A (1:54)

Ben's healing himself exclusively with essential oils, like any good la Westsider.

B (1:59)

I did my own research going. Full art of home cures. Yeah. Yeah.

A (2:02)

Well, you look good. I'm glad you feel better. The flu is the absolute worst. I got a flu shot over the break. I went with my 3 year old to the pediatrician and I had to show her that I was brave and get the flu shot first, which did not feel great, to be honest with you. Then she got it and then we got ice cream and I let her eat the ice cream before we had lunch. So it was honestly.

B (2:20)

Well, that's a. That's, you know, my kids are older and that still works. Ice cream still works.

A (2:26)

Chocolate with sprinkles, baby. All right, we got a great show today. We're going to focus just on three big topics. So the first is the latest from Venezuela. We're going to talk about the backstory, about how Trump got from negotiations to invasion, why he jennisoned opposition leader Maria Machado and embraced Delsey Rodriguez, who was Maduro's handpicked vice president. Then we're going to go deeper on the so called Dunro Doctrine. We're going to explore what Trump's newfound love for regime change and expansionist foreign policy at gunpoint might mean for the world. So that's a, that's a fun one for everyone to figure out. And then finally, we're going to cover these massive protests that we've seen in Iran for well over a week now that appear to pose the most serious threat to the regime since, I don't know, probably 2009, Ben. I mean, 20, 22 were the last protests of this scale, but it feels like 2009 was the most significant in terms of threat, threat to the establishment there. So there's a lot of people who are watching this closely. And then, Ben, you just did our interview. Who are folks going to hear from?

B (3:22)

Yeah, I talked to Joaquin Castro, Democrat member of the House from San Antonio, who's also the ranking member, ranking Democrat on the House subcommittee that deals with the Western Hemisphere. So he's kind of the senior guy dealing with this region. We talked about his reaction to the operation in Venezuela, Congress's role, or lack thereof, in terms of how they found out about this, his effort that he's engaging with Tom Thomas Massie and Jim McGovern to pass a war powers resolution that would kind of compel Trump to come back to Congress not just on use of force of Venezuela, but Greenland, Mexico, the other places, and just kind of where this is all going and what Democrats are saying about it, what Republicans are saying about it, what his constituents are saying about it. So it was a good conversation with Joaquin.

A (4:09)

Great. That's great. Very important piece of this. I'm excited to hear that. I also did want to say thank you to everybody who listened to our bonus podcast from Saturday. Then we hit number four in the Apple rankings of the top podcast episodes, which means we, at least temporarily were beating Ben Shapiro, Tucker Carlson, npr, even the, the juggernaut that is, pardon my take, my favorite sports podcast.

B (4:28)

What about Candace? Did we, do we catch up to Candace now?

A (4:30)

She was probably accusing someone having a dick. So I don't know if we beat her, but it was great. It means a lot to us. If you're watching this on YouTube, please subscribe to Pod Save the World on YouTube. If you're listening to it as a podcast, please if you go could go from casual listener to subscriber. It really helps the show. It's also free. Also, if you're a super fan of Crooked Media or Pod Save the World, or you generally just want to help out progressive independent media, consider becoming a subscriber. Go to crooked.com friends. You get ad free episodes, tons of bonus content. But also, it's just, it's the number one thing you could do to help us reduce our dependence on these big tech platforms and build a media company. So thanks for listening. All right, let's get to the show, Ben. So we're going to kind of tick through some of the stuff we've learned about the Venezuela operations since Saturday when we recorded that breaking news episode. Let's start with some of the things we learned about the operation itself. We'll get to the evolution of the policy and then how Trump decided to jettison the duly elected opposition and back the regime in the form of Delsey Rodriguez, Maduro's handpicked vp. But first, here's just a little bit of Trump talking about the Venezuela operation during a speech this morning, Tuesday, January 6th, to Republicans on Capitol Hill, I believe. Let's listen.

B (5:41)

You know, people are saying it goes down with one of the most incredible.

C (5:44)

It was so complex and 152 airplanes. Many, many talk about boots on the ground.

B (5:50)

We had a lot of boots on.

C (5:51)

The ground, but it was amazing.

A (5:53)

And think of it, nobody was killed. And on the other side, a lot.

B (5:55)

Of people were killed. Unfortunately, I say that soldiers, Cubans, mostly.

A (6:00)

Cubans, but many, many killed. They've been after this guy for years and years and years. And, you know, he's a violent guy.

B (6:09)

He gets up there and he tries.

A (6:10)

To imitate my dance a little bit.

C (6:15)

But he's a violent guy and he's.

A (6:17)

Killed millions of people.

B (6:19)

He's tortured. And now what they do, the radical left, they actually have people and it's.

C (6:24)

Hard to get them.

B (6:25)

They're all paid people, Venezuela, everyone. They're marching in the streets.

A (6:29)

They love it.

C (6:30)

Except in New York.

A (6:30)

I mean, where they find these people.

C (6:34)

They're the worst looking people I've ever seen.

A (6:36)

That was Trump speaking to the House Republican retreats at the Kennedy center, which is now known as the Trump Kennedy center, although we're not going to call it that.

B (6:44)

No.

A (6:45)

It's good to see he's treating regime change is like the sobriety and seriousness with which it deserves, huh?

B (6:50)

Yeah, yeah, it's, I mean, there's just a lot there, you know, hot protesters. Yeah. The good looking protesters are Maduro, by the way, bad guy. But I don't know where the millions of people come from. A little hyperbole, but yes, he seems like someone who's really feeling the weight of life and death decisions that he's making.

A (7:10)

Definitely, definitely. As always. Okay, so speaking of life or death. So on Sunday, the Venezuelan government said that 80 people were killed in this Delta Force assault on Caracas and the associated airstrikes. Additionally, Ben, the Cuban government came out pretty quickly and said that 32 of its citizens were killed in the attack, including basically like all intelligence and military personnel. Did it surprise you that they released that number?

B (7:35)

It didn't surprise me that there was that number. I mean, the Cubans have had like intelligence personnel, but some of the kind of security around Maduro, some of the, you know, there's this deep ideological alliance between Cuba and Venezuela. So it didn't surprise me that that number are killed. Yeah, I guess them putting it out, maybe they felt like it was gonna get out like Trump was gonna put.

A (7:57)

It out of it.

B (7:58)

So I think they were probably just trying to get ahead of it.

A (8:00)

Yeah. Strange. The Financial Times reported also that the Colectivos, which are the regime's paramilitary groups, they've been arresting journalists and they've been cracking down on basically any civilians who take to the streets who are celebrating Maduro's removal. So the human rights situation for those keeping score at home in Venezuela is getting worse, not better for actual human beings. Ben. I've also been just stunned at how much highly classified information the Trump administration has leaked to the media so quickly. So that started with the administration telling like literally every reporter that the CIA had an asset close to Maduro in Caracas who helped them find him. But then there's also been reports about the US flying stealth drones over Venezuela. Presumably those were CIA drones, which means they are very, very sensitive secret items or, you know, programs. And then Trump has been bragging about how the US Military was able to disable the power grid in Caracas in advance of the strikes, which obviously, like, you, look, you can't keep it a secret when you take down a power grid. But he was sort of hinting at like the way we did it, which was likely done with some highly classified, like, you know, sort of cyber capabilities that the military has. Sort of, this is a little bit petty. But, you know, I remember when Republicans like Lindsey Graham, for example, went, would destroy us, you and me, you know, personally at times when anything classified would leak, including about like the bin Laden operation. But they have absolutely nothing to say when Trump is just disclosing that the CIA had an asset on the ground in Venezuela who might still be there. We have no idea.

B (9:29)

Yeah, wouldn't necessarily want to be that asset. You know, look, the, the couple things about this are, first of all, it's clear they're planning this for months. And, and look, we don't do this that much but I mean we've been saying that they're probably Delta Force guys there. We've been saying this regime change operation. But to, to have the combination of an offensive cyber operation overhead, drone capacity, Delta Force guys on the ground, pre positioned naval assets, like they've been planning to do this for months. Like that's my takeaway from the details that have come out.

A (10:04)

And it cost billions of dollars.

B (10:06)

With a B. With a B. And this puts the lie to the idea that, well, you know, we're going to do the boats and no, this was always about this. Right. And it took them months to get everything in place, to get the intelligence work done, to get people into the country and then to do this and then, yeah, like the kind of half assed, half hazard way that they like to do these victory laps. They're just so thirsty to look like tough guys. What risk did Donald Trump take? I mean, I remember this when the bin Laden operation took place, actually we were pretty careful about what we put out. We didn't even put out there as Navy seals. That kind of came out because I think some of the people in the military were like, hey, we did this, which is great, but you want to protect those capabilities in the future. We've just telegraphed, by the way, and hope we don't have to do stuff like this again. And we'll talk about the fact that Trump probably wants to do this again. Here's like how we do it, you know, like, here's the game plan, like here's how we might go about regime change in your country, you know, so, yeah, like the, all those people that spent years, you know, like beating the shit out of people like us because stuff would occasionally leak out are now just screaming it from the rooftops.

A (11:14)

We're just celebrating it. There's also been some really interesting TikTok stories that have traced the evolution of Trump's policy. The Wall Street Journal reported that as recently as July, Trump wanted to cut a deal with Maduro. But he got fed up with him over the course of the year and felt like the negotiations weren't going anywhere. Several outlets have reported that the last straw for Trump was all those videos of Maduro dancing at public events because Trump felt like he was being mocked. I mean, you heard him mention it there in that clip. I think Trump seemed to think that Maduro was doing his dance, as opposed to both of them just being old dorks who can't dance.

B (11:46)

They dance similarly. You know, it's a strong man problem.

A (11:48)

Yeah, it's a strongman problem. It's an old man problem. The best and final offer that Trump made to Maduro came on December 23. It was basically like, look, buddy, go live in exile. I'll get rid of sanctions on you and just shut up forever. But that was rejected. So Trump reportedly moved on to the military options, which clearly, as you said, had been planned for a long time. There's also been a bunch of reports on why Trump ended up installing Maduro's vice president, Delsey Rodriguez, as president instead of Maria Machado, the head of the opposition. The Washington Post said it was because Trump was butthurt that Machado accepted the Nobel Peace Prize. It, quote, a source close to the White House told the Post, quote, if she had turned it down, she'd be the president of Venezuela today, end quote. As we all know, Trump won the far more coveted FIFA Peace Prize, but he also wanted the less prestigious Nobel. Ben, that sourcing is a little thin for me, like, close to the White House, but it's also quite believable in a kind of fun thing. So I wanted to include it, but I don't know. I have. I find it hard to believe that that was the sole reason he didn't go with Machado. We can get to the other reasons in a sec.

