Maddow calls out the real reason Trump invaded Venezuela

Summary

---

The Rachel Maddow Show

Episode: Maddow calls out the real reason Trump invaded Venezuela
Date: January 6, 2026
Host: Rachel Maddow (MS NOW)
Guests: Senator Mark Kelly, Paul Rykoff

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives deep into the surprising and controversial U.S. military invasion of Venezuela under President Donald Trump. Rachel Maddow unpacks the administration’s shifting rationales for the invasion, scrutinizes conflicting explanations, and explores broader questions of executive power and accountability. The episode considers who benefits from the distracting headlines, the erosion of institutional norms, and the chilling effect on dissent within the government and military. Interviews with Senator Mark Kelly and veterans advocate Paul Rykoff provide on-the-ground insight and personal stakes.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Who Benefits from the Distraction? (00:57–10:22)

• Maddow posits that the biggest initial beneficiary of the Venezuela invasion’s media frenzy is Karen Bud Phelan, a Trump administration Interior Department official embroiled in a growing corruption scandal that was just making headlines.
  • “I believe that the single biggest winner in this whole situation is a person named Karen Bud Phelan. And the reason you can tell she is the biggest beneficiary of the Venezuela invasion is because no one within the sound of my voice right now has any idea who that is.” — Maddow (00:57)
• She outlines Karen Bud Phelan’s conflict of interest regarding a $3.5 million water rights deal tied to a Nevada lithium mine, decided by her agency—classic “public corruption.”
• Notable context: The New York Times was about to blow up this story when news of the Venezuela invasion overtook headlines. Maddow highlights how scandals are conveniently “submarined” by major news distractions.

Memorable Quotes

• “You can see there’s a real financial incentive there, right? If the mine isn’t approved, deal’s off. But if the mine is approved, you guys are going to get paid millions of dollars.” — Maddow (01:14)
• “If Tom Homan’s kava bag can be famous for something like that, I mean, Karen Bud Phelan was about to be famous for this.” — Maddow (03:12)

Timestamps

• 00:57 — Introduction of Karen Bud Phelan corruption story
• 01:40 — Details on Phelan's conflict and the media overshadow

---

2. Stacked Stories the Venezuela News Helped Bury (10:23–17:30)

• Maddow lists others who benefit from a shift in the news cycle: those connected to unreleased Jeffrey Epstein files, the Trump administration’s HHS gutting the childhood vaccine schedule, and the anniversary of California’s fire crisis mishandling.
• She notes the eerie timing, with the five-year anniversary of the January 6th insurrection—a topic the Trump administration wants to avoid.

Notable Quotes

• “Everybody with a personal stake in what’s in those [Epstein] files that they’re not releasing... is also benefiting from this dramatic change of subject in the news cycle.” — Maddow (07:06)
• “I don’t really believe in wag the dog. I don’t, I don’t really, I don’t believe in most conspiracies just because I think most people aren’t that together to be that well organized ... But let me ask you this. Do you believe they did this Venezuela thing for the reasons they say they did it?” — Maddow (18:10)

Timestamps

• 06:33 — Epstein files/gut vaccine schedule/concurrent controversies
• 09:44 — January 6th, mismanagement anniversary

---

3. Debunking Trump’s Shifting Explanations on Venezuela (17:30–28:00)

• Maddow methodically dismantles the evolving official explanations for the incursion:
  • First: It’s about drugs (fentanyl), but fentanyl doesn’t come from Venezuela.
  • Then: It’s about cocaine, but U.S. cocaine comes from elsewhere, and Trump pardoned a leader convicted of actual cocaine trafficking.
  • Then: It’s about Maduro as a “dictator” or about “illegitimate elections,” but U.S. support now goes to Maduro’s VP, also elected in the same questionable vote.
  • Then: It’s the oil—yet Reuters reveals oil majors weren’t consulted, and “taking oil” is logistically and financially nonsensical.

Notable Quotes

• “Does any of this sound remotely plausible or like they’re even trying to make it seem plausible? They’re not even trying. And maybe that is the important point here.” — Maddow (27:10)
• “Maybe what this is is a president who can barely bother with coming up with some clearly false pretext, because what he really wants is totally unilateral, totally unaccountable, unquestioned ability to use the US Military anywhere for any purpose…” — Maddow (27:52)

Timestamps

• 17:33 — Fentanyl narrative unraveled
• 19:45 — Cocaine/President of Honduras pardon contradiction
• 22:01 — The oil “stick-up” fallacy
• 25:29 — Polls: Americans don’t see Venezuela as a threat

---

4. Real Motive: Expansion of Unilateral Military Power (27:30–29:24)

• Maddow argues the invasion’s true significance is Trump’s push to decouple military action from public or congressional consent, normalize whimsical deployment of U.S. forces, and personalize the armed forces as his “own toy soldiers.”
• “He wants to break the perceived connection between public legitimacy for military action and the use of the United States military. He wants the ability to use the US Military with the consent of no one.” — Maddow (27:55)

Timestamps

• 27:30 — Analysis of Trump’s unchecked military authority

---

5. Retaliation and Chilling of Dissent: The Mark Kelly Story (29:57–37:48)

• Maddow brings on retired Navy Captain and Senator Mark Kelly (31:07) to discuss Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s efforts to demote him and cut his pension for publicly stating that military members “can and must refuse illegal orders.”

