitors. It is a metric of the metastasization of the engineered sickness psychosis that has afflicted this country for six years now. Medical professionals (sic) who presumably have some understanding of how viruses are transmitted and who by now have no excuse for continuing to believe that people who aren’t sick can make others sick (the “asymptomatic spreader” idiocy) when it comes to viral bugs because people who aren’t contagious don’t cough spittle or sniffle.

They therefore don’t emit viral particles.

And even if they did, a “mask” doesn’t (for Christ’s sake) “stop the spread” of particles so small they sneeze right through the porous to viral-sized-particles “mask.”

Besides which, it is insane to spend your life in morbid dread of catching a cold. It is part of normal life to get sick occasionally.

One does not need to spend several years at medical school to understand these facts. Yet there are still apparently lots of people who did spend years at medical school who either do not understand the facts or play along with the lies. This latter is almost certainly the thing going on. It is understandable why it is going on.

Most doctors are just employees – like most of the rest of us – and they must do what their employer says, if they wish to remain employed.

In the case of most doctors, it is mostly the big hospital/health care chains and the insurance cartels that are the employer and when they say “jump” (or “mask” up) the doctors say how high?

And that wearing is caring.

Doesn’t this instill in you great confidence in the independent judgment of your doctor? What else are they telling people they need to do that they (the doctors) have been told they’d better tell people they need to do?

It brings to mind a rhetorical question voters were asked once about Richard Nixon: Would you buy a used car from this man? Well, would you buy into the pills (or surgery) your doctor is trying to sell you? The same guy who says you’ve got to wear a “mask” to be allowed to sit in his waiting room?

Integrity, once sold, is not easily re-purchased.

Just as sanity, once lost, is not easily regained.

We may soon see just how many people have not yet recovered. Not just their sanity. Their balls.

The symptoms are passivity and compliance when they are told they must – once again – “mask up” to be allowed within.

How many won’t believe the lies but will go along with them – again – to avoid a confrontation or some inconvenience? I need to see the doctor. Then maybe it will be I need to go to the store.

How many will defy the social pressure to be compliant and refuse to play along, no matter the inconvenience?

Everything depends on such people.

Venezuela’s former Vice President Delcy Rodríguez is now president of the country, U.S. President Donald Trump said, hours after a U.S. military operation captured former leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, on Jan. 3.

“She was just sworn in, but she was, as you know, picked by Maduro,” Trump said.

He said U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio “is working on that directly. Just had a conversation with her, and she’s essentially willing to do what we think is necessary to make Venezuela great again. Very simple.”

The overnight surprise attack resulted in Maduro and Flores being shipped to New York to face charges of narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy, possession of machine guns and destructive devices, and conspiracy to possess machine guns and destructive devices.

Courtesy of Jacki Thrapp via The Epoch Times, here is what we know about Rodríguez.

Who Is Rodríguez?

Rodríguez was born and raised in Caracas, the capital of Venezuela, on May 18, 1969.

​The 56-year-old leader graduated from Universidad Central de Venezuela, became a lawyer, and quickly rose through the political system in the past decade.

Rodríguez served as the Communication and Information Minister in 2013 before she pivoted to a Foreign Ministry position from 2014 to 2017 and eventually served as the head of the Constituent Assembly, which expanded Maduro’s powers.

Vice Presidency

Maduro selected Rodríguez as his vice president in June 2018, describing her as “a young woman, brave, seasoned, daughter of a martyr, revolutionary, and tested in a thousand battles.”

In August 2024, Maduro assigned Rodríguez to manage sanctions on oil between the United States and Venezuela.

Acting Leader

Trump announced from Mar-a-Lago on Jan. 3 that the United States will “run” Venezuela until a peaceful transition can be made, while saying that Rodríguez has agreed to work with the United States after being “sworn in” as Venezuela’s new president.

Trump said Rodríguez had spoken with Rubio but didn’t provide details on how the United States would work with Rodríguez to run the country.

“She really doesn’t have a choice,” Trump said.

“We’re going to have this done right. We’re not going to just do this with Maduro, then leave like everybody else, leave and say, ‘Let it go to hell.’ If we just left, it has zero chance of ever coming back.

“We‘ll run it properly. We’ll run it professionally. We’ll have the greatest oil companies in the world go in and invest billions and billions of dollars and take out money, use that money in Venezuela. And the biggest beneficiary going to be the people of Venezuela.”

In an address broadcast on state television shortly after Trump’s briefing, Rodríguez – who was identified as vice president by a ticker at the bottom of the screen – did not address Trump’s claims that she was now acting president. Instead, she demanded that the United States free Maduro, who she called the country’s rightful leader.