B (12:52)

Well, you know, here's. Here's what I think. You know, you can tell from all of that information is, first of all, what is this really about? Because, you know, the. The biggest case against Maduro is not drug trafficking, right? If you were to assess the worst drug traffickers in the Western hemisphere, Nicolas Maduro would not make the NCAA tournament bracket. You know, and in fact, we just, you know, pardoned one from the former president, Honduras, who is a huge drug trafficker. The case against Maduro is human rights violations. It's that he stole a Democratic election. He arrests political opponents. There's allegations, credible allegations of torture against political opponents, oppression of journalists. But this operation clearly had nothing to do about that. If it had something to do about that, the entire focus of the United States government the day after the operation would be about how can we get Maria Machado or somebody from the opposition or the person who won the last election into power, Edmondo Gonzalez, who is.

A (13:59)

Sort of like a carve out for Machado, who is figurehead who was allowed.

B (14:02)

To run Machado's proxy or how can we have an election as soon as possible.

A (14:06)

Right.

B (14:06)

We're not even pretending that that's what this was about. So again, for anybody who's like, well you know, this is good, you know, no, the same regime is in power and as you said, the human rights situation's actually gotten worse cuz they're cracking down on people right now because they're clinging to power. So it's not about any of those things. It's about the optic of removing Maduro, just showing, hey look, I can go get this guy with this kind of complex night raid because I don't care about laws, I don't care about norms, I don't care about all the second effects that this could cause. And it's about oil. And these people will be more likely because I just showed that if you don't do what I want, I can just put you in a helicopter and take you to New York. The next person up, Dalcy Rodriguez, more likely to be like, sure, Chevron, whatever American oil company, you can kind of do what you want here, take a bigger cut of the profits. That's all this is about. Right. And that to me, you know, yes, the personal stuff, it probably does factor in. It's probably not the chief factor, but it's probably like I don't like how he dances, I don't like I didn't get the Nobel Prize. I mean he is that petty.

A (15:14)

It's believable. The fact that it's believable is like tells you a lot. I mean, by the way, I mean the Venezuelan constitution calls for new elections within 30 days of a presidential vacancy. I haven't heard anyone in the Trump administration even mention that because they obviously don't give a shit. But it's just, you know, it's worth noting.

B (15:31)

Yeah. I mean, and I'm trying to, I mean it is literally like, you know, if you removed like Mullah Omar from the Taliban but left the entire Taliban in charge of Afghanistan after 9, 11. I mean that's. And again the apples to oranges. I'm not suggesting that this is the Taliban, but, but it's the same thing. Like that the same regime is governing. It was a decapitation more than was a total regime change. Yeah. And with this idea that the United States is now going to be able to call the shots and Run the country.

A (16:01)

And.

B (16:01)

Yeah, and I just don't. By the way, I don't believe that that's going to happen either. So. So we get to that. But I don't think their plan is going to work.

A (16:08)

Yeah, I'm with you there. I mean, so the Wall Street Journal had a more sort of substantive take. I mean, they reported that the White House asked the CIA to do an assessment of who was best positioned to lead a post Maduro, Venezuela. And the CIA determined that the top members of the Maduro regime were better positioned than the opposition leaders, which, you know, I don't think you needed a fucking multibillion dollar budget or intel agency to tell you that. It's glaringly obvious. But, I mean, it does make sense that they would, they would task that. The New York Times reported that Machado pissed off Rick Grenell, who was the sentient Twitter troll who early on made a big play to be Secretary of State, then for a while was like Trump's primary envoy to Maduro and to Venezuela, but now seemingly has been relegated. So, like trying to book Kiss at the Kennedy center or whatever the hell he does. But the Times reported that Grinnell was annoyed Machado refused to meet with him when he was in Caracas and then refused to provide him with a list of political prisoners that they wanted to see released, which is sort of weird. They wouldn't do that. And Grinnell was reportedly annoyed that Machado didn't have, like, a concrete plan for what to do if she were to take power, which again, is sort of like, understandable on both ends. Like, I don't know that she had a lot of good options. And then to curry favor with Trump, you know, they talked about how Machado took a bunch of maximalist positions. Like she opposed any talks with the Maduro government. She opposed, she supported completely all the sanctions. She opposed any foreign investment in Venezuela. And that's the kind of hard line position you see from people outside or Venezuelans outside of Venezuela. But it just sort of makes life hell for the people in the country. And so it wasn't necessarily popular. So, Ben, anything else kind of jump out at you as, like, new or notable and interesting since Saturday?

B (17:42)

I think that assessment is the right one from the CIA. Essentially, the problem is the military that buttresses this regime is not going to want to work with Maria Machado. Essentially, they control things. She's their enemy. Like her, she wants to dismantle the security apparatus of the regime. And so therefore, there's kind of an all or nothing question if you get rid of the regime entirely. If you say Machado has to be president, well, then those people are going to fight, and then you're going to be in some kind of civil conflict very quickly. And so, yes, it would have been difficult, if not impossible, absent more US Military force going in to put Maria Machado or Amanda Gonzalez, her proxy, who won the last election, according to national monitors, in charge right away. That makes sense to me. However, I think what's interesting is there's no discussion of even a third option, because what you would normally do is you'd say, okay, this is a problem. We have a regime that doesn't have a lot of legitimacy to the people. It's a brutal regime. But we know that if we just try to install a new leader, they're going to fight that outcome, and then that could get us deeper into a quagmire in Venezuela. Well, what you would normally then do is try to set some roadmap to an election so that you have an event that at least creates the basis to have a new leader or you would have some negotiated transition. And yes, Machado has been very stubborn about. And I understand why it's a principal position to say, I'm not talking to these guys. They throw my friends in prison. But look, the United States has all the leverage right now. And if you said we all need to get together and have some kind of pacted transition, some kind of negotiation where there's essentially a power sharing between aspects of the existing regime, bring in the opposition and then some roadmap to an election, that's what you do. But my take of what I've seen in the last couple days is they have no competence and no patience and no interest in doing that. They just don't give a shit about the Venezuelan people. Like, nothing that they say they could have done more victory laps about the human rights possibilities of this, they just don't care. Like Trump clearly could care less.

A (19:53)

Just to add to your point, Ben, like, there's reportedly like something 800 some odd political prisoners in Venezuela. If Marco Rubio is running the country, why haven't they been released yet?

B (20:01)

Yes. Yeah. They're not even saying, like, release a few symbolic ones, a few prominent journalists, you know, and so it's that kind of just total lack of reg guard for this country that they just removed the leader from that is so striking to me. All they care about is getting oil contracts and doing victory laps on a special forces operation.

A (20:22)

Yeah. And just on the Machado point, I mean, I wanted to Play this clip mostly just because it kind of made me sad. Here is Maria Machado on Fox News, I think Monday night, or maybe it was Sunday night, talking to Sean Hannity. Let's watch. As soon as I learned that we.

B (20:37)

Had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, I dedicated to President Trump because I believed at that point that he deserved it.

A (20:45)

Did you at any point offer to give him the Nobel Peace Prize? Did that actually happen? I had read that somewhere. I wasn't sure if it was true.

B (20:53)

Well, it hasn't happened yet, but I certainly would love to be able to personally tell him that we believe the Venezuelan people because this is a price of. The Venezuelan people certainly want to, to.

A (21:07)

Give it to him and share it with him. What has, what he has done, as.

B (21:11)

I said, is historic.

A (21:13)

This poor woman risked her life to run against Maduro, risked being tortured, risked her life again to escape Venezuela via this, like, dangerous sea journey out into the middle of the ocean when, you know, they almost didn't pick her up because, like, you know, the, the people she was supposed to rendezvous like hundreds of miles off the coast of Venezuela couldn't find her for a while to then get to Europe to the Nobel Prize ceremony, which she actually missed. And it goes on Fox News and gets pressed about why she didn't give her peace prize to this asshole who just blew up the capital of her country. Like just fucking bizarre land.

B (21:51)

Yeah. I mean, there's a comedy and a tragedy to this, right? The comedy is that this is what we're talking about. Like that Sean Hannity is talking about the Nobel Peace Prize. And look, Maria Machado is a right wing person, right. I mean, I admire her courage, but deep ties to the Republican Party. The lesson is just because you suck up to Trump and dedicate that you're awarded Trump, it's never enough, right? Like kissing his ass is never enough. It will always. It's not enough that she dedicated to him. She has to give it to him physically. He needs the medal. You know, like that's absurd. I think the darker piece of this is the reaction, Tommy, and I'm curious your thoughts on this. I felt very, not just because I was sick, I felt very weird the last couple days because my brain is telling me we have a dictatorial leader who has now begun to invade countries and remove their leaders. And he threatened to, you know, invade several other countries since this went down. Okay. Like we've seen that movie in history. It's like a really scary movie. And yet the reaction is this combination of on the right Like Fox News, Donald Trump, he's the greatest man. You should give him the Nobel Prize. And even the mainstream media is more like, let's do the TikTok of the military operation and is this good for Trump? Or what are Democrats gonna say? And it's like, I don't know, the period of history that it feels like we're living through now doesn't like, is this what it was like in other countries? And I'm not gonna draw the analogies. I'll let your people listening. Use your own. But, like, maybe this is what it's like. Like, you know, you conquer country after country and the state media is like, Fox and everybody else is a little too scared to say that this isn't normal. You know? Yeah, I'm getting a lot of central here, but I mean.

A (23:44)

No, I know, I know. Look, I think I want to dig into the deeper kind of Don Rowe doctrine implications in a little bit as we get past the vet as well. Like, you had a great piece on this in the New York Times today.

B (23:54)

Yeah, I tried to unpack it and.

A (23:56)

Got me thinking about it, too. I mean, you know, you and I about talked about this a bit on Saturday, and I still feel the same way. I mean, mostly, look, I think the US Media and political reaction to, like, the opening days of wars is always, like, pretty fawning and kind of gross. I mean, there's some, some interesting pushback on Trump. Like, Megan Kelly was like, I'm reserving judgment about what's going on in Venezuela. And she actually called out Fox News for being state TV and was said, back when, back in the day when she was at Fox News, she felt obligated to cheerlead every single war and felt burned by that in the long term, which, you know, like, good for her for saying that, but that kind of voice was rare. But then you have, like, Rudy Giuliani tweeting, like, cut off the entire head of the snake and like, get rid of Rodriguez, too. So there is a lot of triumphalism in these early days of war. There's very little consideration of the costs. The people pointing out that Iraq and Libya and all these other interventions ultimately were disasters were often shouted down and told that, like, how dare you compare these places? Because they're different. It's like, well, of course they are. But you know what isn't different is that the United States isn't very good at solving political problems with the military. Whether or not it means, you know, Trump is like, in the beginning of an authoritarian right wing like fascist military bender. I don't know. But it certainly, it worries me. It definitely worries me.

