Keeping It Real: Conversations with Jillian Michaels

Episode: Did We Just Start WW3? RUSSIA AND CHINA React To Venezuela
Date: January 7, 2026
Host: Jillian Michaels
Guests: Mike Baker (ex-CIA covert operations officer), Josh Hammer (constitutional attorney & Newsweek senior editor)

Overview

Jillian Michaels tackles one of the most explosive and consequential events of early 2026: the U.S. pre-dawn military operation in Venezuela that resulted in the capture and extraction of Nicolás Maduro. This episode seeks to pierce through the noise and break down the strategic, geopolitical, and legal ramifications of the operation, with a focus on the implications for U.S. foreign policy, global power dynamics, and the precedent it sets for international law.

Two heavyweight guests join Jillian:

• Mike Baker (Ex-CIA): Explains the tactical ‘how’ and the geopolitical ‘why’.
• Josh Hammer (Constitutional Attorney): Examines the operation’s legal underpinnings under U.S. and international law.

Jillian guides frank, nuanced discussion, balancing awe at operational prowess with hard questions about America's long-term strategy and global ripple effects.

Main Discussion Points & Insights

1. Why Did the U.S. Move on Venezuela?

(02:00–11:35)

• Conflicting Narratives:
  Jillian introduces three prevailing theories:
  • The U.S. “grabbed” the world’s largest oil reserves for economic dominance.
  • Strategic control of key geographies (e.g., Panama Canal) and countering adversaries in the region.
  • The U.S. has no real economic stake—Venezuela’s oil is not integral; the move is more about geopolitics.
• Mike Baker’s Breakdown: "We don't control the Venezuelan oil industry... We've captured Nicolas Maduro and his wife. But that regime, it wasn't just Nicolas Maduro, right? So they've already named a new president..." (04:41)
  • Not a Clean Regime Change: Maduro’s core power structure remains. U.S. may not have real control over outcome.
  • Origins: Operation began as a counter-narcotics mission, then escalated.
  • Strategic Objective: Eventually became about removing a hostile regime for U.S. leverage and to send a message to hostile actors (Russia, China, Iran).
  • Historical Context: U.S. companies (e.g., Chevron) previously had major stakes, but Chavez nationalized the oil sector. Some in Washington want a return to a friendlier, U.S.-aligned regime.

2. Success vs. Quagmire: Operation Analysis and Fallout

(11:35–21:00)

• Jillian expresses skepticism over regime change, comparing initial euphoria in Iraq, Libya, and Panama with ultimate U.S. entanglements.
  • "I also remember when the Iraqis were ecstatic in pulling down the statue of Saddam... And the people are overjoyed right up until we're in a 20 year conflict and they hate us..." (11:35)
• Mike:
  • No Occupation Expected: Predicts reshuffling of corrupt insiders, not true democratic change unless U.S. forges credible transition.
  • Operational Brilliance: Compares the complexity and success to the Bin Laden raid.
    • "Full marks to them for making this happen ... From an operational perspective, [it] was spot on." (16:33)
  • Risk: Warns lack of a clear transition plan could lead to chaos.
    • "If what's been going on have been these backroom discussions... If that's not the case, and they don't have sort of an understanding... you're kind of winging it." (16:33)

3. Geopolitical Dominoes: Russia, China, Cuba, Iran

(21:00–32:41)

• Jillian & Mike dissect the broader strategic motivations and reactions from rivals:
  • Cuba: Relies on cheap Venezuelan energy, provides security/espionage support; now vulnerable.
    • "Cuba's very concerned right now about what may happen... their regime, their economy depends very heavily on it." (22:47)
  • Russia & Wagner Group: Provided direct security to Maduro; now embarrassed and sidelined.
  • China:
    • Heavily invested ($60 billion lent, oil futures); potential to lose leverage and resources.
    • Implications for broader China-U.S. relations, especially with regard to Taiwan.
  • Iran: Used Venezuela as a proxy and staging ground for terror cells and drone manufacturing.
    • "The Ayatollah has got to be shitting himself." (27:42) – Jillian
• Big Question: Did the U.S. just set off a global paradigm shift, or is this just shuffling the deck in South America?

4. Real & Perceived Outcomes: Who Benefits?

(32:41–35:03)

• Mike outlines three scenarios:
  1. Pro-U.S. insiders maintain control—good for America, ambiguous for Venezuelans.
  2. Internal uprising leads to opposition government—rare, best for both U.S. and Venezuelans.
  3. Ongoing chaos, lost opportunity for democratic change.
• Skepticism: "How many times can you think of regime change where it was smooth...?" (32:41)
• Jillian: Encourages critical thinking—are we setting up for long-term military commitment, or have we finally mastered clean interventions? (46:17)

5. Ripple Effect: Messaging to Global Adversaries

(35:03–38:16)

• Iran’s Response:
  • Mike is skeptical that Iran will “straighten up” simply because of Venezuela's fate; sees bigger problems for the Iranian regime from domestic unrest than U.S. action.
    • "I don't think they're looking at Venezuela and thinking, 'Oh, we could be next.' It's apples and oranges..." (35:51)
• China's Takeaway:
  • Mike warns that China may use the U.S. application of the Monroe Doctrine in its hemisphere as justification for more aggressive actions in its own backyard (e.g., Taiwan). (01:07 and 45:16)
• Human Element:
  • Mike and Jillian reflect on the celebrations in Caracas but note that successful regime change rarely translates into immediate democratic reform or prosperity.