• Kelly highlights the attempt to silence dissent:

  • "If he can get me to shut up... what does that say to all these other retired and ex service members? What rights do they have anymore?" — Sen. Kelly (34:13)
  • “If they can punish me in a significant way, that's going to silence other critics of the government. And that is a foundational problem for our constitutional democracy.” — Sen. Kelly (35:16)

• On the Venezuela invasion, Kelly says, “We don't yet [know the real reason]. We'll have a brief this week... Usually when we get these briefs, we walk out... with more questions than we walked in with.” (35:50)

Timestamps

• 29:57 — Introduction to Mark Kelly’s statement
• 31:07 — Kelly on threats to his pension, chilling effect
• 35:50 — Kelly on unanswered questions about Venezuela

---

6. Veterans’ Perspective: Paul Rykoff on War Powers and Precedent (39:24–46:45)

• Maddow connects today’s Venezuela operation to previous military misadventures and brings on Paul Rykoff, Iraq War veteran and veterans’ advocate, for his analysis.
• Rykoff’s take: This is “not crazy”—it’s part of Trump’s deliberate escalation of U.S. military assertiveness in the Western Hemisphere (“2026 is about taking over the Western Hemisphere. Venezuela is just the next big chip in that step.” — Rykoff, 43:13)
• He observes there are now “no brakes”—“nothing is stopping him. His party’s not stopping him. Congress is not stopping him. NATO's not stopping him... he can do whatever he wants with the most powerful military the world has ever seen, and nothing is stopping him.” (41:49)
• Rykoff worries this is “Forever War 2.0”—endless, unchecked expansion of U.S. force with no end in sight.

Notable Quotes

• “Trump wants to control the Western Hemisphere, and this is just the next piece in a plan that he’s been working on executing for the last year.”— Rykoff (43:13)
• “Anybody who stands in his way ... he's going to try to knock them down, he's going to try to remove them, he's going to ignore them, and he's just going to keep going forward.” — Rykoff (44:33)
• “Too many people in this country, Rachel, especially on the left, have a total failure of imagination. They fail to imagine what Trump might do. He has no failure of imagination.” — Rykoff (45:20)

Timestamps

• 39:24 — Rykoff introduced, Iraq War backstory
• 41:49 — Rykoff’s viral critique of Trump’s military power grab
• 43:13 — Analysis: Venezuela just the next chip
• 44:33 — Trump’s use of military as hammer
• 45:50 — No clear way to stop Trump identified

---

7. Postscript: January 6th, the Plaque, and American Memory (46:48–48:28)

• Maddow closes on the congressional controversy over a commemorative plaque for police who defended the Capitol on January 6th. The plaque remains absent, with Speaker Mike Johnson issuing bureaucratic excuses.
  • “Now it's the law. That's how you implement it. You just put up the plaque. Ta da. That's his response thus far. We'll let you know if we hear more. We won't.” — Maddow (48:22)

Timestamps

• 46:48 — Update on Capitol plaque controversy
• 48:28 — Episode sign-off

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

Rachel Maddow

• On the absurdity of shifting invasion justifications:
  “Maybe we just went down to Venezuela to enforce the gun laws, to charge Nicolas Maduro with illegal weapons possession. Or maybe we went for election integrity... Does any of this sound remotely plausible or like they're even trying to make it seem plausible?” (27:10)

• On Trump's military power grab:
  “Maybe the most important thing going on here is that Donald Trump does not believe he needs to even try to convince you of some reason, some false reason or some true reason that explains why he is using the US Military the way he is.” (27:44)

Senator Mark Kelly

• On silencing dissent:
  "If they're successful in getting me to not speak out... what does that say to all these other retired and ex service members? What rights do they have anymore?" (34:13)

Paul Rykoff

• On the precedent being set:
  “This is Forever War 2.0. This is the manifestation and the evolution of that and there's no sense that it could end. So that's the question for every leader in America and in the world. What are you going to do to stop him?” (46:17)

---

Important Timestamps & Segments

| Timestamp | Segment & Subject | |------------|------------------------------------------------------------------| | 00:57 | Maddow introduces the Venezuela “wag the dog”/corruption thesis | | 06:33 | Other scandals buried by invasion news | | 17:33 | Dismantling Trump’s stated reasons for invasion | | 22:01 | Reuters debunks "take the oil" explanation | | 25:29 | Polls: Public not convinced by admin’s case | | 27:30 | Maddow: Trump's motives—unchecked military power | | 31:07 | Sen. Mark Kelly interview: Retaliation against dissent | | 35:50 | Kelly: Congress in the dark on Venezuela rationale | | 39:24 | Paul Rykoff: Forever wars and military overreach | | 43:13 | Rykoff: Venezuela as another power play in Western Hemisphere | | 45:50 | Rykoff: Lack of checks on Trump’s military actions | | 46:48 | Capitol plaque/J6 anniversary update |

---

Conclusion

This episode offers a deeply skeptical, meticulously detailed analysis of the Trump administration’s invasion of Venezuela, with Maddow and her guests arguing that shifting rationales obscure the real motive: a drive towards unchecked, personalist executive power over the military. Major investigative journalism, congressional pushback, and public accountability efforts are all shown to be endangered by a “forever war” mindset and a chilling atmosphere toward dissent. Maddow urges listeners to resist normalization of these actions—reminding them of the vital importance of public scrutiny, lawful process, and imagination in defending democracy.

---

Transcript

[Commercial Voice]

AI had the time of my life. A I never felt this way before.

[Monday Sidekick Advertiser]

From building timelines to assigning the right people and even spotting risks across dozens of projects, Monday Sidekick knows your business, thinks ahead and takes action. One click on the star and consider it done.

[Commercial Voice]

And I owe it all to you.

[Monday Sidekick Advertiser]

Try Monday Sidekick AI you'll love to.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Use on Monday.com Bubba Wallace here with Tyler Rev.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

You know what's more nerve wracking than waiting for qualifying results?

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Waiting for the green flag to drop.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Instead of pacing, you rev up with Chumba Casino's weekly new releases.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

It's like a fresh set of tires for your brain.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Play for [e-mail] let's jumba no purchase.