B (25:13)

Yeah. Well, and I. And to take it to Venezuela. There's no more clarity on what's actually going to happen there right now. I mean, like, you know, Dulcie Rodriguez is in charge. What happens tomorrow and the next day? Like, is the opposition going to be brought in at all? How are the oil companies going to get in there? Like, who's going to rebuild the oil infrastructure? Who's going to pay for that? Like, what happens if somebody in Venezuela starts to try to have a coup because they feel like now's the time? Like, there's so many questions and what I'm struck by is that the lack of answers.

A (25:54)

This episode is sponsored by Better Help. The new year doesn't require a new you, maybe just a less burden to you. Therapy can help more easily identify what weighs you down or holds you back by offering an unbiased perspective to better understand your relationships, motivations and emotions. Better Help therapists work according to a strict code of conduct and are fully licensed in the US BetterHelp does the initial matching work so you can focus on your therapy goals. A short questionnaire helps identify your needs and preferences in their 12 or more years of experience. An industry leading match fulfillment rate means they typically get it right the first time. If you aren't happy with your match, switch to a different therapist at any time from their tailored RECS. With over 30,000 therapists, BetterHelp is one of the world's largest online therapy platforms, having served over 5 million people globally. And it works with an average rating of 4.9 out of 5 for a live session based on over 1.7 million client reviews. Look at the stressful time of year, the holidays, there's work, there's family obligations. There's a lot going on in the world. You need therapy. Give it a try. Check out BetterHelp. They've helped millions of people and you could be the next one. BetterHelp makes it easy to get matched online with a qualified therapist. Sign up and get 10% off at betterhelp.com Crooked World that's BetterHelp H-E-L-P.com Crooked World Positive World is brought to you by American Giant. We're all trying to get new stuff, look fashionable, keep up with the times. But you know what? A lot of it is crap that falls apart the second you wash it. Not American giants. And this time of year, a good hoodie is essential. But it can be tough to find One that will last through the season. The American Giant Classic Full zip hoodie is made to last a lifetime. So you can count on it to bring you comfort and warmth year after year. Slate magazine called it the greatest hoodie ever made. And from cotton to zipper, it's made right here in the United States of America. I've got some great American Giant stuff myself. I got a sweatshirt, I got some really comfortable sweatpants. They are high quality and thick and durable and you know, washed it a million times now because my kids get them disgusting and it holds up and it's just like the day I bought it and took it out of the bag. The iconic classic full zip hoodie is the jacket that started it all for American Giant. Custom heavyweight fleece and side panels for mobility make it the best hoodie ever. Body skimming fit with a double lined hood and reinforced elbow patches mean this hoodie will last. Born from a commitment to support the communities that create its products. Every American Giant piece is made in America and designed to last, no exceptions. It's the kind of difference you'll feel and appreciate for years to come. This season, snag the hoodie that'll bring you comfort for life. The American Giant Classic Full zip and save 20% off your first order at american-giant.com when you use promo code world at checkout, that's 20% off your first order at American-Giant.com code world. Let's talk about the new president of Venezuela, Delsey Rodriguez and then sort of the other power players who were left post Maduro. And you know what it tells us. So Delcey Rodriguez and her brother Jorge Rodriguez, they're like longtime political insiders. They've been advisors to Maduro, they've been advisors to Hugo Chavez. Jorge Rodriguez is like his, you know, positions in the assembly and overseeing elections. Their dad was a left wing guerrilla who was allegedly involved in the kidnapping of an American businessman in 1970s. For that action, he was picked up by the then Venezuelan government and tortured to death. And so Delsey has said that she views like Chivismo and the movement that she is a part of as retribution for what happened to her dad, the murder of her dad by security forces. She is viewed as a very highly competent administrator. She built ties with the Venezuela's business community and basically transitioned the economy of the country like such as it is, from socialism to capitalism. She helped oversee an increase in oil production. She's foreign educated. She worked as a foreign minister. She speaks English and French, as in, you know, one expert I was Talking to said, you know, she's corrupt as hell, but she's not a drug runner. You know, she's like not corrupted that way. Which probably makes her more palatable to the Trump people. Her brother is also like a very well known quantity with the U.S. government. He's part of lots of talks in the U.S. however, like they're a big problem for Rodriguez is what she does not control, which what you were alluding to, like, she's not in charge of the military. That is the Defense Minister, Pedrina Lopez. She is not in charge of the intelligence agencies that's predominantly handled by Di Estado Cabello, those who are also, they have the most control over these colectivo paramilitary groups that we mentioned earlier. So, Ben, the questions you just raised are all the ones I have, like, is she really in charge? I don't know. Can she stay in charge? Because ultimately, like the guys with the guns tend to end up in charge in these situations. And there's just all these ways that these like, strong men around her can, you know, pull cords, like subtly to make her tenure as president end.

B (30:34)

Yeah. Or to make sure that, you know, their, their cut and their position is preserved. I mean, essentially you have, you know, in these circumstances, it's always the guys at the guns, as you say, who are, who are going to preserve their position. She's kind of a negotiator. I see her as someone who's, you know, it was been interesting to watch her. She gave a kind of very left wing, pro Maduro speech to the Venezuelan people, shoring up her bona fides as a Chavista. And then she put out a kind of conciliatory statement about, well, we'll dialogue with the United States. I see her as a negotiator. She's negotiating between Venezuelan business interest and the Venezuelan military. And the more hardcore Chavistas, she's negotiating with the US Government. Like, that's what she's doing right now. She's not necessarily controlling all the levers of power, but she's navigating between them. There's always a moment after a shocking military operation like this where everybody's kind of waiting to see where things are going to go. Now Trump and Stephen Miller, like, his tough talking, you know, you know, Viceroy for Venezuela, I guess, are saying, like, well, they're gonna have to listen to us because we've got these people, you know, in the Caribbean. Well, you know what, we had like 150,000 troops in Iraq and people just stopped listening to us at a certain point, because they realize at the end of the day, you're not really going to be here. Like, it's Venezuelans who are going to be in Venezuela and there is the opposition. What are they going to do? They're going to fight? Are they just going to try to have an election? Are they going to try to get the political prisoners released? Is the military going to listen to things that she says? Like all these questions about how that place is gonna work are not answered by just saying Delsey's in charge, but the US Is really running the place, right?

A (32:20)

Yep, that's right. And you know, Politico reported, Ben, that the US has like three big asks for Delsey Rodriguez. One, crackdown on drug flows. Two, kick Iran and Cuban operatives out of Venezuela. I did notice that. I think the Iranian and Cuban ambassadors were some of the first people to greet her at her swearing ceremony. So I'm sure those images didn't go over that well in the White House. And then three, stop selling oil to US Adversaries like China. The only one of those that seems actually doable to me, Ben, is number two, which is kick out the Iranians and kick out the Cubans. Because if she really goes after the drugs, the corrupt generals who are part of the drug trade, who are actually, you know, referred to as cartel de la souls, could go after her. And I, like, I don't. Do you think they can afford a rupture with the Chinese if suddenly, you know, Venezuela cancels all these Chinese oil contracts that they've had for years and years? So, look, I don't know, maybe, maybe she will be able to pull off enough of this. But you could also see, like, Cabello and Lopez, like, setting her up to fail by allowing, like, just enough political instability that it's a headache for Trump or it keeps the oil companies out of Venezuela.

B (33:29)

Well, look, look, all of those are difficult, right? Because like you said, maybe she can turn off some symbolic drug trafficking, but she can't, kind of. These are criminals, right? Like, they, they, they, they don't listen to authority. By definition, the Cubans would be hard to get out of there because you talk about, like, the intelligence ministry. They're deeply, deeply embedded with the Cubans. It's kind of like a blurred together by design. The Iranians may be a little easier, and the Chinese have been buying that oil for years. So this is all difficult stuff. And if you're in Venezuela, if you're one of these factions there, what you're probably thinking is, is Trump gonna lose interest in this place, like, he just did his big show. But everything, you know about Trump is, you know, a few weeks go by and he's focused on something else. And so they have every incentive to kind of maybe throw some symbolic chum at Trump. We arrested this one drug dealer. We, you know, proved that this one Iranian, or we let go of some political prisoners. But you basically would keep the regime in place and play for time, and then, you know, let's see. See how it goes.

A (34:33)

Yeah, they know what our midterms are. They know that a re invasion gets harder and harder. By the way, I drew out a lot of this section from this great reporting in the, in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times. There's papers by the Crisis Group. They were really great. And then our friend Juan Gonzalez had a great piece in Foreign affairs magazine that's worth reading. And Juan also pointed out to me when we were talking that, like, you have a lot of very experienced fighters hanging out kind of in and around Venezuela. Like, you know, the remnants of the farc, the group called eln. They are skilled fighters. They are skilled in urban combat. They could stage operations that do just enough to scare away these oil companies. And there is no surge in energy.

B (35:10)

Yeah. Trump may have to put US Boots on the ground to protect the oil companies if they're really going to get in there. And I'm just wondering how the American people are going to feel about deploying a bunch of troops to secure Chevron interests in Venezuela that will be funded by American taxpayers paying to rebuild Venezuelan oil fields. Like, it's. It's a crazy. What is the benefit of this operation?

A (35:32)

Yeah.

B (35:32)

Because I don't think politics get worse. Nicolas Maduro is not like some key piece of the international drug trade. Right. So it's not like you really did anything in the international drug trade. What is, actually, there's a lot of risk of greater violence, civil war, state collapse, all these things we talk about. The benefit that Trump articulates is purely oil, but that's going to take years to rebuild that oil infrastructure. Billions of dollars that the American people have to spend, and probably the deployment of US Troops to secure that oil infrastructure. So not sure what the win is in this. Yeah.

A (36:05)

One other important thing we've learned in the last couple of days from the new indictment of Maduro is that the Justice Department is no longer alleging that he is the leader of an actual cartel called Cartel de la Souls. That claim was first made in their indictment of Maduro back in 2020. And then that language from that indictment was used to designate Cartel de la Souls as a terrorist organization by both the Treasury Department and the State Department. And then you repeatedly heard guys like Marco Rubio say, well, Maduro is a designated leader of a narco terrorist group. So of course we had to like, take him out. But, you know, actual Venezuela experts kept pointing out that Cartel de la Souls and is not a real organization. It is a slang term invented by the Venezuelan media to refer to corrupt officials who are corrupted by drug money in particular. And so this new Maduro indictment reflects that reality, Ben, and says Cartels de la Souls refers to a patronage system or a culture of corruption that is fueled by drug money. In other words, the Trump administration, they knew the 2020 claim was bullshit, so they had to pull it because they knew they couldn't get it passed in a court of law, and so they dropped the thing. So, you know, that seems to be, you know, again, shout out Charlie Savage at the New York Times for kind of reporting this out and flagging it. But, like, it seems like a pretty astounding admission since designating this fake cartel as a terrorist group is the linchpin of this made up legal strategy that the Trump administration has pointed to to justify these airstrikes where they've been murdering people in the Caribbean and in the Pacific Ocean.

