update - USSC to hear birthright citizenship case

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
86,435
131,299
113
Trump rages at governor for refusing to free MAGA acolyte


President Donald Trump raged at a governor whom he derided as a "sleazbag" on Wednesday for declining to free one of Trump's allies from prison.

Earlier this week, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis' office directed state prison officials not to comply with a request Trump made for Colorado to relinquish custody of convicted felon Tina Peters. Peters, 70, is serving a nine-year sentence for her role in leaking passwords for Mesa County, Colorado's election system to right-wing actors in regards to Trump's attempt to overturn the 2020 election.


Trump fumed at Polis in a new Truth Social post on Wednesday.

"The SLEAZEBAG Governor of Colorado, Jared Polis, refuses to allow an elderly woman, Tina Peters, who was unfairly convicted of what the Democrats do, cheating on Elections, out of jail!" Trump wrote. "She was convicted for trying to stop Democrats from stealing Colorado Votes in the Election. She was preserving Election Records, which she was obligated to do under Federal Law."



"She has now served more than one year in jail, and has eight years to go," he continued. "On top of everything else, she is a cancer 'survivor.' This lightweight Governor, who has allowed his State to go to hell (Tren de Aragua, anyone?), should be ashamed of himself. FREE TINA!"
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
86,435
131,299
113
Bondi orders US law enforcement to investigate 'extremist groups'


WASHINGTON, Dec 4 (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi on Thursday ordered federal law enforcement to step up investigations into the anti-fascist antifa movement and similar "extremist groups," and asked the FBI to compile a list of entities possibly engaged in domestic terrorism, according to an internal memo reviewed by Reuters.



more

The memo, which was sent to prosecutors and federal law enforcement agencies, calls on the Justice Department to prioritize investigating and prosecuting acts of domestic terrorism, including any potential "tax crimes" involving "extremist groups" who defrauded the Internal Revenue Service.

It comes several months after President Donald Trump signed an order targeting antifa as a terrorist organization and pledged to go after left-wing groups following the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

Antifa, short for anti-fascist, is a "decentralized, leaderless movement composed of loose collections of groups, networks and individuals," according to the Anti-Defamation League, which tracks extremists.

A Justice Department spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the memo.

"These domestic terrorists use violence or the threat of violence to advance political and social agendas, including opposition to law and immigration enforcement; extreme views in favor of mass migration and open borders; adherence to radical gender ideology, anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, or anti-Christianity," Bondi wrote in the memo.



more

She wrote that the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Forces "shall prioritize the investigation of such conduct."

She also ordered federal law enforcement agencies to scour their files for any intelligence they may have on antifa groups and provide it to investigators.

The FBI and joint terrorism task forces will also be asked to investigate incidents over the past five years that may have involved acts of domestic terrorism, from the doxxing of law enforcement to the targeting of Supreme Court justices, according to the memo.

After the FBI compiles a list of possible groups engaged in alleged acts of domestic terrorism, the agency is required to develop new strategies similar to those used to counter violent and organized crime to "disrupt and dismantle entire networks of criminal activity."

The memo also calls on the department's grant-making offices to prioritize awarding funding to states and municipalities that have programs designed to protect against domestic terrorism, and it instructs the FBI to update and improve its tip line so that "witnesses and citizen journalists can send media of suspected acts of domestic terrorism."

(Reporting by Sarah Lynch; Editing by Michelle Nichols and Tom Hogeu)
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
86,435
131,299
113
New legislation targets Trump passion project


Democrats are pushing to restrict private donations for projects like Donald Trump’s $300 million White House ballroom, pointing to potential conflicts of interest and “pay-to-play” concerns.

The Stop Ballroom Bribery Act


The bill, led by Senator Elizabeth Warren, proposes donation limits. (MEGA)© Knewz (CA)
Under the Stop Ballroom Bribery Act, individuals with conflicts of interest — like pending lawsuits or bids for government contracts — would be barred from donating to projects in federal buildings used by the president or vice president.