Key Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the operation’s complexity:
  "This has got to be an operation of a magnitude we what maybe saw with only Bin Laden." – Jillian (16:08)
• On the reality of regime change:
  "You can argue definitely that the Venezuelan people would be far better off going forward with a new government... But you can also at the same time argue and agree that... this isn't as cut and dry." – Mike Baker (12:36)
• Global signal sent:
  "There is nothing been funnier to me over the past couple of days than the Russian Foreign Ministry... complaining about U.S. actions and saying that we've invaded the sovereignty of another nation. I just find it hilarious..." – Mike Baker (43:12)
• National security cost-benefit:
  "If Obama had done this or Biden had done this, people would have said yes, and... you've always got the Trump factor." – Mike Baker (41:25)
• On legal precedent:
  "There is legal precedent for this... very similar to what happened to Manuel Noriega... extracted by the US in Panama back in 1990, 36 years to the day prior to the courageous operation in Caracas." – Josh Hammer (56:02)

Legal Deep Dive with Josh Hammer

(50:19–69:56)

1. Congress vs. President: Who Has War Powers?

• Article I (Congress) vs. Article II (President): Historically cloudy, but Hammer subscribes to an influential minority view—Congress’s "declare war" power is mostly a formality after hostilities commence; the President can act preemptively to protect interests.
• "For a pinprick strike like this... I'm actually really happy that they did it this way and not the other way around." – Josh (53:50)

2. Was the Operation Legal Domestically?

• Not a "War":
  • Hammer argues the Maduro raid is a law enforcement operation—not a classic military operation—since Maduro was under U.S. indictment for narco-terrorism, and prior presidents (Trump 1, Biden, Trump 2) have all refused to recognize him as legitimate.
  • “...this is fundamentally a law enforcement operation... the key points to recall is that Nicolas Maduro and his wife were indicted by the... Southern District of New York.” (54:40)
• Precedent: The Noriega operation as a clear example.

3. International Law: Real or Make-believe?

• Hammer is dismissive of "international law" as invoked by critics:
  • “...so-called international law... is only as strong as the ability or willingness of the various parties... to actually abide... In many ways, frankly, it's an ill informed talking point of hacks and morons...” (63:12)

4. Monroe Doctrine: U.S. Justification

• Operation framed as a "hardcore Western Hemisphere policy," establishing the U.S.'s continuation of the Monroe Doctrine; an explicit signal that the U.S. will not tolerate hostile powers in its backyard.

5. Does It Set a Dangerous Precedent for China/Taiwan?

• Only a superficial comparison. Maduro was not recognized as a legitimate leader globally, whereas Taiwan’s status is fundamentally different. Xi could twist the situation, but real equivalency is lacking.
  • “Xi Jinping... is going to twist and distort anything there... I'm not sure that it's really going to tip the scales ultimately one way or the other.” (68:23)

Timestamps of Key Segments

• 00:02 – Jillian introduces the event, the chaos, and her guests' credentials.
• 02:00-11:35 – Dissecting the “why” behind the U.S. move; theories from oil to geopolitics.
• 12:36–21:00 – Parallels with other regime changes; operational execution; lingering risks.
• 21:00–35:03 – Country-by-country analysis: Cuba, Russia, China, Iran.
• 32:41–35:03 – Possible future scenarios for Venezuela; history of regime change failures.
• 35:51 – Iran’s likely takeaways from the U.S. action.
• 41:25–46:17 – Domestic political reaction; U.S. global signaling; how this implicates China.
• 50:19–69:56 – Legal analysis: U.S. constitutional issues, historical precedent, limits of "international law".
• 56:02 – Operationally compared to Noriega’s extraction.
• 67:09 – Josh Hammer’s bottom line: “It’s a huge win for the United States. We frankly look like a bunch of badasses...”

Real-Time Nuance & Tone

• Tone:
  Direct, skeptical, vigorously analytical, with dashes of dark humor and "keeping it real."
• Jillian is candid: Playing devil’s advocate for both hawkish and cautious positions, pushing for clarity and realpolitik.
• Both guests praise the operation’s tactical brilliance but emphasize the foggy, unpredictable aftermath.
• Political divisions: Both highlight how much reactions hinge on partisan lenses, regardless of outcome.
  • “You’ve always got the Trump factor, right?... they’re going to criticize whatever he does.” – Mike Baker (41:25)
• Legal clarity: Hammer’s takes are sharp, dismissive of knee-jerk critiques, and stress that international law in this context is little more than rhetorical window-dressing.

Conclusion

This episode offers a rare depth and balanced skepticism about what the U.S. has achieved in Venezuela. Jillian, Mike, and Josh agree: the U.S. just flexed extraordinary operational muscle, but unresolved questions loom about political fallout, stability in Venezuela, and the broader impact on great-power competition. The move was as much about sending a signal to Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran as about regime change—but what comes after the “seismic” move is unpredictable.

Notable closing quote:
"It's so obvious that there are a million ways this could go... Even Trump himself said, look, historically this hasn't gone well. This could be, this could be a disaster. But I have to hope that he has some sort of a plan." – Jillian (35:03)

Resources

• Mike Baker: The President’s Daily Brief podcast, YouTube channel.
• Josh Hammer: Article 3 Project, The Josh Hammer Show, social @joshhammer.

For listeners: This episode delivers a critical, nuanced, and actionably informative perspective on one of the year’s most important (and under-explained) stories.