B (37:36)

Yeah, but it just shows the disregard that they have for it because essentially they know that when they get in a court of law and they actually have to prosecute Maduro, they can't make shit up because then the case will get thrown out. But they can make shit up to send an armada to the Caribbean. You know, think about that. Like, they're not worried about lying to the whole world to justify invading this country, lying to the American people, lying to Congress, but they do know they can't lie to a judge because he might toss the case. You know, it tells you a lot about how they operate.

A (38:09)

Yeah, that's a really good point. Last thing, there have been a lot of comparisons to this, the Majora operation, to the operation against Manuel Noriega in the 1980s and early 1990s that we thought we'd just spend a minute just talking about that. So for those who don't know, maybe weren't alive then, the operation against Noriega started in December of 89 and ended in January of 1990. Then President George H.W. bush, he ordered this operation to an invasion of Panama to arrest Manuel Noriega, who is the dictator running Panama at the time. The scale of that operation was massive. Like, the US deployed 26,000 troops. I think about half of them were already in Panama because at the time, U.S. southern Command was located in Panama, now it's in Florida. But this invasion came after, you know, lots of repression by the, of the Panamanian people, by Noriega, lots of evidence that he was involved in drug trafficking, the killing of a U.S. marine by a Panamanian soldier. And then the Panamanian General assembly passed a resolution declaring that there was a state of war, that a state of war existed between the US And Panama, which I think was twisted to suggest that Panama had declared war on the US which wasn't really what happened, wasn't really intended, but whatever, you know, it's history now. So the US invades, Noriega hides in the Vatican diplomatic mission for a few days before he gives himself up. 23 US troops were killed, hundreds were wounded, hundreds of Panamanian troops were killed along with hundreds of civilians. And the US military just leveled Panama City. Like tens of thousands of people lost their homes and became, you know, IDPs or refugees. But I think what, what makes the, that operation especially crazy, Ben, in the benefit of hindsight, is that like, Noriega was a long time CIA asset. Throughout the Cold War, the CIA paid Noriega for information about the Cubans or about, you know, or to train the Contras or other, you know, do other dirty deals for them. And they turned a blind eye to the fact that he was a military dictator who killed his political opponents. He was a serial rapist, he was a massive drug trafficker, and just by all means, like an evil dude, but like, you know, he's our friend. And then the Cold War ends, the war on drugs starts. George H.W. bush goes from CIA director to president and he turns on his old ally or asset. And here we are. Before you know it, Noriega is, you know, getting prosecuted in a court in the U.S. so, you know, an interesting but very dark bit of history, Ben. And it's like, I think if you really dig into the details of the Noriega operation, it's not necessarily a comparison I would want to make if I were the Trump administration.

B (40:39)

Yeah, you cover the bad part of the operation. I guess the other piece I'd say is that sometimes it gets cited because, you know, the aftermath went pretty well. Like they kind of, you know, had an election, new, you know, new new government there. But Panama is much smaller than way smaller, you know, and that's where it doesn't hold. Like Venezuela is a country of 30 million people, massive geography. So replicating a political transition in a bigger, much more complex country with like an ideologically entrenched regime is a much, much larger task. And Trump one night raid is not going to transform Venezuela. You know, like, that's what's so maddening about this. In the same way that in Panama, like, you know, we had more of a capacity to do that because it was just. We're playing on a smaller field. Yeah.

A (41:31)

Okay, we're going to take a quick break, but for our international listeners in Australia, I just want to let you know that Pod Save America is coming to Australia and New Zealand. We're going to be there in Auckland on February 11 and do three cities in Australia after that. Melbourne on February 13, Brisbane on the 14th and Sydney on the 16th. If you live in Australia, if you live in New Zealand, come see Pod Save America. It'll be fun. Tickets are on sale now. Go to crooked.com events. Pod Save the World is brought to you by Sundays for dogs New Year. New you should always include eating better, right? Well, if you're upgrading and optimizing what goes in your body, then why are our dogs still stuck with the same old kibble routine? Give them real food. Give them good food. Give them sundaes for dogs. Sundaes was founded by a veterinarian and mom, Dr. Tori Waxman, who got tired of seeing so called premium dog food full of fillers and synthetics. So she designed sundaes, air dried real food made in a human grade kitchen using the same ingredients and care you'd use to cook for yourself and for your family. Every bite of Sundays is clean and made from real meat, fruits and veggies. And no kibble. That means no weird ingredients you can't pronounce and no fillers. Compared to kibble and other brands out there, sundaes invest 50 times more in its ingredients to ensure premium quality. Because your dog deserves food made with care, not in the interest of cost cutting. And the best part, you can scoop and serve. No freezer, no thawing, no prep, no mess. Just nutrient rich, clean food that fuels their happiest, healthiest days. You can get more of them to share together. Listen, we love our dogs. Like family members, you bet. Often more. Why not feed them the same kind of quality food that you would feed a cousin, a brother, a child and you know, watch how happy it makes your dog. Watch how thrilled they are, how much more energy they have, the better mood, the more calm and focused, softer coat, less itching, no eye burgers, better poops, all the above, check out Sundays for dogs. Make the switch to Sundays. Go right now to Sundays for dogs.com World30 and get 30% off your first three orders. Or you can use the code World30 at checkout. That's 30 off your first three orders at Sundays for dogs.com World30 Sundays for dogs.com World30 or use code World30 at checkout. Choose to show up.

B (43:54)

With the bold.

A (43:54)

Styling of the Mazda CX30. Okay, so let's do a big picture talk about the Don Row Doctrine. I think that's the thing that, like you and me and everyone else in the world basically is trying to figure out is what this Venezuela operation tells us about how Trump is going to conduct foreign policy going forward. So, you know, we've talked about the Don Row Doctrine, which is Trump's belief that he's the emperor of the Western Hemisphere. We covered a lot of this when they released their national security strategy last year because it was spelled out in pretty plain English. But Trump and his team have made a bunch of alarming and illustrative comments ever since. So we're going to play a couple of those for you. So the first is a super cut of Trump talking with reporters on Air Force One on Sunday where he threatens to invade a bunch of countries. So let's roll that one first. Colombia is very sick, too, run by a sick man who likes making cocaine and selling it to the United States.

C (44:55)

And he's not going to be doing it very long. Cuba is ready to fall, you know.

A (44:58)

Yes.

C (44:59)

By the way, you have to do something with Mexico. Mexico has to get their act together.

A (45:03)

Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese.

B (45:07)

Ships all over the place.

A (45:09)

We need Greenland.

C (45:10)

The Don Row Doctrine.

A (45:13)

Okay. And here is newly minted Viceroy of Venezuela, Stephen Miller talking with CNN's Jake Tapper on CNN. The United States is using its military to secure our interests unapologetically in our hemisphere. We're a superpower. And under President Trump, we are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower. It is absurd that we would allow a nation in our own backyard to become the supplier of resources to our adversaries, but not to us, to hoard.

B (45:44)

Weapons from our adversaries to be able to be positioned as an asset against.

A (45:48)

The United States rather than on behalf of the United States States sovereign country should be able to do what they want. The Monroe Doctrine and the Trump Doctrine is all about securing the national interests of America. This whole period that happened after World War II, where the west began apologizing and groveling and begging, I don't even know honestly what you're talking about right now.

B (46:10)

You're approaching this from the wrong frame, this neoliberal frame that the United States.

A (46:15)

Job is to go around the world and. And demanding immediate elections be held everywhere, immediately, all the time, right away, no vacuums. That's not what I think. But you invaded the country, we took, went into the country and we seized the leader of Venezuela. Damn straight we did. And I'm saying we're not going to let. So is the US Going to have new elections that we're not going to let, Tim. Pot communist dictators, send rapists into our.

B (46:38)

Country, send drugs into our country, send.

A (46:40)

Weapons into our country.

B (46:42)

Okay.

A (46:43)

Barry Weiss wants to make sure you interview that guy for 16 minutes. I do love how he's ranting about how we're not going to let Venezuela only sell oil to the fucking, you know, Chinese or whatever. It's like you guys sanctioned them in 2019 and banned us from being able to buy their own. Whatever. So, Ben, we've talked about, like, the big picture, right, which is that Trump thinks he's the emperor of the Western Hemisphere. He thinks he gets to dictate events in Central and South America. But what kind of specific steps are you worried about or watching for him to take next? Like, specifically keeps mentioning Cube, Cuba. Do you think there's going to be some sort of, like, overt or covert move on the Cuban government? Do you think he might really do something to Petro in Colombia? Like, how are you watching to see how this plays out?

B (47:29)

Yeah, no, I'll keep it. I mean, there's so much there. But I know, and I do want to say, just for the YouTube viewers, Lindsey Graham's face each time Trump threatens to depose another government. It looks like he just took a bump of cocaine. Yep. And actually when he says Cuba, he's like, ah. Like, he literally looks like a jolt went through him or something.

A (47:48)

His first biography erection since 2003.

B (47:51)

So there's a lot there. Congratulations. Yeah, congratulations, MAGA voters and, you know, isolationist all in potters who thought Trump was this guy that was going to end the imperial foreign policy. What Stephen Miller is describing is an empire in all the Western hemisphere. I mean, which he keeps describing as our hemisphere. When he says our, he doesn't just mean, like, communally. We all live here. It means these are possessions of ours, essentially, which is an insane thing to say. I mean, these are sovereign countries. It's a big fucking hemisphere. Sao Paulo is 5,000 miles from New York, you know, but in Terms of what I expect, which is always hard with Trump, he seems most focused on two kinds of places, Right. One, are there natural resources there that I can extract and my buddies can get rich off of and then I'll probably take some massive back end cut. So like whatever oil's being drilled in Venezuela 10 years from now, Trump's kids.

A (48:56)

Are like the Trump library. Yeah, it's got a little spigot.