The rules would also cover monuments dedicated to living presidents.

The bill, led by Senator Elizabeth Warren and Representative Robert Garcia, proposes donation limits, full donor transparency and strict enforcement measures.

Proposed guidelines


The legislation would prevent the president and family members from soliciting funds or accepting anonymous contributions.

Donors would also face a two-year ban on lobbying.

Before being accepted, donations would be reviewed for potential conflicts by the National Park Service and Office of Government Ethics.

The Justice Department, together with state attorneys general, could impose civil and criminal consequences for violations.

Trump’s $300 million ballroom

According to the White House, Trump raised $350 million from private donors for the East Wing demolition and subsequent ballroom construction.

Extra funds could be used for other construction projects, including a triumphal arch in the nation’s capital.

Among the 37 donors the White House has partially listed are crypto billionaires, charitable groups, sports owners, influential financiers, tech and tobacco leaders, media companies and longtime Republican supporters.



more

Defending the administration, a White House spokesperson told Newsweek, “Critics who are alleging fake conflicts of interests, would also complain if American taxpayers were footing the bill for these long-overdue renovations.”

The spokesperson added that the donations will benefit “the People’s House” for “generations to come.”

‘Pay to play’


Senator Warren doubled down on her concerns. (MEGA)© Knewz (CA)
Former White House ethics chief Richard Painter and other experts warn that these donations risk enabling a “pay-to-play” scheme, giving donors potential influence over policy.

“These corporations all want something from the government,” Painter told BBC News.

Senator Warren doubled down on her concerns in a press release, saying, “Americans shouldn’t have to wonder whether President Trump is building a ballroom to facilitate a pay-to-play scheme for political favors. My new bill will put an end to what looks like bribery in plain sight.”
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
86,435
131,299
113
Supreme Court takes on Trump’s birthright citizenship case


The Supreme Court has agreed to take up the constitutionality of President Donald Trump's order on birthright citizenship after he declared that children born to parents who are in the United States illegally or temporarily are not American citizens.

The justices will hear Trump's appeal of a lower-court ruling that struck down the citizenship restrictions.



more

The case will be argued in the spring and a definitive ruling is expected by early summer.

The birthright citizenship order, which Trump signed on the first day of his second term, is part of his Republican administration’s broad immigration crackdown. Other actions include immigration enforcement surges in several cities and the first peacetime invocation of the 18th-century Alien Enemies Act.

The administration is facing multiple court challenges, and the high court has sent mixed signals in emergency orders it has issued.



Olga Urbina (L) of Baltimore and her 9-month-old son Ares Webster participate in a protest outside the U.S. Supreme Court on May 14, 2025 in Washington, DC (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
The justices effectively stopped the use of the Alien Enemies Act to rapidly deport alleged Venezuelan gang members without court hearings. But the Supreme Court allowed the resumption of sweeping immigration stops in the Los Angeles area after a lower court blocked the practice of stopping people solely based on their race, language, job or location.



more

The justices are also weighing the administration’s emergency appeal to be allowed to deploy National Guard troops in the Chicago area for immigration enforcement actions. A lower court has indefinitely prevented the deployment.

Birthright citizenship is the first Trump immigration-related policy to reach the court for a final ruling.

His order would upend more than 125 years of understanding that the Constitution’s 14th Amendment confers citizenship on everyone born on American soil, with narrow exceptions for the children of foreign diplomats and those born to a foreign occupying force.

In a series of decisions, lower courts have struck down the executive order as unconstitutional, or likely so, even after a Supreme Court ruling in late June that limited judges’ use of nationwide injunctions.

The Supreme Court, however, did not rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class action lawsuits and those brought by states. The justices did not decide at that time whether the underlying citizenship order was constitutional.



more

Every lower court that has looked at the issue has concluded that Trump’s order violates or likely violates the 14th Amendment, which was intended to ensure that Black people, including former slaves, had citizenship. Birthright citizenship automatically makes anyone born in the United States an American citizen, including children born to mothers who are in the country illegally, under longstanding rules.