“Here, we have a government with clarity, and I repeat and repeat again … we are willing to have respectful relations,” Rodríguez said.

“It is the only thing we will accept for a type of relationship after having [been] attacked.”

Maduro’s Exit Plan

Before Maduro was captured, he floated the idea of staying in office for three more years before having Rodríguez take over and finish his term through January 2031.

The proposal was rejected by the White House, which openly questioned the legitimacy of Venezuela’s 2024 election and accused Maduro of overseeing a narco-terrorist state.

A fascinating new report by Bloomberg on Sunday has observed a huge uptick in Chinese social media users weighing in on the decades-long Taiwan independence crisis, in relation to President Trump’s weekend overthrow of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

“Trump’s operation against the Venezuelan strongman shot to the top of China’s Weibo late Saturday, with the topic gaining some 440 million views on the X-like platform,” Bloomberg reports. “Many commentators were quick to make comparisons between the fate of the South American nation and that of the self-ruled democracy Beijing has vowed to claim.”

Like the long building military showdown between the United States and Venezuela, Taiwan has been a flashpoint in mainland China’s shadow. It is ‘small’ in comparison with China’s population and military might. But the situation is an inversion, with Washington having long armed Taiwan to the teeth.

This fact is obvious enough to spark an avalanche of commentary, with Bloomberg citing one Weibo post and thread (among many) which said “I suggest using the same method to reclaim Taiwan in the future” – in reference to Beijing’s designs on ‘reuniting’ the self-ruled island with the mainland.

Another user said, “The US imperialists’ lightning raid on Venezuela to capture Maduro and his wife provides a perfect blueprint for our military to launch a surprise attack on Frog Island and seize [Taiwanese President] Lai Ching-te” – which utilized a popular derogatory term for Taiwan.

China has joined Russia in demanding the immediate release of Maduro, with the foreign ministry staying it was “deeply shocked” by the “blatant use of force against a sovereign state.”

The same report features the perspective of former diplomat Ryan Hass:

“I don’t expect today’s events in Venezuela will dramatically shift Beijing’s calculus on Taiwan,” Ryan Hass, a former US diplomat and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, wrote on X. “Beijing hasn’t refrained from kinetic or other actions on Taiwan out of deference to international law and norms.”

“Privately, I expect Beijing will emphasize to Washington that it expects to be given the same latitude for great power exemptions to international law that the US takes for itself,” he added, citing China’s operations in the South China Sea, where it has territorial disputes with US allies and other regional neighbors.

Indeed under Trump it is a new day. Not only does he “speak the truth out loud” – no longer merely hiding behind platitudes like “spreading democracy” in the name of the “rules-based order”, he unapologetically just invades countries he doesn’t like (as the foray into Caracas makes clear).

The US has long condemned Moscow of doing just this (in Ukraine, or in Georgia over a decade ago). The Kremlin has reacted this weekend to the Venezuela intervention by saying “just watch the double standards in motion.”

Beijing without doubt is signaling the same thing. It is asking essentially: if the US can do this in its own backyard (invade a small ‘nuisance’ country), then why can’t China do the same?

Time to watch the double standards in real time.

— Kirill Dmitriev (@kadmitriev) January 3, 2026

U.S. automakers are quietly pivoting back toward what they know makes money: large gasoline vehicles. Selling trucks and SUVs is now the fastest path to higher profits, especially as government pressure to push electric vehicles has weakened. Trying to maximize profits from gas cars while keeping pace in EV technology is proving extremely difficult, according to a new writeup from the Wall Street Journal.

Recent policy changes strongly favor gasoline models. Fuel-economy rules have been softened, penalties for missing targets have disappeared, EV tax credits have expired, and California can no longer impose its own emissions standards. EV momentum has cooled worldwide as well, with Europe, the U.K., and Canada also retreating from aggressive mandates. BloombergNEF projects U.S. EV sales will drop 24% in Q4 2025 from the year before.

Automakers are responding quickly. GM, Ford, and Stellantis have announced plans to emphasize gasoline vehicles, which deliver far better margins. Thousands of EV-factory jobs have been cut and several plants paused. As RBC’s Tom Narayan explains, “Even one quarter of mismatched production can result in billions of dollars of losses.”

Their caution is understandable. EV programs have been deeply unprofitable. Ford alone lost nearly $13 billion on EVs between 2021 and 2024, and now expects $19.5 billion in new charges, largely EV-related. Meanwhile, easing regulations are creating what Ford CEO Jim Farley calls a “multibillion-dollar opportunity over the next two years.” TD Cowen estimates profit gains of $4B for Ford, $3B for GM, and €1.4B for Stellantis from these regulatory shifts.