B (48:59)

And two, is it some kind of boogeyman, you know, that I can gin up my right wing base about? Right. So for that reason, here are the countries I'm most worried about on his list of places to bomb. Right. I'm on Cuba. I do think that they will try for the regime change. They've got, you know, Marco Rubio, they've got parts of their political base in Miami. They would like to see the Cuban regime gone. They, you know, there's a lot of economic interest that could be developed in Cuba in the tourism ministry that like Trump, I know for a fact, by the way, Tommy, when I, because I did the Cuban negotiations, the Trump Organization was down scouting like golf course properties. Of course, they were Cuba in 2016. So Cuba is both an ideological thing for them, but it's also like a money grab. And I would not expect that to necessarily be a new Bay of Pigs invasion. They'll probably see if they can do it with some kind of, you know, covert sabotage type stuff, squeeze the regime. But who knows, like at the end of the day they may just do another one of these kinds of things and see how it goes. I don't think it'll go well, but we can get to that later. Mexico, I do think all the chest stumping about drug trafficking and fentanyl, there is this kind of momentum towards strikes in Mexico, not for regime change, but to kind of show that we're going to take shots in Mexico that deals with his political base on drugs. Greenland, I would be very, very surprised if they don't try to seize Greenland. I would, I put it above 50% because that's the resource rich place. Like there's all this stuff up there, right. There's, you know, critical minerals and there's oil and gas and, and, and so those three. Greenland, Cuba and potentially strikes in Mexico. Petro, Colombia seems crazy to me, especially because Columbia's gonna have an election and.

A (50:51)

Petro's term is up in August. He can't run again. I think the first round is in a couple months. So, like, it would be crazy if I were Petro, I'd Shut the fuck up for six months.

B (51:00)

But, and you know, I don't know, he's like, I kind of like it's.

A (51:03)

Helping his politics, it's helping him politically, it's helping his party.

B (51:05)

Yeah. And it's probably gonna help his party a little bit, but. So I, I, I think this is not the end. I do not think Venezuela is the end. And I think they mean what they say, that they want to run this place like an empire. They keep telling us this, and I don't know why we wouldn't listen to them.

A (51:20)

We got to believe him. We got to listen. Yeah. So let's play another clip of Stephen Miller specifically talking about Greenland, and then let's dig in on that piece. Greenland has a population of 30,000 people, Jake. The real question is, by what right does Denmark assert control over Greenland? What is the basis of their territorial claim? What is their basis of having Greenland as a colony of Denmark? The United States is the power of NATO for the United States to secure.

B (51:46)

The Arctic region, to protect and defend.

A (51:49)

NATO and NATO interests. Obviously, Greenland should be part of the United States. And so that's a conversation that we're going to have as a country. That's a process we're going to have as a, as a community of nations.

C (51:59)

So you can't take it off the.

A (52:01)

Table that the US Would use military force to seize Greenland. You can't take it off the table. Jake, I understand you're trying very hard to, which again, is your job. I respect it. It's great to get exactly the headline right. That catchy headline, trying to get an answer that says, that says Miller refuses to rule out the. The United States should have Greenland as part of the United States. Nobody's going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland. It's just, it's not the key point. But his voice is so fucking annoying. So the world is taking this very like, the world, I think, agrees with you, Ben. So the Danish prime minister met the Fredriksen, said she is taking Trump's Greenland threat very seriously and that him claiming Greenland would mean, quote, the international community as we know it, democratic rules of the game, NATO, the world's strongest defensive alliance, all of that would collapse if one NATO country chose to attack another. Those are the stakes. It's not just about like a block of ice who controls 30,000 people's fate rights. It's that in her mind. And then, you know, earlier today there was a joint statement from, about Greenland from France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, the UK and Denmark, it says in part. Security in the Arctic must therefore be achieved collectively in conjunction with NATO allies, including the United States, by upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the inviability of borders. These are universal principles and we will not stop defending them. Greenland belongs to its people. It is for Denmark and Greenland and them only to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland. So it is just clear from these statements that this would lead to a rupture of like the entire post World War II order, full stop.

B (53:45)

Yeah. If people are watching this and thinking like, well, you know, what's the big deal? Why can't the United States, you know, there are only 30 or 50,000 people there, or even Maduro, like, we did this. What's the big deal? There's two problems, meta problems. Right? One is that the Trump administration just doesn't give a shit about people. So if the people getting blown up in the boats or fishermen, they don't care if Venezuela descends into violent chaos, they don't care. Like, they don't. There's a valueless. If you're not an American, and probably specifically a white American, they, they don't give a about you. And that, that's an alarming worldview. And that tends to lead to bad things that happen, you know, where we break countries and, and, and they're a mess for years. The second piece is one you just said, though. Like, we, we are breaking every single rule that has held the world together since World War II. People got together after World War II because they had seen where autocrats, nationalism and military aggression led. It led to two world wars. Those two world wars were so devastating that everybody got together and were like, we need laws of war to govern how and when countries can go to war. We need laws to make sure that sovereignty is inviolable principle. So big countries just don't invade small ones. Because they didn't want, not just another world war. They didn't want a nuclear world war. They didn't want World War three. Right. That's why you get a whole UN system, all these things. And Trump is tearing at all of that with this. And look, Greenland is actually the best example of it, more than Venezuela. Why? Why Denmark? See, why shouldn't it be ours instead of Denmark? Look, I'm not a Greenlander. I can't speak to how the Danish have been there. They've probably done some shitty things over the years. But for 300 years, like, this has kind of been a part of Denmark, like. And so, you know, if you go in and say, we're going to take this massive geography with all these natural resources and just claim it because we're stronger. You are going to shatter NATO. You are going to shatter the US alliance with Europe. You are going to encourage the Russians and Chinese to grab more of their own, because then they're going to see we're in a resource competition. We're in a great power competition. We need to grab more territory.

A (56:13)

Right?

B (56:13)

And so suddenly, it's not just a Taiwan question. What else is China going to try to grab? What else is Russia going to grab? And ultimately, as happened in World War I and World War II, when you have expansionist empires, they bump into each other and they end up fighting a war with each other. And it may not start, like the day after we take Greenland, but that is the course that he is setting us on by doing this and by having this fucking, you know, two bits like Jeff Sessions, staffer, cosplay fascist, thinks he's like a NATO geopolitics expert. You're talking about, like, our right to Greenland is we shouldn't be.

A (56:51)

Well, a lot of this came from his wife's dumb trolling tweet of, like, Greenland with an American flag on it. Yeah, I mean, like, the big question I have is like, does the Don Row doctrine mean the Western hemisphere is ours? Clearly, he doesn't care if Putin carves up Ukraine or Europe. He's like, whatever, go. Go deal with it. I wonder what it means for Taiwan. I think he'll probably trade away Taiwan. But I think the big question, Ben, is like, what happens if the Chinese go after an island that is claimed by the Japanese? Right? And suddenly, like, there's a hot conflict there. We should point out that On Monday, the U.N. security Council held an emergency meeting about us, about the United States. The secretary general of the U.N. said the U.S. violated the U.N. charter. We were, like, criticized by Brazil and China and Cuba and Mexico. We even got denounced by the French, who said that the Maduro operation, quote, chips away at the very foundation of the international order. But just quickly back to Lindsey Graham, right? Like, this fucking guy has been. First of all, he's a neocon. He's in favor of every war. But, like, one area where we agreed with him on policy generally was his support for Ukraine, because he viewed, you know, Ukraine as the first domino that would fall, and then the Russians would move across Europe and they would hit a NATO country and NATO would get drawn into the flag fight. Yet he's sitting there yucking it up as Trump is talking about taking Greenland, which all of our closest NATO allies say would unravel Naito as we know it. And he's like, oh. And he's like, thinks it's fun and it's a good fucking time. Because I don't know, he's got a war boner again. And it's just like, I hate these people. I hate them. They have no principles, they have no values. They mean nothing.

B (58:17)

No. And everything. Like, this is a really important point. And like, because, you know, we have some listeners I know who've been following this kind of stuff for years. And it's like these people like Lindsey Graham have showed up as defenders of democracy in the world for, like, decades. Right? Like back to the John McCain days, but that was all bullshit. They sold out Maria Machado the day that Trump decided that he'd rather deal with the Maduro regime people, they sold out Europe the day that, like, the Republican Party became like a far right ethno nationalist party. That was a. Like, just don't trust these people. Like, you know, like, they're the wrong people. And, and their ideas are dangerous. And, and the reality is this Greenland thing, it's going to come to a head. Like, I. We're not one year into Trump. You think in the next three years he's not going to try to make a play on Greenland. And how do you have a NATO when the whole basis of the alliance is collective defense and you've got one member just seizing the territory of another, like, it doesn't work. And then to throw Lindsey Graham's arguments back at him without NATO, well, then you really do have the likelihood that Putin will go into the Baltics, that Putin will go into Europe proper, because NATO is the thing that stops him from doing that.

A (59:32)

Yep, it's really bad. Okay, we are going long today. But, you know, that's fine because there's a lot of important stuff to talk. But our last topic is Iran and these protests. So the protests began on December 28. It was when some electronics vendors went on strike in Tehran there. Soon there was a bunch of other merchants and shopkeepers in the capital who joined in. Then the protests spread to universities. And this so often happens with these protest movements as the, as the number of people protesting grows, the reasons and the demands from the protesters grow as well. So initially it was all about Iran's economy. The regime had raised increased gas prices. Inflation was been like 40% for a long time. The Iran's currency has collapsed. Tehran could literally run out of water. Soon. I mean, that's sort of a very scary scenario for them. But now you got protesters calling for the end of the regime period. And there's reports been that about 35 people have been killed, about 1200 have been arrested. Iranians are now protesting or they've there's been reports or confirmed reports of a protest in about 200 locations in 26 of Iran's 31 provinces, according to this US based human rights activist news agency. So these are not just like, you know, urban liberals. It's like everywhere. Now. This is the biggest protest movement in Iran since 2022, which we covered at the time was a young woman named Mahsa Amini was murdered by Iran's so called morality police. Back then, the security forces cracked on car. They killed about 500 people. Now the regime seems a bit paralyzed as to what they should do or how to respond. On Saturday, the Supreme Leader called the original protesters grievances legitimate. But he also said, quote, rioters must be put in their place, which is ominous. However, President Possession said he wants his interior minister to meet with protesters. He wants them to hear them out. And on Monday, the government announced that they would give most citizens a monthly payment equivalent to like seven bucks. So I don't know how far that'll go, but doesn't seem like much. Trump has commented on the situation several times. Last Thursday, he posted on social media that if Iran, quote, violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue, end quote. He repeated that threat on Sunday in that same gaggle. We played you a clip from earlier which, you know, after the Maduro operation certainly gave it some added weight. Of course, our favorite boy, Lindsey Graham weighed in on this as well. Here he is on Fox News again, being a very serious person, I think this was Trey Gowdy over the weekend.