[Legal Disclaimer Announcer]

Necessary VGW Group Void we're prohibited by law. CT&C is 21 + sponsored by Jumba Casino.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Right off the bat here, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I think I know the name of the person who arguably is the biggest beneficiary of Donald Trump starting an inexplicable war in Venezuela this weekend. And again, I do think it's arguable, but there is a good case to be made. I believe that the single biggest winner in this whole situation is a person named Karen Bud Phelan. And the reason you can tell she is the biggest beneficiary of the Venezuela invasion is because no one within the sound of my voice right now has any idea who that is. Karen Bud Phelan? Who?

[Paul Rykoff]

Who?

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Have you ever heard this name before? Has anybody ever heard of this person? No, no, nobody knows who this person is. Karen Bud Phelan is the number three official in the Interior Department under Donald Trump. She also served in the same Trump's first term. Karen Bud Phelan's family has a ranch in Nevada, and there's a company that wanted to build a huge mine, a huge lithium mine in that part of Nevada. And lithium mines, among all their other many splendid things, they do take a ton, a ton of water. So during Trump's first term, while Karen Bud Phelan was working at the Department of the Interior, Karen Bud Phelan's husband sold the water rights from their ranch in Nevada to the mining company that was going to build this big mine. They said, we're going to pay you $3.5 million for the water from your ranch. The only catch, the only contingency, is that the full deal only goes ahead if our mine gets approved by the Interior Department. If our mine doesn't get approved, then the deal's off. You can see there's a real financial incentive there, right? If the mine isn't approved, deal's off. But if the mine is approved, you guys are going to get paid millions of dollars. Karen Budfelin works at the Interior Department, which has to make the decision about whether or not to approve this mine during Trump's first term. She meets with the mining company, she meets with them at the cafeteria at the Interior Department. Hey, guys, want to hang out? And then, hey, wouldn't you know, it turns out that mine got approved and it got approved on a fast track. So it could avoid the pesky environmental reviews and all the rest and all the other reason that people were protesting against it in Nevada. But the other result of that approval at the Interior Department is that, bingo, Karen Bud Phelan's family was now going to get paid their millions of dollars. So before Christmas, the publication High Country News and veteran reporters at Public Domain on Substack, they published reporting, really explosive reporting about this top ranking official in Trump's Interior Department and what really does appear to be like the simplest possible explanation of what public corruption looks like, right? Like if there's a public corruption child's picture book, this is the kind of story that would be pictured, right? You don't need, like, you don't even need words really to understand this family stands to be paid millions of dollars if government agency does X. Family member from that family works at that government agency. Agency in fact does X. So family gets paid, right? This is, that's it. This is how you'd construct like a mad libs about public corruption in order to explain it to people who understood nothing simpler than, than anything else you could imagine. But that story, that very explosive story about this Trump administration official, it's hits in these smaller publications before the holidays. Then this weekend the New York Times jumps on it and the New York Times adds their own reporting and they blow it up. Headline, the Trump administration approved a big lithium mine. A top official's husband profited. Karen Bud Phelan, the number three official at the Interior Department, did not disclose a three and a half million dollar water rights contract between her husband and the developers of a Nevada mine. The Times got a comment from Phelan's husband saying that that meeting in Washington at the cafeteria of the Interior Department, that was like just a big coincidence. He said that was purely a social occasion. Definitely nothing to do with her agency doing something that makes millions of dollars for her family. They just ran into each other at the cafeteria Inside the agency, the mining company gave a comment essentially along the same lines, saying that it wasn't that they were meeting with her in any formal capacity when they met with her at the Interior Department. It was, you know, it was just fun. How could it be a bad thing? So that story in the New York Times is prepped for Saturday, and on Saturday morning, it is the big national headline on the front page of the New York Times website. And Karen Bud Phelan is about to be very famous for this. Right? Like at least as famous as Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, who's reportedly on tape taking $50,000 in cash stuffed into a kava bag from undercover FBI agents working a bribery case. Right. Tom Homan initially refused to explain had happened there at all. Then he denied that he took the money. We're still waiting any day now for the Justice Department to disclose its files on that case and indeed, maybe the tape. Senate Democrats have asked why that case against Tom Homan was closed mysteriously once Trump became president. We are awaiting DOJ disclosures on that any moment. But, you know, I mean, if Tom Homan could be very famous, if Tom Homan's kava bag can be famous for something like that, I mean, Karen Bud Phelan was about to be famous for this. So if you had to name someone who benefited the most from the insane breaking news this weekend that the United States military just invaded Venezuela and took its president, I think Karen Bud Phelan at Trump's Interior Department might be a good nominee. She was otherwise poised to be very famous. But, whoop, that story was absolutely submarines, for all the obvious reasons. And admit it, you've already forgotten what her name is. I just said it like 20 times, and you already couldn't say it back to me if I asked you. But Karen Bud Phelan, that Trump Interior Department official is not the only contender in the Cui Bono sweepstakes here. I think you'd have to also consider Ghislaine Maxwell and everybody else who has a personal stake in the 5 million plus more documents that the Justice Department has not released from the Jeffrey Epstein investigative files, even though by law they are required to do so. Everything, in fact, was supposed to be released from the justice department by December 19th. They did release some things on December 19th, then some more things in following days. But once they released this on December 23rd, this prosecutor's email saying, quote, for your situational awareness, wanted to let you know that the flight records we received yesterday reflect that Donald Trump traveled on Epstein's private jet many more times than previously had been reported or that we were aware of, including during the period we would expect to charge in a Maxwell case. Yeah, once they released that two days before Christmas, the Justice Department hasn't released anything since except word that there are literally millions more Epstein documents that they are eventually maybe sort of going to sort through. But again, all this stuff is supposed to be out by December 19th by law, and they don't seem to be in any hurry. This was Brian, Texas, this weekend outside the minimum security federal prison to which Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell was inexplicably moved by the Trump administration once new questions heated up about Trump's involvement with Epstein and his administration's efforts to keep information about him from the public. These protesters in Bryan, Texas, this weekend holding signs that said, among other things, we release the names, not Ghislaine Maxwell. So as the Justice Department drags into its third, now, third week, I guess, of not releasing the upstate information, they're required by law to release. Everybody with a personal stake in what's in those files that they're not releasing. Everybody there is also benefiting from this dramatic change of subject in the