The case under review comes from New Hampshire. A federal judge in July blocked the citizenship order in a class action lawsuit including all children who would be affected. The American Civil Liberties Union is leading the legal team representing the children and their parents who challenged Trump's order.

“No president can change the 14th Amendment’s fundamental promise of citizenship,” Cecillia Wang, the ACLU's national legal director, said in a statement, adding, "We look forward to putting this issue to rest once and for all in the Supreme Court this term.”


The administration had also asked the justices to review a ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. That court, also in July, ruled that a group of Democratic-led states that sued over Trump's order needed a nationwide injunction to prevent the problems that would be caused by birthright citizenship being in effect in some states and not others. The justices took no action in the 9th Circuit case.

The administration has asserted that children of noncitizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and therefore not entitled to citizenship.

“The Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause was adopted to grant citizenship to newly freed slaves and their children — not ... to the children of aliens illegally or temporarily in the United States,” top administration top Supreme Court lawyer, D. John Sauer, wrote in urging the high court’s review.


Twenty-four Republican-led states and 27 Republican lawmakers, including Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, are backing the administration.
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
86,435
131,299
113
Federal judge in Florida orders Epstein grand jury documents unsealed


A federal judge in Florida has ordered grand jury materials surrounding an investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein to be unsealed, marking the first of several expected decisions to publicly release grand jury documents in cases tied to the late financier.

District Judge Rodney Smith ordered the release of material from grand jury investigations from 2005 and 2007. The judge had previously denied the request but revisited the decision Friday after Congress passed and Donald Trump signed a measure that compels the Department of Justice to release all investigative files in its possession.



more

The order from Smith, a Trump appointee, did not attach a deadline.

The Justice Department must publicly disclose files in its possession — which do not include the documents shown to grand juries that considered indictments against Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell — by December 19, based on the congressional order.

Separate requests to unseal grand jury materials are underway in New York, where Epstein died in prison awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges 2019. Another judge is mulling the release of grand jury documents in the case against Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence after she was found guilty of recruiting and grooming young women and girls in connection with Epstein. Those requests are pending.

Lawyers for Maxwell said this week that releasing grand jury files from her case could complicate her long-shot attempts to get a new trial.


more

“Releasing the grand jury materials from her case, which contain untested and unproven allegations, would create undue prejudice so severe that it would foreclose the possibility of a fair retrial” should she successfully win a retrial, they wrote.

Attorneys for Annie Farmer, who testified under oath that Maxwell groomed and assaulted her when she was a teenager, also wrote to the judges overseeing the cases this week, warning that any denial of the motions to unseal the documents “may be used by others as a pretext or excuse for continuing to withhold crucial information concerning Epstein’s crimes.”

“Epstein’s victims have been denied justice for far too long by multiple government administrations of both parties,” they wrote. “Even now, the government has failed to investigate anyone other than Epstein himself and one of his accomplices, Ghislaine Maxwell, and there is no indication that the Department of Justice (or any of its offices) is taking action against other critical inner circle Epstein accomplices despite congressional investigations and public reporting concerning his sex trafficking ring’s financial infrastructure.”


more

In July, the Justice Department determined “no further disclosure” in the Epstein case “would be appropriate or warranted,” sparking public outcry that only fueled accusations that the government was concealing Epstein’s ties to a wider network of powerful figures — including Trump — allegedly connected to a sex trafficking conspiracy.

Last month, the president reluctantly agreed to sign a measure approved by Congress that compels the Justice Department to release all investigative materials from the Epstein case in its possession.



Judges in New York are also mulling the release of previously undisclosed grand jury materials that landed blockbuster indictments against Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell (REUTERS)
The materials in Florida stem from an abandoned federal case against Epstein that resulted in what critics have called a “sweetheart” deal for state charges and a brief jail sentence.