B (61:59)

Unlike Obama, President Trump has not turned.

A (62:02)

His back on the people of Iran.

B (62:05)

So I pray and hope that 2026 will be the year that we make Iran great again.

A (62:15)

It's a very cool hat. Dork. Lindsey Graham just put on a make Iran great again hat there though it was black and I don't know, I hate him. So, Ben, let's start with the protests themselves and then get to the US Response. So what are you watching for in terms of tipping points or something that might lead to a signal that there might be an actual regime change? And what do you make of this kind of seemingly incoherent response from the regime so far, at least kind of all over the place.

B (62:42)

I think what's clear is that the regime is very weak, weaker than they've been in a very, very long time for a lot of different reasons. Right. Some of it is they took some shots from Israel, obviously, and I don't just mean the nuclear program. I mean, like, their air defenses got taken out, some of their proxy network got depleted, but more of it is just. It's an old, sclerotic, shitty regime.

A (63:05)

Yeah. The Supreme Leader is 86.

B (63:06)

That's the main problem they have is it's a corrupt, sclerotic, ideological regime that has not delivered for its own people for a very long time. And we've seen protests for decades in Iran, and each time it feels like they come back bigger and they don't have answers to the people, the things that people are protesting over. I also think it's important to note that the 2022 protests, the women Life Freedom protest, succeeded in some respects. Women are starting to go uncovered in Tehran, which was in Iran, which is a sign that the regime couldn't reimpose its will. Right. That's a sign of weakness, too. And so I think you have a lot of internal cracks in that regime. The problem going forward is there's no clear path to, like, well, what is. Would come next. Right, Right. Because the reality is it's like the Venezuela thing. Let's say the Supreme Leader got led protests built and built and built, and the Supreme Leader, like, you know, fled the coup and went to Moscow, like, to hang out with Assad. The irgc, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard are probably the people that would run the country. They're the people with the guns, you know, and. And Trump, you know, bombing them isn't going to change that. Lindsey Graham putting on a hat isn't going to change that either. And so I think, you know, I don't expect there to be some regime collapse followed by some new government return to the Shah or like an election next week. I just think we're in a period of instability, and the question is whether or not Israel tries to take advantage of that by bombing Iran again and seeing if that. It's like a, you know, hitting a boxer who they think is about to go down. I don't think that would be good because actually, I think the more chaotic the collapse is of this regime, the more likely there's a civil war and the IRGC or the people that are running the place.

A (64:58)

Yeah. Also, like, look, to your point, I mean, the Supreme Leader is 86. So regime change is coming.

B (65:03)

It's coming. Actuarial and he's the longest serving dictator in the world.

A (65:08)

Yeah. And like, so I think that does also seem to have made some of the other kind of politicians and competing power centers more willing to criticize him and criticize the regime. Pizzkian's offer to meet with protesters, like, sounds like a concession, but imagine doing that in practice. Like, imagine putting yourself forward, being like, yes, I would like to tell you my name and have a conversation with you and go to a locked room with you. Like, you could end up in prison. It seems like a bad idea. It is hard to overstate I think the degree to which, like, the, the value of the real has dropped in the last year. I think it dropped 75%. It's like 1.4 million real to the dollar. So, like, the economy in Iran is in crisis, and that is in large part because of U.S. sanctions. But let's talk about this U.S. response, Ben, because I do think that there's kind of a threshold question which is, is Trump serious? Would Trump really intervene if there was a crackdown on protesters? And if so, what would he do? Trump didn't use the words red line like Obama did with Syria, but clearly he drew a red line by saying if the regime kills protesters, the U.S. will, quote, come to their rescue. However, it does seem clear, like, the regime is already killed protesters. So Trump has not done anything yet. So the red line has been crossed. But maybe, I don't. Maybe we interpret it as like some widespread use of force by the Iranian military or something. But again, the question is one, Ben, like, do you believe him to. Do you think the Iranian protesters believe him? Because the US has this long history of promising or at least suggesting to protesters that if they rise up, we will get their backs and then we let them get massacred. For example, in 1991, George H.W. bush encouraged Iraqis to take to the streets to take down Saddam Hussein. So a bunch of them did. And then Saddam massacred tens of thousands of Kurds in Shia, and the US did nothing. So the words matter a lot. The stakes are very high here. And it's sort of a question of, you know, we know Trump is not like, you know, measured with his words, but in the wake of the Maduro operation, maybe they take on some added weight.

B (67:09)

Yeah, if I were the protesters, I wouldn't be buying it. And, you know, because Trump, Trump has been all over the map on Iran, right? One day he wants a deal, one day bombing them, you know, one day threatening to bomb them if they crack down on protesters. But also, like, does nobody believes that that's out of any sincere interest in protecting protesters? Like, is, you know, there's, there's not other countries in the world where Trump cares about violent crackdowns. You know, he's not a human rights motivated person, you know, so the only way they might believe it is if it looks like the regime's about to fall. But again, what does it mean for that regime to fall? Like, what, what is in place after? Like, whatever. The, like, the thing that drives me the most crazy, Tommy, is when I see the kind of people that you have more patience to fight with online than me, who being like, you know, you don't care about the Iranian people or. No, I don't. If you're just seeing them as a tool on your geopolitical chess game. To me, that's the definition of not caring about the Iranian people. Because if this place collapses into civil war, that could be fucking awful. You know, I mean, part of what I think the protesters. So if people want to ask me, well, what should happen, I think part of what these protesters are doing is they know change is coming. Like, the Supreme Leader is going to die soon, or you may have to, like, you know, just leave power because he's old and he's losing control. And can there be some kind of pathway to just a different system in Iran? That might not be exactly what, you know, the US And Israel would impose on Iran, which is probably like the Shah again, you know, but making a.

A (68:41)

Lot of noise about coming back. Did a Wall Street Journal Q and A.

B (68:44)

Well, that's what he's saying. Like, I don't think that that's what the Iranian people want. You know, I'm just going to go out there on a limb. Can there just be some Iranian process to, like, negotiate like a pathway in a different direction? That will take time, but that's better than the, the regime collapsing and there being a civil war, or it's better than the Supreme Leader being ousted, but then the IRGC is in charge. Right. And again, I don't know, like, Trump bombing. I mean, this is when things start to, if we're doing, if we're bombing Iran within, like, weeks of removing the leader of Venezuela after we bombed Nigeria on Christmas. It really does feel like the Don Road doctrine is taking us into, like, this kind of global roving US Military conflict, which people may say we've already been in that with a war on terror. But now we're getting at, like, territorial expansion, where we're getting at, like, significant Geopolitical players. It's a, it is a different level of anything we've done since we went into Iraq.

A (69:52)

Yeah. For what it's worth. So, you know, in the interest of like wanting to learn from mistakes from the Obama administration, you know, we were in the White House in 2009 when the grieve movement rose up. President Obama, you know, sort of did not full throatedly support that movement at the time because there was concern that it could kind of steal their thunder as like a glib way to do it, but, you know, distract from what was a clear internal Iranian led movement and certainly make it about the US which was sort of the, the, it's always Iran's propaganda. Right. Which is, this is like the U.S. zionist, you know, puppet movement. It's not real. It's astroturf. I asked Obama about this in 2022 when we interviewed him. Here's what he had to say. When I think back to 2009, 2010, you guys will recall there was a big debate inside the White House about whether I should publicly affirm what was going on with the Green movement because a lot of the activists were being accused of being tools of the west and there was some thought that we were somehow going to be.

C (70:59)

Undermining their.

A (71:01)

Street cred in Iran if I supported what they were doing. And in retrospect, I think that was a mistake. Every time we see a flash, a glimmer of hope of people longing for freedom, I think we have to point it out, we have to shine a spotlight on it. We have to express some solidarity about it. I thought that was really interesting, Ben, that he kind of wanted to make that point. He kind of like pivoted to pointing out that, you know, he felt like that was a mistake and he wished, you know, we had been more full throated in 2009 in support of the Green movement.

B (71:42)

Yeah, I think that was wrong. And look, I think you and I were arguing on the other side of that White House debate at the time. But look, that was interesting. But I take a couple lessons from that, right? It was wrong not to speak out forcefully on behalf of those protesters at that time, to be a source of solidarity to those protesters. That said, I don't think Obama going out earlier and being forceful in his statements about the protests would have made the regime fall. And that's part of what drives me nuts about these debates online is it's kind of like if Obama had issued a statement, the regime would have fallen. And actually people might then to swing it all the Way in the other direction. Obama told me privately when the Arab string happened, he didn't want to make the mistake again of not being supporting protests. So we spoke out about the protests, and guess what? I don't think it was because of our statements, but a lot of those regimes did fall and it was a bit chaotic. Right? I mean, so you have to learn these lessons, right? What people deserve who are protesting is solidarity. They need to know that the world supports them. They need to know that the world's attention is on this. They need to know that the regime can't sweep it under the rug. Sometimes you can do certain things like help provide Internet access into a country, but ultimately it's up to the people of the country itself to change the place. And that's what most protesters will tell you they want to do themselves. Israel bombing them is not necessarily going to help them deal with this situation.

A (73:09)

You know, or the US Arming some, you know, opposition that some, you know, exile tells us we should be giving weapons to. I mean, look at Syria, right? Like all these efforts to foment regime change in Syria for 15 years failed until a former ISIS guy, a former Al Qaeda guy.

B (73:24)

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

A (73:24)

Decided to drive his truck to fucking Damascus and took the place over. And here we are.

B (73:31)

Yeah. No, there's plenty of lessons from the last 25 years, and Trump is probably not trying to learn any of them.