news cycle. And frankly, I gotta tell you, hepatitis benefits as well from this change of subject. Hepatitis and rotavirus and the flu. While we're having the worst and deadliest flu season in recent memory, the crackpot Health and Human Services Department under Donald Trump today just announced that they are gutting the vaccine schedule for American kids, and they are explicitly doing so not on the basis of any data, but on what they essentially described as vibes about vaccines. They have not been able to produce any data that backs up their conspiracy theories and fantasies about why vaccines are bad, but they nevertheless are removing them from the childhood vaccination schedule anyway, citing things like trust. I should tell you, they made this change. They announced this change in an anonymous call to reporters in which no one was allowed to be quoted by name. That's how strongly and transparently they're standing behind these changes, I guess. Sure, if I was going to take a sledgehammer to the most successful public health efforts in a millennium, I might try to do that anonymously on a busy news day as well. But that's what they did today at hhs. And, you know, this week, looking ahead this week, Wednesday, that marks one year since the start of the deadly, horrific Southern California firestorm to which a newly inaugurated President, Donald J. Trump, responded by inexplicably dumping out over a billion gallons of water from California reservoirs into flooded fields that did not need it and that weren't prepared for it. He said that was his solution to the fires that had just devastated LA. He wasted enough water to supply 7,000 households for a year. Jacob Soborough's new book, Firestorm, does come out tomorrow on the LA fires and how spectacularly we screwed that up. The anniversary again of those fires is this week, and of course tomorrow is January 6th. Tomorrow is five years since the Donald Trump supporting mob attacked the United States Congress to try to keep him in power by force. This is an anniversary that the Trump administration probably did not relish. The arrival of Trump, his first day in office, pardoned all of the rioters, including those who assaulted and tried to kill police officers. Many of those people Trump pardoned have since been rearrested on charges ranging from child rape to vehicular manslaughter to threatening to kill Democratic politicians by law. There's supposed to be right now, displayed at the Capitol a plaque that honors police officers who physically fought that day to defend the United States Congress from the mob attack to thereby physically defend our democracy and our election. But that plaque is not up in Congress. House Republicans have refused to put it up, as the AP reports today, quote, Approaching the fifth anniversary of the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol, the official plaque honoring police who defended democracy that day is nowhere to be found. It's not on display at the Capitol as is required by law. Its whereabouts are not publicly known, though it is believed to be in storage. Yeah, I'm sure the Trump administration would much rather talk about inexplicably invading Venezuela than the anniversary, the five year anniversary since Trump sicced that mob on Congress to try to physically force an overthrow of America's election results so he could stay in power despite having been thrown out by the people. And constitutionally, in terms of my personal constitution, I don't really believe in wag the dog. I don't, I don't really, I don't believe in most conspiracies just because I think most people aren't that together to be that well organized to get the dog organized well enough that they can use the tail to wag it. And I have to tell you, I don't know why they chose to do this Venezuela thing this way right now with this timing, pushing all of these other things out of the news. But, but let me ask you this. Do you believe they did this Venezuela thing for the reasons they say they did it? I mean, obviously they've been building up to this for weeks and months. And they've given us a lot of different explanations for what they were doing getting ready for this in Venezuela with that troop buildup and everything and blowing up all those boats and everything. Right. At first. First they said it was about drugs. Specifically, they said it was about fentanyl. That was their initial explanation, even. They now acknowledge, though, that fentanyl doesn't actually come from Venezuela. Then they tweaked that pretext to say, okay, it is about drugs, but it's not fentanyl. Okay, maybe that was wrong. It's about cocaine. Yeah. Because if one thinks about crusading against cocaine, one definitely thinks about the Trump family, am I right? But that was an awkward pretext, too, because even though some cocaine does come through Venezuela, experts say that cocaine is generally bound for Europe, not for the United States. So that's kind of a weird thing for us to be all fired up about them. In particular, that pretext was then completely blown up anyway when Trump gave a pardon to the former president of Honduras, who really was convicted of trafficking more than 400 tons of cocaine, not to Europe, but to the United States. If Trump supposedly cares so much about a foreign leader being responsible for trafficking cocaine into the United States, why did Trump pardon a foreign leader literally convicted of smuggling hundreds of tons of cocaine into the United States? Why did he do that if he cares about this? Right. Well, he said at the time that he did it, quote, because if somebody sells drugs in that country, that doesn't mean you arrest the president. That's what he said about pardoning the guy from Honduras. So the idea that Trump needed to arrest the guy in Venezuela for that same alleged crime, he pardoned the president of Honduras for that, but he needed to go invade Venezuela to get the president there for that same thing. How do you make sense of that? Maybe the only way to make sense of that is to acknowledge rationally that that is maybe not the real motivation at work for what we just did in Venezuela. Right. So what is the real motivation at work? I mean, they've tried a few different explanations when those kind of slid off the slippery slope. Right. They. After they invaded and abducted Maduro this weekend, Trump told reporters that Maduro was a dictator, which is true, but that is not exactly a mark against someone. From Donald Trump's perspective, he loves dictators. Remember when he told Fox News he wants people. He wants his people to pay attention to him the way they pay attention to Kim Jong Un in North Korea? I mean, Trump said the thing he likes the most about Xi Jinping in China is that he seized power for life. Trump rolled out a literal red carpet for Vladimir Putin in Alaska and then kind of danced on it with excitement while he was waiting for him to get there. Yeah, Maduro being a dictator is the problem. They're also now saying that Maduro wasn't the legitimately elected president of Venezuela. And, yes, fair enough, but is that really why we invaded? Because, again, see Putin and Frankly, see Trump January 6th, five years ago tomorrow. But also, if Trump's supposed reason for invading Venezuela and abducting. No, seizing Nicolas Maduro is that the last election in that country didn't legitimately elect Maduro to be president. Well, the other person who stood with Maduro in that election was his vice president. And now Trump is recognizing her as the legitimate leader of Venezuela. So make that make sense. Right? I mean, because of the illegitimacy of that last election, we invaded that country so that now we can recognize the vice president who was elected in that same illegitimate election. That doesn't make sense either. What's the actual reason that we did it? I mean, Marco Rubio says it wasn't an invasion at all. It wasn't an act of war. It wasn't even a military operation. He said it was just sort of an unusually large arrest. We just needed 15,000 troops and more than 100 aircraft and Delta Force there to protect the law enforcement officers who were carrying out the arrest. But it was just an arrest. And sure, you know, why not arrest his wife, too, right? Doesn't everybody always get arrested with their family members? And what kind of law enforcement operation just serving an arrest warrant, as Marco Rubio would have us believe? What