Publicly, the companies still claim commitment to EVs. GM CEO Mary Barra says “profitable electric-vehicle production” remains the firm’s goal, and Farley warns that Chinese rivals like BYD and Geely are the real competition. But reality is sobering: the Detroit Three together control less than 5% of global EV sales, while BYD, Geely, and Tesla hold nearly 40%.

WSJ writes that part of the problem is demand. Consumers have resisted expensive electric versions of large vehicles that don’t suit long-distance or commercial use. Ford now plans a smaller, cheaper electric pickup around $30,000 for 2027. GM is redesigning EVs to be lighter and more aerodynamic. Both companies are also trying to keep flexibility by producing EVs and gasoline cars in the same plants. As Barra put it, “we have the ability to flex back and forth between ICE and EVs.”

That flexibility, however, undermines efficiency. BloombergNEF’s Colin McKerracher argues that scale is essential for lowering battery costs, and John Murphy of Haig Partners notes that mixed production lines inevitably sacrifice efficiency.

Believing Detroit can dominate EVs now requires faith: that low-cost EVs can be built without massive scale, that U.S. firms can match the speed of Chinese rivals who release new models every 1.8 years versus 5.2 years for Western firms, and that Chinese automakers will stay out of the U.S. market indefinitely.

There is another path. Like U.S. oil companies that ignored renewables and doubled down on their most profitable business—with strong results—the Detroit automakers could lean into gasoline and hybrids. Hybrid demand is still growing and uses nearly the same supply chain as traditional vehicles. S&P Global Mobility expects global gasoline and hybrid sales to rise through at least 2032.

The danger is timing. The world could transition to EVs faster than expected, leaving U.S. automakers stuck behind. For now, though, profits from gas vehicles are simply too attractive to resist.

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

It can fairly be said that the most precarious jobs in the world are those of a golf ball collector at a driving range, a mascot at a Chuck E. Cheese, and a Trump Administration lawyer.

That was evident at the press conference yesterday as President Donald Trump blew apart the carefully constructed narrative presented earlier for the seizure of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. 

Some of us had written that Trump had a winning legal argument by focusing on the operation as the seizure of two indicted individuals in reliance on past judicial rulings, including the decisions in the case of former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio and General Dan Caine stayed on script and reinforced this narrative. Both repeatedly noted that this was an operation intended to bring two individuals to justice and that law enforcement personnel were part of the extraction team to place them into legal custody. Rubio was, again, particularly effective in emphasizing that Maduro was not the head of state but a criminal dictator who took control after losing democratic elections.

However, while noting the purpose of the capture, President Trump proceeded to declare that the United States would engage in nation-building to achieve lasting regime change. He stated that they would be running Venezuela to ensure a friendly government and the repayment of seized U.S. property dating back to the government of Hugo Chávez.

This city is full of self-proclaimed Trump whisperers who rarely score above random selection in their predictions. However, there are certain pronounced elements in Trump’s approach to such matters. First, he is the most transparent president in my lifetime with prolonged (at times excruciatingly long) press conferences and a brutal frankness about his motivations. Second, he is unabashedly and undeniably transactional in most of his dealings. He is not ashamed to state what he wants the country to get out of the deal.

In Venezuela, he wants a stable partner, and he wants oil.

Chávez and Maduro had implemented moronic socialist policies that reduced one of the most prosperous nations to an economic basket case. They brought in Cuban security thugs to help keep the population under repressive conditions, as a third fled to the United States and other countries.

After an extraordinary operation to capture Maduro, Trump was faced with socialist Maduro allies on every level of the government. He is not willing to allow those same regressive elements to reassert themselves.

The problem is that, if the purpose was regime change, this attack was an act of war, which is why Rubio struggled to bring the presser back to the law enforcement purpose. I have long criticized the erosion of the war declaration powers of Congress, including my representation of members of Congress in opposition to Obama’s Libyan war effort.

The fact, however, is that we lost that case. Trump knows that. Courts have routinely dismissed challenges to undeclared military offensives against other nations. In fairness to Trump, most Democrats were as quiet as church mice when Obama and Hillary Clinton attacked Libya’s capital and military sites to achieve regime change without any authorization from Congress. They were also silent when Obama vaporized an American under this “kill list” policy without even a criminal charge. So please spare me the outrage now.

My strong preferences for congressional authorization and consultation are immaterial. The question I am asked as a legal analyst is whether this operation would be viewed as lawful. The answer remains yes.