A (73:38)

That is, I think, a definite. Okay, so that's it for us for the new section. Thank you guys for listening. But stick around because after the break, you're going to hear from Congressman Joaquin Castro about the Congressional debate over Venezuela and what Congress could do to prevent Trump from, I don't know, invading Greenland or a whole bunch of other countries. So stick around for that. This podcast is sponsored by Squarespace. Squarespace is the all in one website platform designed to elevate your online presence and drive your success. Squarespace provides all the necessary tools to claim your domain, build a professional website, expand your brand and facilitate payments, making it the ideal solution for businesses of all sizes. Squarespace gives you everything you need to offer services and get paid all in one place. From consultations to events and experiences. Showcase your offerings with a customizable website designed to attract clients and grow your business. With Squarespace's collection of cutting edge design tools, anyone can build a bespoke online presence that perfectly fits their brand new or their business. Start with Blueprint AI, Squarespace's AI enhanced website builder to get a fully custom website in just a few steps using basic information about your industry, your goals and personality to generate premium quality content and personalized design recommendations. With Squarespace email campaigns, all the tools you need to engage clients, promote your services and grow your business are built in. Set up email automations to stay connected, nurture leads and save time while seamlessly integrating your offerings into beautifully designed templates that drive bookings and sales schedule emails that reach your audience at the perfect time, keeping your business at top of mind and driving long term growth. Head to squarespace.com for a free trial and when you're ready to Launch, go to squarespace.comworld to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain. That's squarespace.com world hi there, it's Andy Richter, and I'm here to tell you about my podcast, the three Questions with Andy Richter. Each week I invite friends, comedians, actors and musicians to discuss these three where do you come from, where are you going, and what have you learned? New episodes are out every Tuesday with guests like Julie Bowe and Ted Danson, Tig Notaro, Will Arnett, Phoebe Bridgers, and more. You can also tune in for my weekly Andy Richter Call in show episodes where me and a special guest invite callers to weigh in on topics like dating, disasters, bad teachers, and lots more. Listen to the three Questions with Andy Richter wherever you get your podcasts.

B (76:11)

Well, I'm very pleased to be joined by Congressman Joaquin Castro, who represents the 20th district of Texas down there in San Antonio. Wonderful place. He's the ranking member of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. So he's the most senior House Democrat on these issues. He's also a member of the House Intelligence Committee. So he's looking at this from multiple directions. Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.

C (76:34)

Yeah, good to be with you.

B (76:36)

I do just want to start actually by saying after the tremendous New York Knicks victory in the NBA cup, your San Antonio spurs ripped my heart out on Christmas Day and sent the Knicks spiraling. So we're even now.

C (76:50)

You guys got us back because you remember in 1999, that was the first spurs victory. That was the first championship against the New York Knicks.

B (76:58)

That's right. That's right.

C (76:59)

I blame you for taking joy in the Phoenix.

B (77:02)

No, no, I remember that was the David Robinson Tim Duncan championship.

C (77:05)

That's right.

B (77:06)

Yeah. Well, anyway, those are better days. We're here to talk about Grimber News. But look, you've been one of the most outspoken Democrats about what Trump's been doing in the Caribbean and lead up to the attack on Venezuela you obviously were not notified in advance of that attack. And we'll get to that in a moment. I just wanted to start by asking you as someone who's followed this closely, when you heard the news, first of all, how did you hear the news? Normally you would have heard it in a briefing before it happened, but how did you hear the news and what was your first reaction?

C (77:38)

Yeah, I mean, I think I started, I turned the television on or I started seeing it on social media and you know, it was like at 2 or 3 in the morning I was at home in San Antonio. So I was up late because it's Christmas break for my kids and so they were staying up late, super late. And my daughter, my 12 year old was still awake, so I was still awake and I started seeing this stuff come up on X and other social media and then I turned on the news channels and then saw some of the footage coming through. But no, I mean, I'm on the Intel Committee, I'm the ranking member for Western Hemisphere on the Foreign Affairs Committee. And we got zero notice, like nothing. I mean, you know, no heads up. And the thing is, Ben, I had asked Marco Rubio, when they did that briefing, they had a big briefing, you know, like on December 16th or 17th. And I asked him specifically, I said, if you guys are going to do a land strike or some kind of land invasion, are you going to come to Congress to get authorization to do it? Right, what we call an aumf. And he said, we'll come to Congress for anything that requires an aumf. But he also said we haven't made any plans for anything like that. I mean, that obviously just wasn't true.

B (78:56)

Actually, I want to stick with that for a second because you, like me, I'm sure watched Dan Cain at that, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the press conference with Trump after the operation. And he basically was describing what sounded like months of planning, you know, pre positioning all these resources. Obviously you have to plan a complex Special forces raid like that. It seemed like, and I'm sure you can't talk about this, but it seemed like there was a combination of probably offensive cyber operations and special operations. This took months. Is it not the case that they were telling you that they like that they weren't planning anything while they were planning something? I mean, that seems like a big deal.

C (79:37)

No, I mean, look, this has been, and I don't say this lightly, right. And it's not just partisan criticism, like, okay, I'm a Democrat and these guys are Republicans. I mean, this has been the most secretive, least transparent administration, certainly, that I've dealt with. I mean, I've been here 13 years, but in my conversations with people that have served a lot longer, including some Republicans, no, it's the most secretive, least transparent administration. I mean, it's gotten so bad that on foreign affairs, for example, Maria Salazar from Florida, I'm the ranking member, she's the chairwoman. They didn't even want to send her a witness. Have the State Department present a witness at a subcommittee hearing on Honduras. When we were doing this hearing on Honduras ahead of the elections, you never see that. You never see this situation where the president from one party doesn't want to send a witness, for example, to the hearing when his own party is in the majority. I mean, that's just. That's unheard of, really. But that's where we are. It speaks to where we are right now.

B (80:41)

Because Trump also did say on Air Force One that he spoke to American oil companies before the operation. So it feels like maybe Chevron got a heads up before you.

C (80:50)

I guess we're just not the right people. You know, I mean, he talked to some Texans, but not me. Maybe that's what I just said.

B (80:56)

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

C (80:57)

You know, he was talking to the Houstonians instead of the San Antonians.

B (81:01)

Feels that way.

C (81:01)

Crazy, the idea that you'd go talk to these big oil company folks and, like, zero members of Congress, because even the Republicans, I think he talked to them. I think Rubio said they talked to them after the strikes were done. And then it sounds like he talked to the people that he's comfortable with. Right. Because he served in the Senate. So Tom Cotton and a few others that he's friends with.

B (81:23)

Well, it seems like everything is about personal relationships now and not institutions. But. Well, to get into what's going on, what is your reaction? There's been a lot to digest. Trump is now saying we're going to run Venezuela, but he's also basically keeping the Maduro regime in place. Absent Maduro, he says that this is. We're no longer talking about drugs as much as we're talking about oil. What are your concerns right now going forward about what happens now that the United States has removed Nicolas Maduro from power in Venezuela?

C (81:59)

I mean, like a bunch of things. A bunch of things for us as Americans and then a bunch of things for Venezuela and what it means for the sovereignty of nations for us as Americans. I mean, right now, literally right now, you have millions of Americans who are having to pay more money for their health care insurance because Donald Trump and the Republicans wouldn't extend these healthcare subsidies. And so even my Insurance went up $2,400 this year. And I got diagnosed with cancer three years ago. And so now I'm paying $200 more a month. That's a common story right now all over the country. So you're either gonna spend billions of dollars here in the United States for Americans, or you're gonna spend billions of dollars over there in Venezuela. And right now, Donald Trump is choosing to spend billions of dollars over in Venezuela. That's a big concern for me as he's talking about us running and fixing the Venezuelan oil industry and all that. I mean, that's not. That's not a $500 thing. Right? That's billions and billions of dollars. And for Venezuela, often you've seen throughout history, in Latin America and other parts of the world, when you take out the leader, it can often be a very destabilizing thing. In fact, we just saw that there were skirmishes, gunfire, and so forth yesterday. And we don't know exactly what happened, if it was an attempted coup, if there's different sides that are starting to fight. So my concern for them is the destabilization. It's a country where you've already had millions of people leave to go to Colombia, to go to Chile, to come to the United States or try to come to the United States. So the destabilization. And then finally, people are wondering, okay, well, what's Trump's foreign policy like? What's he doing? I don't think that he was necessarily acting in the best interest of the United States or even of Venezuela, although there are a lot of Venezuelans that are happy that Maduro was gone, because in many ways, he did abuse his people. But I don't think that's what Trump was doing. I mean, I think that his foreign policy is basically whatever makes Trump rich at this point. I think there's a small group of political cronies and family members that he is trying to enrich. And if we look five or ten years down the road, these are some of the people that are going to have a big stake in the different Venezuelan industries, whether it's oil, natural resources, like gold and ore and iron and so forth, or other things running their electrical grid and stuff. Yeah, I think that's what it's boiled down to. And I hate to say that as an American, but I think that our president. That's basically where he's at.

B (84:39)

Yeah, you said a lot that I want to break down here, because there are different things that concern me here. So let's take one that gets at your effort to introduce a bipartisan war powers resolution that you've been working on for some time now. For people who don't know, this is essentially trying to insist that the United States return to a circumstance where the president cannot use military force without coming to Congress. That's in the Constitution. But part of what concerns me, and I think other people, is that he seems to be catching this regime change bug. Even after the operation in Venezuela, he threatened the President of Colombia, he threatened to go into Cuba. He's talking again about Greenland. It feels like this might not be the last one. And that raises the question of what can be done to stop or slow this down. Talk a little bit about what your effort might do to at least try to insert Congress into this mix. So it's harder for Trump to kind of keep running this play again and again in other countries.

C (85:46)

Yeah. I mean, so, you know, a little bit of recent background. Along with Jim McGovern and Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, the three of us led a resolution, a war powers resolution, to try to force President Trump to come to Congress, get permission if he was going to do any of this, any kind of land strikes, land invasion, so forth. And so it was a bipartisan resolution, and we even picked up a few Republicans, but we lost the vote, I think 213 to 211. And so we lost by two votes. It was a close vote. But after that, then obviously around the New year, Donald Trump goes ahead and launches that invasion. And you're right, I mean, since then, he's just become more problematic because he's talking about, okay, we may go do Colombia, we may do Mexico. Stephen Miller's out there ranting about Greenland again. And they put out this National Security Strategy memo that talks about the Monroe Doctrine. The Monroe Doctrine was basically a declaration that the world's power is going to protect certain spheres of their territorial backyard. And so for the United States, that included the Western Hemisphere and Latin America. But it was that policy for years, particularly during the Cold War, that saw the United States do essentially this. They treated every right wing leader as a friend and and every left wing leader as a foe, fearing that communism through these left wing presidents was going to lead to the Red scare across the Western Hemisphere. So we backed some really bad people. I mean, we backed Pinochet, we backed folks in Central America and South America that abused their people, committed all kinds of human rights Abuses. So when you talk about, he's talking about the Monroe Doctrine and going back to that, you're talking about going back to a policy that's decades old that led to many people getting killed, mass migration, civil war, all of these things. But to answer your question, beyond the Venezuelan War Powers Resolution, which we're going to refile soon, I think that you'll also see other resolutions with respect to Greenland, similar resolutions with respect to Greenland, Mexico, Colombia and so forth.

B (88:08)

Yeah, well, there's another piece of this that I was wondering about too, which is the war powers would try to constrain his capacity to do this, at least without Congress. You mentioned the billions of dollars it would cost to do what he's talking about doing in Venezuela. Like that oil infrastructure is dilapidated, it's fallen in disrepair. Yeah, it's a multi billion dollar.