kind of law enforcement operation serving an arrest warrant like that ends with the arresting force saying, okay, now we run your country and also we are taking all your oil. What part of law enforcement, what part of law enforcement process is it to say, now we have arrested you and so we are running, we will be running your country. Speaking of law enforcement, did you see that one of the things they supposedly arrested Maduro for, one of the things they've charged him for now is gun possession. You think that's the real reason we just invaded Venezuela? Because gun possession arrests and prosecutions are a really big priority for the Trump administration. Really? And, yes, Trump does bluntly say, we're there for the oil, we're there to take the oil. Are we? Reuters had some really interesting reporting about that today. And I think this is going to turn out to be important here. Here's the headline from Reuters today, quote Trump administration has not consulted US Oil Majors about Venezuela, Oil execs say hmm. Quote the Trump administration did not consult with oil companies ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips or Chevron Corporation about Venezuela before or after US forces captured the South American country's president Nicolas Maduro, according to four oil industry executives familiar with the matter. That contradicts President Donald Trump's assertion aboard Air Force One on Sunday that he had spoken to all of the US Oil companies before and after Maduro's capture about his plans for investing in the country. Three sources said the companies had no prior knowledge about the US Operation to seize Maduro and held held an had held no conversations with the Trump administration about investing there as of Sunday. Trump told everybody told reporters, oh yes, I've been talking to the oil companies. I talked to them before. I've talked to them since. The oil companies are like, no, dude, no you didn't. Donald Trump likes the sound of let's take the oil. He thinks that sounds cool and transgressive and tough, thinks it makes him sound like kind of a king, kind of a military conquest kind of guy. Contrary to our popular imagination about Donald Trump, he supported the invasion of Iraq in 2003. He said he was for it. He actually said the only thing that was wrong with what we did in starting that disastrous war in Iraq is that we should have taken the oil. Even in his first run for President in 2016, he would repeat that we should have taken the oil. He loves the sound of that. Does he know what that means? Because Venezuela's oil is not like sitting in barrels on shelves in a store and we can just march in there with a gun and a balaclava and demand that they hand it over. Venezuela's oil isn't sitting there for us to take in some convenient package. Venezuela's oil is under the surface of the earth. It needs to be drilled out, drilled down to, and then pumped up. And for that you need a working electrical grid that provides you tons of reliable electricity. You need many trained workers. You need political stability and working ports and roads and physical security for your operations. You need contract law to work. You need billions and billions and billions of dollars, including billions of dollars worth of expensive equipment and expert investment. You need investments that you will not recoup immediately. It will take years, if not decades. When Donald Trump says we're going to take the oil, I think he's thinking it's like a stick up. And Reuters is reporting that he lied when he told reporters that he had talked to all the oil companies about this in advance and they were all on board with what he was doing. I mean, if you're Exxon, do you think that because Trump just invaded and took away their president, now Venezuela is a great place. It's going to be an excellent and stable place to make big investments that won't pay off for years. Multi billion dollar investments that won't pay off for years, if not decades. Do you think they feel confident about that? And if you're the president of Exxon, you're thinking about that and you're thinking about making those big investments to go drill oil in Venezuela and it won't pay off for years. Are you sure that you're going to be able to recoup your investment? And once you start recouping your investment, are you planning on then donating the proceeds you earn to Donald Trump or to the U.S. treasury? Because when Trump says we're going to take the oil, he's the oil is going to pay for us running that country indefinitely. It's going to reimburse us for everything we're going to do to run that country. So Exxon's just going to give us the money. Oil isn't a thing you just mug someone for and then take it to the pawn shop for cash. Donald Trump has liked the sound of take the oil for decades now. But take the oil doesn't even make sense to explain his invasion of Venezuela this weekend. Yes, the United States can take action to hurt their oil industry or their oil income, but there is no magic wand. There's certainly no military action that can be taken to, hey presto, build them a new oil industry. And they wouldn't be able to even do it themselves under duress or even as a favor to Trump just because Trump is threatening to invade them more times if they don't. And so what is it? Why do it? I would say the best clue that we have is this CBS poll. Do you see Venezuela as a major threat to the security of the United States? No. 87% of the American public says no, we do not see Venezuela as a major threat to the United States. Same poll. Has the Trump administration clearly explained the U.S. position on military action in Venezuela? No. 76% of the public says no. There has not been a clear explanation from the Trump administration on whatever the heck it is doing in Venezuela. I mean, listen, at least when they started the Iraq war, they bothered to tell us fairy tales about it, right? To concertedly, strategically, energetically in A sustained way. Tell us Big Porky Pie lies about supposed weapons in Iraq and how dangerous Saddam Hussein was to America. That was all designed to get the American on the side of us invading Iraq. Even if they did so under false pretenses here, they're barely bothered, right? Oh, yeah, we're going down there for drugs. Oh, I mean, other drugs. No, we're going down there because we really don't like dictators. Is that gonna fly? No, no, we're gonna go down there and take the oil. Trump at least likes saying that, although there appears to be no operable planning behind it at all. I mean, maybe, maybe. Maybe we just went down to Venezuela to enforce the gun laws, to charge Nicolas Maduro with illegal weapons possession. Or maybe we went for election integrity. I mean, does any of this sound remotely plausible or like they're even trying to make it seem plausible? They're not even trying. And maybe that is the important point here. Maybe the most important thing going on here is that Donald Trump does not believe he needs to even try to convince you of some reason, some false reason or some true reason that explains why he is using the US Military the way he is. Maybe what this is is the simplest thing imaginable. Maybe what this is is a president who can barely bother with coming up with some clearly false pretext, because what he really wants is totally unilateral, totally unaccountable, unquestioned ability to use the US Military anywhere for any purpose against anyone, even if it is inexplicable or unpopular or even illegal. He wants to break the perceived connection between public legitimacy for military action and the use of the United States military. He wants the ability to use the US Military with the consent of no one. And so we are seeing him use the US Military in the Middle East? Yes, like lots of other presidents. And also in Nigeria and also in Iran, and also now in the Caribbean and in the Pacific and in South America and in Los Angeles and in Portland and in Chicago and in Washington. And, And. And none of the pretexts they have offered for what they just did in Venezuela make any sense, unless the nonsensical nature of it is the point. Breaking the professional ethos of the US Military, breaking our expectations for even being given a plausible reason for why they're being used, making them his own toy soldiers that he can use anywhere, on any whim, outside any law. That's what we're going to talk about tonight. Stay with us.