The courts have previously upheld the authority of presidents to seize individuals abroad, including the purported heads of state. This case is actually stronger in many respects than the one involving Noriega. Maduro will now make the same failed arguments that Noriega raised. He should lose those challenges under existing precedent. If courts apply the same standards to Trump (which is often an uncertain proposition), Trump will win on the right to seize Maduro and bring him to justice.

But then, how about the other rationales rattled off at Mar-A-Lago? In my view, it will not matter. Here is why.

The immediate purpose and result of the operation was to capture Maduro and to bring him to face his indictment in New York. That is Noriega 2.0.

The Administration put him into custody at the time of extraction with law enforcement personnel and handed him over to the Justice Department for prosecution.

The Trump Administration can then argue that it had to deal with the aftermath of that operation and would not simply leave the country without a leader or stable government.

Trump emphasized that “We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.”

I still do not like the import of those statements. Venezuelans must be in charge of their own country and our role, if any, must be to help them establish a democratic and stable government. Trump added that “We can’t take a chance that somebody else takes over Venezuela that doesn’t have the good of the Venezuelan people in mind.”

The devil is in the details. Venezuelans must decide who has their best interests in mind, not the United States.

However, returning to the legal elements, I do not see how a court could free Maduro simply because it disapproves of nation-building. Presidents have engaged in such policies for years. The aftermath of the operation is distinct from its immediate purpose.

Trump can argue that, absent countervailing action from Congress, he has the authority under Article II of the Constitution to lay the foundation for a constitutional and economic revival in Venezuela.

He will leave it to his lawyers to make that case. It is not the case that some of us preferred, but it is the case that he wants to be made. He is not someone who can be scripted. It is his script and he is still likely to prevail in holding Maduro and his wife for trial.

FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino officially resigned from the bureau on Saturday, hours after President Donald Trump confirmed that Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro had been taken into US custody. 

Responding to a post on X, Bongino praised Maduro’s capture, saying it was “a busy last day on the job.”

“Tomorrow I return to civilian life. It’s been an incredible year thanks to the leadership and decisiveness of President Trump.”

Bongino said that it was “an honor of a lifetime” to work beside FBI Director Kash Patel, adding “See you on the other side.”

It was a busy last day on the job. This will be my last post on this account.
Tomorrow I return to civilian life. It’s been an incredible year thanks to the leadership and decisiveness of President Trump.
It was the honor of a lifetime to work with Director Patel, and to serve… https://t.co/ETUqiYXvLH

— Dan Bongino (@FBIDDBongino) January 4, 2026

Bongino announced in mid-December that he would be leaving the FBI in January. 

In response President Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland on Dec. 17 that Bongino had done a “great job,” but “I think he wants to go back to his show,” referring to Bongino’s podcast. 

Patel also confirmed Bongino’s retirement announcement on X Saturday night – after having previously calling him “the best partner I could’ve asked for in helping restore this FBI.”

“He not only completed his mission—he far exceeded it. We will miss him but I’m thankful he accepted the call to serve.”

Dan is the best partner I could’ve asked for in helping restore this FBI. He brought critical reforms to make the organization more efficient, led the successful Summer Heat op, served as the people’s voice for transparency, and delivered major breakthroughs in long unsolved… https://t.co/o8wZOUnojP

— FBI Director Kash Patel (@FBIDirectorKash) December 17, 2025

 As the Epoch Times notes further, Bongino highlighted some statistics of the FBI’s operations over the past year in a post on Dec. 30, 2025, noting the bureau had made more than 50,000 arrests—including more than 30,000 that were for violent crimes—had seized more than 2,000 kilograms (4,400 pounds) of fentanyl, and increased arrests for “Nihilistic Violent Extremism” by 490 percent.

The United States also saw a significant drop in the national murder rate over the past year, and the FBI located more than 6,000 child victims, an increase of 22 percent, Bongino added.

Bongino’s tenure at the FBI also saw some infighting with the Department of Justice, the bureau’s parent agency, over its handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files after Bongino had spent considerable time on his podcast demanding answers about the now-deceased sex offender and his 2019 death, which was officially ruled a suicide.

Bongino wrote a post on X in late July 2025 that said the FBI was “committed to stamping out public corruption and the political weaponization of both law enforcement and intelligence operations,” but that what he learned conducting investigations “into these aforementioned matters, has shocked me down to my core.”

“We cannot run a Republic like this. I’ll never be the same after learning what I’ve learned,” Bongino said at the time, but did not elaborate.