C (88:32)

Yeah.

B (88:32)

Where's that money come from? Like you usually, I mean, I remember being in the White House, you'd have.

C (88:37)

To go for that.

B (88:39)

Well, that's the question though. Like what? Like do you have any? Because even this operation and all these deployments must cost money. I mean, is there some capacity for Congress to try to figure out using its power of the purse? Although I know the Republicans have kind of, you know, relinquished that. But what about the his ability to pay for say the reconstruction of Venezuela's Orleans?

C (89:00)

Yeah, I mean, like you ask a great question. Where would it come from? Well, in theory, right, it's going to come from the taxpayers. American taxpayers are going to have to pay these hundreds of billions of dollars. And remember like he said about, I've seen the figure about like $115 billion just for the oil industry in Venezuela. But you're talking about Colombia, you're talking about Greenland, maybe Mexico. He threatened Panama over the canal issues. So I mean that $115 billion is for one industry in one country. If you go do all these countries, you're definitely talking about trillions of dollars and yeah, I don't see the Congress, I don't see the Congress supporting that. So I don't know, I don't think they have a real plan. I don't even think they have a real plan for Venezuela. I mean, I think they're just, it's just kind of, you know, you know, fly by night stuff at this point. And it's just a lot, a lot of talk, but obviously a lot of swagger but a lot of, you know, dangerous action as well.

B (90:01)

Yeah, it feels that way. And I want to ask about both parties and their response to this. So we'll start with the Democrats, which, you know, generally, I think Democrats have been quite strong on this in opposing what is clearly an illegal, reckless, dangerous action that has nothing to do with, as you said, you know, dealing with affordability and the kinds of things that Americans care about. But you always sense in these moments, particularly when the military is involved and there's an operation like this, there's always a little bit of tentativeness. And you had an Axios report the other day where they quoted some anonymous centrist colleagues of yours who were saying, you know, that I think it looks weak, one person said, to criticize Trump. If you don't acknowledge this is a win for our country, then you lose credibility. How unified is the party on this? And would you like to see more, you know, kind of more voices raised against this? Are you concerned about that kind of post 911 mindset that, oh, we're afraid of looking weak if we criticize this? What is your sense of where Democrats are on this?

C (91:07)

I think that we're still pretty united. Obviously, I think we're going to find out a bit more in the next few weeks. But my sense is that Democrats are still united against it. I do think when you see the US Military and how swiftly and effectively they were able to carry out this operation, look, I think that there is a lot of American pride in having a strong and successful military that can carry out an operation. But I also think that's separate from the wisdom of taking on the operation and the commander in chief, the president who made the decision to go do it. And so I think ultimately people will support those war power resolutions, Democrats especially, and hopefully we'll pick up some Republicans as well, because like I said, Venezuela may not be the last. It looks like it may be the first. Right. For years, they've been laying the groundwork. I've been saying for years that they've been laying the groundwork to take military action in Mexico. In fact, there was an AUMF that was proposed by one of the Republicans in Congress even a few years ago, reclassifying fentanyl, for example, like all of these different steps, designating some of the cartels as terrorists, that would then justify the president, Donald Trump, basically declaring some kind of war or taking military action. And so, yeah, I mean, I think I'm hoping we're going to stay united, but we're going to see in the next few weeks.

B (92:40)

Well, and I also want to ask about Republicans. You have worked with Thomas Massie, a Republican, Kentucky. He's been willing to break with Trump on a number of things on your War Powers resolution. It strikes me that this is kind of the opposite of what Trump promised his MAGA base. Right. Ending forever wars was a key part of his attraction to a lot of people who were exhausted by spending money or deployments overseas. In talking to Republicans, maybe, who still, you know, feel like they have to say nice things about Trump in public, do you have any sense that that MAGA base is cracking a little bit? Because you see it among the kind of MAGA commentariat. But is there an opportunity for Democrats to reach different voters or even maybe different colleagues of yours who don't like this kind of imperial foreign policy?

C (93:27)

Absolutely, yes. Because I think for a lot of them, in their minds, they're having to do a 180, because, remember, they got behind Trump as the peace president. I mean, he went after Jeb Bush hard, remember, in 2016, basically held all of the George W. Bush actions with respect to Iraq and Afghanistan against Jeb Bush successfully, by the way, and even took on Hillary Clinton with the same argument. Right. I mean, there were newspaper articles and columns even speculating about whether Donald Trump was more of a dove than Hillary Clinton back in 2016. He criticized Biden along the same lines in their contest in 2020. So a lot of his base is having to do this 180. A lot of them are doing that 180. They're coming along with him. Right. But there's some that I can see and even a few folks that I've talked to who are like, it's kind of like their eyebrows are raised, right? Like they're confused. Well, wait a minute. I thought we stood for the other thing, like, not globalism, not intervention, the US Minding its own business, not being the policeman of the world and so forth. But I think Donald Trump, for him at least, I don't think he cares anymore. I don't think he cares what happens to the Republican Party either, really. I do think in his perfect world, Democrats wouldn't take back the House or the Senate because he doesn't want any oversight, doesn't want any investigations, doesn't want subpoenas, all that. But otherwise, man, I just think he's like, he's doing his own thing. I think when the Supreme Court made that decision about a president not being liable criminally for official acts, to him, that was just like taking the guardrails off. As long as it's an official act, he can do whatever he wants. And then you've got people like Stephen Miller out there who I think is unstable himself, who are making key decisions on this. Yeah, it's just a bad mix for the country.

B (95:30)

Well, yeah. And one more thing I want to ask you, which is, I know it's early days after this and people are digesting it, but you were at home when this happened. Have you gotten any sense of how this is going down with your constituents and how this might factor into the case that you'll be making next year about whether Trump is doing what he's elected to do?

C (95:54)

Yeah, I mean, I think most people at the beginning, they were like, why.

B (95:59)

Are we doing this?

C (96:01)

Why is the country doing this? But then I think San Antonio is known as. The place I represent is known as Military City usa. So we still have a huge military installation there in Joint Base San Antonio, and we have a huge number of veterans there. So you have people in those neighborhoods, just like across America that sent their kids off to war and never saw them come home. So every time there is something like this where there may be a war, a truce, may get deployed, I get calls and we get emails and everything from people that are basically really nervous, usually family members, spouses, parents that are really nervous, like, hey, what are you guys doing? What's going on? And it was the same thing this time, a lot of outreach. And so I sent a mass email to thousands of people saying, hey, this is what's happening. This is what I'm trying to prevent, which is getting into this thing further or then going to Mexico and climbing Colombia and so forth. But now people are confused and increasingly getting angry about this whole thing.

B (97:08)

Yeah, well, it's interesting, too, because part of the Western hemisphere piece of this is also that you have first and foremost that concern of troop deployments again and the risk that could pose to our troops. You have the concern about, why are we doing this again? We're spending money over there instead of fixing the affordability crisis here. But also, these are because it's closer to home. All these countries he's threatening, they're huge diaspora populations in this country. Now, the Venezuelans had mixed. You know, some of them were happy to see Maduro gone, although I think they're surprised to learn that the Maduro regime is staying in place. That's a whole other question. But, you know, Mexico, right? He's talking about bombing Mexico. There are a lot of people with family in Mexico. He's talking about bombing Colombia. There are a lot of people with family in Colombia. Do you have any sense of how the kind of diaspora populations are Digesting the fact that Latin America could become this kind of roaming war zone for the United States.

C (98:04)

Yeah, I've seen this, I've heard this in conversations with Venezuelans who are in the United States that have family members that are still in Caracas, for example. And then certainly in the conversations about what he may do in Mexico. They're worried for their family members. They're worried about the danger that it may present to their family members. And let's just take Mexico, for example. So he's talked about cartel strikes. Well, how about we'll take on the cartels? But it's not just that. If you do that, it's likely that the cartels are also going to take action either against Americans, but I think more likely against Mexican politicians, against other Mexican citizens, that they're going to make life hell for others in Mexico. Right. So it'll create a kind of, you know, basically huge danger and disruption there. And I think that's also what people are worrying about is, are my relatives, is my family going to be safe?

B (99:03)

Yeah. Well, that's a, you know, a scary but important note to end on because we feels like we're kind of in the early stages of something, unfortunately. Well, Joaquin Castro, we wish you the best with your work, particularly on this War Powers Resolution. People should people wanna get involved and do something, call your member of Congress, encourage them to support the War Powers Resolution, the support the return of constitutional powers to Congress. We will be watching your work and hoping that the spurs get back to the finals where they can lose to the Knicks. Spurs.

C (99:38)

Knicks again.

B (99:39)

Spurs.

A (99:39)

Knicks.

B (99:39)

We'll hope for a replay of the NBA Cup. Thanks so much for joining us.

C (99:43)

Take care.

A (99:48)

Thanks again to Congressman Castro for joining the show. Ben, thank you for playing through your flu game. I hope you feel better and, you know, talk to you guys soon. Pod Save the World is a crooked media production. Our senior producer is Ilona Minkowski. Our associate producer is Michael Goldsmith. Our executive producers are me, Tommy Vitor and Ben Rhodes. The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Cancer is our audio engineer. Audio support by Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis. Thanks to our digital team, Ben Hefcote, Mia Kelman, William Jones, David Toles and Ryan Young. Matt de Groat is our head of production. Adrian Hill is our senior vice president of news and politics. If you want to listen to Pod Save the World ad free and get access to exclusive podcasts, go to crooked.com friends to subscribe on supercastle substack, YouTube or Apple. Podcasts. Don't forget to follow us at Crooked media on Instagram, TikTok and Twitter for more original content, host takeovers and other community events. Plus find Pod Save the World on YouTube for access to full episodes, bonus content, and much more. And if, like us, you're opinionated, leave us a review Our production staff is proudly unionized by the Writers Guild of America East. Choose to show up.

B (101:09)

With the bold.

A (101:10)

Styling of the Mazda CX30.

B (101:13)

I wake up.

A (101:16)

Hi there, it's Andy Richter, and I'm here to tell you about my podcast, the three Questions with Andy Richter. Each week I invite friends, comedians, actors and musicians to discuss these three questions. Where do you come from, where are you going? And what have you learned? New episodes are out every Tuesday with guests like Julie Bowen, Ted Danson, Tig Notaro, Will Arnett, Phoebe Bridgers, and more. You can also tune in for my weekly Andy Richter Call In Show Episodes, where me and a special guest invite callers to weigh in on topics like dating, disasters, bad teachers, and lots more. Listen to the three Questions with Andy Richter Wherever you get your podcasts.