[Commercial Voice]

AI had the time of my life. AI Never felt this way before from.

[Monday Sidekick Advertiser]

Building timelines to assigning the right people and even spending spotting risks across dozens of projects. Monday Sidekick knows your business, thinks ahead and takes action. One click on the star and consider it done.

[Commercial Voice]

And I owe it all to you.

[Monday Sidekick Advertiser]

Try Monday Sidekick AI you'll love to.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Use on Monday.com Bubba Wallace here with Tyler Reddick.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

You know what's more nerve wracking than waiting for qualifying results?

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Waiting for the green flag to drop.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Instead of pacing a rev up with Chumba Casino's weekly new releases.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

It's like a fresh set of tires for your brain.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Play for [e-mail] let's chumba no purchase necessary.

[Legal Disclaimer Announcer]

VGW Group Void we're prohibited by law. CTNC's 21/ sponsored by Chumba Casino.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Ah.

[DSW Advertiser]

DSW Earth place of the humble. Brag here. The shoes are so good no one would ever know how little you paid if you didn't go telling everyone that is. And with never ending options for every style, mood and occasion, all at really great prices, they'll definitely give you something to brag about. So go ahead, stock up on fresh sneakers from your favorite brands or try those boots you always secretly knew you could pull off. Find the shoes that get you at prices that get your budget at DSW stores [e-mail] Let us surprise you.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Quote Over 25 years in the US Navy, 39 combat missions and four missions to space. I risked my life for this country and to defend the Constitution, including the First Amendment rights of every American to speak out. I never expected that the President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense would attack me for doing exactly that. Pete Hegseth wants to send the message to every single retired service member that if they say something he or Donald Trump doesn't like, they will come after them the same way. It is outrageous and it's wrong. There's nothing more American than that statement today from retired Navy Captain and United States Senator Mark Kelly after Trump Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced today that he is moving to demote Senator Kelly from his retirement retirement rank in the Navy and also moving to cut his retirement pay. All because of Senator Kelly's true and uncontroversial legal public statements that US Service members can and indeed must refuse illegal orders. Joining us now live is Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona. Senator, I thank you so much for being with us tonight. I know this has been a heck of a day.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Well, thank you for having me on.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Let me ask first of all, just your reaction to Secretary Hegseth's announcement today that he is moving ahead with trying to demote you and doc your pay for having advised military service members that they should obey their oath and refuse illegal orders.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Well, I'm surprised that they're continuing down this path and taking, you know, these steps to try to silence me, silence other members of Congress, silence retired members of the military, former service members, really silence the American people. I mean, this isn't totally only about me. This is about all of us. And I mean, this started back in November when we put out that video and Donald Trump said, I should be hanged, I should be executed, prosecuted. And then Pete Hegseth ran with that and said he was going to court martial me. And, and so today we're at the point where I guess they realized they wouldn't do well with a jury and a court martial. So they're just going to go on their own and try to demote me after 25 years of service in the United States Navy. But here's the thing, Rachel. I'm never going to back down from these guys. I'm going to continue to speak out. I'm going to continue to do my job. And as much as I can highlight how wrong these people are and how outrageous this is and how dangerous, so I'm not going away. This is just one step in this process, and I think it's fair to say it's a big one.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

I'm struck by the way this does and doesn't fit the pattern of other acts taken by the Trump administration in this past year. They have taken different types of acts of retribution against people who they see as their political opponents or their political rivals or their critics running the gamut. Everybody from members of the board of the Fed to other elected officials, to indictments of former Trump administration officials. And so it seems to fit that sort of pattern in one way. But with you, there's also the substance of the matter, which is why they're going after you by their own admission, which is advising service members that they do not need to and indeed, they must not disobey illegal orders. Do you think this is part of something they are trying to fundamentally change in the military in terms of the way the president uses the military, the way he orders them to act, and the kinds of expectations we have for ethical and lawful behavior by U.S. service members?