Earlier that month, Trump had dismissed reports of friction between Bongino and others at the FBI and Justice Department over the release of the Epstein files, telling reporters on Air Force One that Bongino’s a “very good guy” and that “he’s in good shape.”

Authored by Juan Galt via BitcoinMagazine.com,

In a move that could shape corporate Bitcoin adoption, index provider MSCI is set to decide whether to exclude companies holding significant Bitcoin reserves from its global benchmarks. The outcome, due January 15, may influence billions in forced selling and set precedents for how Wall Street views Bitcoin as a treasury asset.

MSCI Inc., a New York-based publicly traded company listed on the NYSE with a market capitalization of $43.76 billion and a stock price of $565.68 as of January 2, is a key player in the investment world. It curates over 246,000 equity indexes daily, with more than $18.3 trillion in assets under management benchmarked to them. These indices serve as blueprints for funds and portfolios, helping investors gain exposure to specific market segments.

Unlike the NASDAQ, which operates as both a stock exchange where companies list and trade and a composite index tracking those listings, MSCI focuses solely on index creation. The S&P 500, managed by S&P Dow Jones Indices, is similarly an index but targets the 500 largest U.S. companies by market cap. MSCI’s offerings, such as the MSCI World Index covering developed markets, provide broader global and thematic coverage, influencing trillions in investment decisions.

The issue began on October 10, 2025, when MSCI issued a consultation proposal to exclude companies with 50% or more of their assets in digital assets like Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies from its Global Investable Market Indexes.

The rationale: such firms operate more like funds than traditional businesses.

The proposal named 39 companies, including Bitcoin holders like Strategy and Metaplanet. The announcement triggered an immediate market reaction, with Bitcoin experiencing a sharp intraday plunge of roughly $12,000 on the same day, marking the start of a broader price correction.

Broader awareness grew in late November 2025, when JPMorgan analysts highlighted the risks in a report, estimating $2.8 billion in outflows from Strategy alone and up to $8.8 billion if other index providers followed suit.

This may have amplified selling pressure on affected stocks and contributed to Bitcoin’s ongoing pullback amid a broader market downturn. 

Estimates of total forced selling, if implemented, range from $10 billion to $15 billion over a year, per Bitcoin for Corporations (BFC) analysis.

The consultation period, open for stakeholder feedback, closed on December 31, 2025. BFC, a coalition accelerating corporate Bitcoin adoption, mobilized quickly. They launched a website detailing the proposal’s flaws, including a technical appendix outlining potential market impacts. BFC drafted a letter opposing the change, gathering over 1,500 signatures in two weeks and delivering it to MSCI on December 30. Eight of the 39 affected companies are BFC members.

After initial outreach, BFC held a call with MSCI’s head of research and leadership.

“We had a very constructive conversation,” said George Mekhail, BFC’s executive director.

“I think they were very much still in a listening and learning posture. I think a lot of this just really has to do with a lack of education and understanding of Bitcoin itself, as well as these Bitcoin treasury companies and the significance of their operating businesses.”

Mekhail noted the proposal appeared driven by genuine analytical concerns rather than malice, triggered by Metaplanet’s recent preferred share issuance, not Strategy’s larger holdings. A key gap: MSCI made no distinction between Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, treating all digital assets alike. This has fostered temporary alignment between Bitcoin advocates and the broader crypto sector in opposition, highlighting an ongoing education gap between the Bitcoin industry and Wall Street institutions.

Next, MSCI announces its decision on January 15, 2026. If approved, exclusions take effect February 1.

Mekhail outlined three scenarios:

1. implementation (worst case, forcing sales),

2. a delay for further review (most likely, per his assessment),

3. or full withdrawal (best case).

Polymarket bettors currently give a 77% chance of Strategy’s delisting from MSCI by March 31.

Source: Polymarket

Most financial fallout would hit Strategy, which holds the vast majority of affected Bitcoin treasuries. Founder Michael Saylor’s firm has engaged MSCI directly, issuing its own letter and working behind the scenes. Other opposition includes letters from Strive Asset Management and investor Bill Miller.

Industry pushback has been robust and visible, with no major groups publicly supporting the proposal. This asymmetry underscores Bitcoin’s organized, motivated constituency versus dispersed critics, echoing dynamics in recent political shifts like the 2024 U.S. election.

A withdrawal would boost corporate Bitcoin strategies; implementation could deter treasuries. As Mekhail put it, “The most bullish outcome is that they take it to heart and they withdraw the proposal.”

The decision tests Wall Street’s adaptation to Bitcoin’s role in balance sheets.