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Well, could be partly that. I think the bigger thing here is Donald Trump didn't like what I said, and he was so struck by it. And in some ways, maybe I hurt his ego in a way that he now is starting to understand that members of the military don't have blind loyalty to him. He should know this. He's the commander in chief. He's been president before. The loyalty is to the Constitution, not to a person. And he didn't like that. And, you know, he did what he normally does, which is opens his mouth before he thinks and then doubles down on it. And these are dangerous words, because if he can get me to shut up, I mean, I'm a U.S. senator. I was an astronaut. I spent four trips in space. I flew 39 combat missions. If he's successful in getting me to not speak out against him or the government or Pete Hegseth or whoever and not do my job, I mean, what does that say to all these other retired and ex service members? What rights do they have anymore? And this extends even beyond that. I think if they're successful in. And by the way, Rachel, they're not going to be successful in ever shutting me up. That doesn't. I mean, they could go as far as they possibly can go with that. That's not going to happen. But if they can punish me in a significant way, that's going to silence other critics of the government. And that is a foundational problem for our constitutional democracy.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Senator, this is happening at a time when the military and the government.

[Paul Rykoff]

Are.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Doing incredibly controversial things, including this invasion, this action in Venezuela. You're on the Armed Services Committee, clearly. Do you have clarity as to why the administration did what it did in Venezuela this weekend?

[Senator Mark Kelly]

No, absolutely not. I mean, we don't yet. We'll have a brief this week. I'll be back in Washington tomorrow morning, and we'll, you know, my expectation is we'll get a brief from Pete Hegseth, from Marco Rubio. We'll see what they're going to share. Usually when we get these briefs, we walk out of the secure facility with more questions than we walked in with. They often share what seems like a lot of nonsense with us. Legal arguments that don't make any sense. Half truths. You pointed out today that it seems like the president may have been even lying about his conversations with oil executives. Is this about oil? I don't know if it's about oil. I mean, initially it was about fentanyl, fentanyl coming from Venezuela, and then it turns out they found out, well, it's not fentanyl, because fentanyl is not trafficked out of Venezuela. So there was about cocaine, and then it was about regime change, and then it was about oil, and then it went back to A police action with regime change. And now it's back to, oh, we're going to run this country. You know, by the way, the president says we're running the country, we're not running the country. There's, there's nobody there to run the country. Maduro's hand picked successor is running the country. I worry about what happens next. I mean, what are the, what are the next steps that this president is going to take to, you know, try to show that he is as tough as he wants everybody to believe he is. And when he realizes he's not running the country and maybe the oil executives aren't as interested as he thought they may have been with oil at $60 a barrel, what does he do then? And how many service members wind up having their lives at risk because of this president's ego and ambition?

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

That's exactly right. Exactly right. Arizona senator and retired Navy captain Mark Kelly. Thank you for putting your finger on it. Exactly. I know this is a, a crazy time for you. I appreciate you making time to be here with us tonight.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Thank you.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

All right, more news ahead here tonight. Stay with us.

[Commercial Voice]

AI. Had the time of my life. Hey, I never felt this way before.

[Monday Sidekick Advertiser]

From building timelines to assigning the right people and even spotting risks across dozens of projects, Monday Sidekick knows your business, thinks ahead and takes action. One click on the star and consider it done.

[Commercial Voice]

And I owe it all to you.

[Monday Sidekick Advertiser]

Try Monday Sidekick. AI you'll love to use on Monday.com.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Bubba Wallace here with Tyler Reddick. You know what's more nerve wracking than waiting for qualifying results?

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Waiting for the green flag to drop.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Instead of pacing, we rev up with Chumba Casino's weekly new releases.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

It's like a fresh set of tires for your brain.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Play for [e-mail] let's Chumba.

[Legal Disclaimer Announcer]

No purchase necessary. VGW Group void. We're prohibited by law. CTC's 21 plus sponsored by Jumba Casino.

[DSW Advertiser]

Come to DSW for the shoes. Stay for the fun. Because let's be honest, if shoe shopping isn't fun, are you even doing it right? So go ahead. Try something new. Try something different.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Good different.

[DSW Advertiser]

Try something that feels like you, you.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Know, the real you.

[DSW Advertiser]

And then definitely brag about it later. Because at dsw, you've got unlimited freedom to play. Find the shoes that get you at prices that get your budget at DSW stores [e-mail] Let us surprise you.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

May 1, 2003, President George W. Bush gave his disastrous mission accomplished speech. Standing under A triumphant banner on an aircraft carrier announcing the end of major combat operations in Iraq, which is not at all what happened. That same day. A young first lieutenant from New York arrived in Baghdad that day with his army platoon. He arrived there for a war that was nowhere near ending. And one year after that, on May 1, 2004, the Democratic Party turned over their weekly national radio address to that young infantry officer, that lieutenant, young man named Paul Rykoff, so he could share his very recent experience of what it was like to fight in that war.

[Paul Rykoff]

But when we got to Baghdad, we soon found out that the people who had planned this war were not ready for us. There were not enough vehicles, not enough ammunition, not enough medical supplies, not enough water. There was not enough body armor. Leaving my men to dodge bullets with Vietnam era flak vests. We had to write home and ask for batteries to be included in our care packages. Our soldiers deserve better.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Soldiers deserve better. Lieutenant Rykoff's remarks were immediately, very vociferously criticized by Republicans in Washington. But over time, what he said, what he described, would become America's common understanding of that disastrous military intervention. Meanwhile, Lieutenant Rykoff founded the group we now know today as Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, IAVA. Under his leadership, IAVA became the largest organization for post 911 veterans in the U.S. iAVA fought successfully to fix backlogs at the VA. They worked on veterans homelessness and suicide. They helped pass the post 911 GI bill and the repeal of Don't Ask, don't tell. In 2019, he stepped back from running IAVA. He's remained active in the veterans community through a new organization called Independent Veterans of America. And he continues to offer the same blunt, unvarnished, not politically correct assessment of American military intervention like he did back in 2004. This weekend, when the news broke that American troops had been sent to go arrest the President of Venezuela, Rykoff immediately registered his response to the decision.

[Paul Rykoff]

He said he couldn't and didn't consult with Congress on this action because they might leak. Well, if that's his rationale, you can assume he'll never consult with Congress on anything, which is a safe assumption going forward. We are now in a very, very deep world of the most dangerous scenarios, with Trump totally unrestrained and emboldened. Somalia, Iraq, Yemen, Iran, the Caribbean, Syria, Nigeria, and now fully Venezuela. Those are all places he's hit in the last year. And the unprecedented domestic deployment of National Guard and federal troops to the Mexican border, which included Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. And there was DC, LA, Chicago, Portland and Memphis. This is all just in his first year. The most important story in the world is still, and even more so now, that Trump can do whatever he wants with the most powerful military the world has ever seen. And nothing is stopping him.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Joining us now is my friend Paul Rykoff, your raft war veteran, the host of the Independent Americans podcast. Paul, thank you for being here. I know you're a busy guy right now.

[Paul Rykoff]

My pleasure.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Why do you think that we just invaded Venezuela and arrested their president? Do you have any understanding or supposition as to why we did it?

[Paul Rykoff]

Because Trump wants to control the Western Hemisphere, and this is just the next piece and a plan that he's been working on executing for the last year. He's on plan. I mean, this is extreme, it's dangerous, it's shocking, but it's not crazy. This has always been the plan. And he's communicated and telegraphed every single one of his punches, especially over the last year. You know, Project 2025 was about taking over America. 2026 is about taking over the Western Hemisphere. And Venezuela is just the next big chip in that step. I've said this for years, and I'm glad you pulled that line. The most important story in the world is he can do whatever he wants with the most powerful military the world has ever seen, and nothing is stopping him. His party's not stopping him. Congress is not stopping him. NATO's not stopping him. The UN isn't stopping him. So he's all gas and no brakes. And he's made it very clear that Cuba could be next, or Colombia could be next, or Greenland could be next, and we should assume that they will be, because that is what he's doing, and nothing is stopping him.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

This is something that he is trying to do purely as a military operation. I also don't see him, like, jetting down to Caracas to go take over down there that he is planning to do with US Service members. How is he planning to use the US Military to try to do this?

[Paul Rykoff]

I think you nailed it in your monologue earlier. I mean, it's his hammer. This has always been the strategy. It's why he put Hegseth first, who is not really the Secretary of War, he's the Secretary of Culture war. And he got the Pentagon and he got the military, and he purged the generals, and he got his commander, his Chairman of the Joint Chief, and now he's rolling. And if anything, he's picking up steam and he's picking up momentum. And anybody who stands in his way, like the brave senator Kelly, who was just here, he's going to try to knock them down, he's going to try to remove them, he's going to ignore them, and he's just going to keep going forward. So he's going to use our troops for just about anything he wants. He's going to use it to topple a leader in Venezuela. He may use it to threaten Greenland, he may use it to occupy American streets. If he doesn't like what Mamdani says this week, it is his hammer. This is the manifestation of Trump's power. And that's really what it's about for him is it's about power and it's about influencing the entire Western hemisphere with his power. And he said it, I think, I think he said it today. I think he said Colombia could be next. That could happen by this weekend. That is a very real thing. I think too many people in this country, Rachel, especially on the left, have a total failure of imagination. They fail to imagine what Trump might do. He has no failure of imagination. And what we've seen in the first year could be nothing compared to what we see in 2026.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

What is the way to stop it if that is what he wants to do?

[Paul Rykoff]

You know, that's the question for every single elected leader here. I don't know the answer. I really don't know the answer. The War Powers act is going to happen, I hope in the next week. In the Senate, I would have recommended that they called an emergency session. Congress doesn't even seem to be urgent enough to bring them together when he starts a whole new war. So happy New Year, Happy new war and Happy forever war. New forever war. That's really what this is. I'm glad you mentioned, you know, Iraq, because Iraq was part of the forever war, the never ending global war on terrorism. This is Forever War 2.0. This is the manifestation and the evolution of that and there's no sense that it could end. So that's the question for every leader in America and in the world. What are you going to do to stop him?

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Paul Rykoff, longtime veterans advocate, the host of the Independent Americans podcast, and full disclosure, my pal. Paul, you're the first person I wanted to talk to when I got this news on Saturday. Thanks for your time tonight, my friend.

[Paul Rykoff]

Thank you, buddy. You've been on it and we saw this coming.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Yeah, we did. I'll be right back. Stay with us. So, as you know, Tomorrow is the five year anniversary of the January 6th attack on the US Capitol. At the top of the show, I mentioned that there is a commemorative plaque that's supposed to be on display at the west front of the Capitol right now. The plaque honors the police officers who fought there, who physically fought that day and in that place to defend the Capitol, to defend the Congress from the mob of Trump supporters who were fighting to keep him in office by force. Congress passed a law that says that plaque needs to be displayed at the Capitol. But the plaque is not up right now because Republicans have refused to do it. Well, I mentioned that earlier. Here's an update on that, sort of. Since we have been on the air, Republican speaker of the House Mike Johnson has just put out a new statement. He says, quote, as written, the statute authorizing this plaque is not implementable and proposed alternatives devised by Democrat House staff also do not comply with the statute. He says, quote, if Democrats are serious about commemorating the work of U.S. capitol Police officers, they're free to work with the appropriate committees of jurisdiction to develop a framework for proper vetting and consideration. They did that. They passed a law that said you have to put up a plaque. Now it's the law. That's how you implement it. You just put up the plaque. Ta da. That's his response thus far. We'll let you know if we hear more. We won't. Stay with us. All right. That's going to do it for me for now. Happy New Year.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Bubba Wallace here from 2311 Racing. You know what's slower than a pace car waiting at the car wash? That's when I fire up Jumbo Casino. It turns these slow minutes into fast fun. With new games every week, you'll never get bored. Next time you're stuck in the slow lane, speed up with Chumba. Play [e-mail] let's Chumbo.

[Legal Disclaimer Announcer]

No purchase necessary. VGW Group Void. We're prohibited by law. CTNC's 21 plus, sponsored by Jumbo Casino.