A Palm Beach grand jury indicted Epstein on one state felony charge of solicitation of prostitution in 2006, a case that was then referred to the FBI. In 2007, an assistant U.S. attorney crafted a draft indictment outlining 60 criminal counts against Epstein, along with a memo of evidence against him.


Then-U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta then arranged a controversial agreement for Epstein to plead guilty to two state charges as well as a prison sentence and a requirement that he register as a sex offender in exchange for the federal case to be dropped.

Epstein then pleaded guilty to state charges of solicitation of prostitution and of solicitation of prostitution with a minor under the age of 18. He was released after serving less than 13 months in state prison.
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
86,435
131,299
113
Kristi Noem admits to her role in defying court order as judge weighs jail proceedings


Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem fessed up on Friday over who was responsible for the Trump administration's brazen defiance of a court order.

In March, the Trump administration made the controversial decision to transfer Venezuelan detainees to El Salvador despite a judicial order temporarily blocking their removal. The move ignited a confrontation between the Trump administration and Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who was weighing whether to hold officials in contempt of court.



The case centers on two flights carrying predominantly Venezuelan migrants, which were redirected to El Salvador and held in the country's notorious Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT, despite Boasberg's explicit order to return the planes to the United States. President Donald Trump attacked Boasberg on social media, calling him a "Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator.

Noem admitted in a federal court filing Friday evening that she decided the migrants on the two airplanes would be turned over to that country despite Boasberg's order, The Washington Post reported. Her admission comes as Boasberg resumes an inquiry into whether she ought to face a contempt prosecution for defying the order.





more

"The resumption of Boasberg’s probe after a seven-month delay as appeals were heard and Noem’s reply revives a momentous clash between President Donald Trump’s administration and the judiciary," the Post wrote. The report noted her filing lacked details, as did the filings of other officials involved in the move, which could lead the judge to have them testify in court.

Justice Department attorneys appeared to remain defiant, writing in a filing that if Boasberg “continues to believe” his "order was sufficiently clear in imposing an obligation to halt the transfer of custody for detainees who had already been removed from the United States, the Court should proceed promptly with a referral."
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
86,435
131,299
113
Boaters killed in 'double tap' strike were surrendering and sailing away from US: reports


New details are emerging about the Trump administration's Sept. 2 strike on a vessel they claimed was trafficking drugs to the United States, which cast serious doubt on the validity of the military target.

According to The New York Times, "Multiple people who have seen video of the attacks say the survivors climbed on the overturned hull and waved to something overhead, a gesture interpreted as an attempt to surrender, beckoning rescue or trying to signal other alleged drug traffickers. The boat strike has drawn congressional oversight, and the legality of the entire military campaign is in dispute."



Making matters worse, according to CNN's Natasha Bertrand, Admiral Frank Bradley, who testified to Congress about the details of the strike this week, said that the vessel that was destroyed wasn't even headed to the United States. Rather, "the alleged drug traffickers killed by the US military in a strike on September 2 were heading to link up with another, larger vessel that was bound for Suriname — a small South American country east of Venezuela – the admiral who oversaw the operation told lawmakers on Thursday, according to two sources with direct knowledge of his remarks."

Bradley "argued there was still a possibility the drug shipment could have ultimately made its way from Suriname to the US, the sources said, telling lawmakers that justified striking the smaller boat even if it wasn’t directly heading to US shores at the time it was hit."


He also said he believed that the survivors clinging to the hull were trying to continue their drug run.

However, this comes as a mounting chorus of legal experts say the strikes amounted to a war crime and unlawful use of military force, contradicting the longstanding policy of interdicting and arresting the crews of drug trafficking vessels.

It also comes as new reporting says the military fired on survivors of one of the shipwrecks to eliminate them, which would be open-and-shut illegal under any interpretation of the rules of war.
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
86,435
131,299
113
Trump administration will expand travel ban to more than 30 countries, Noem says


WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration will be expanding its ban on travel for citizens of certain countries to more than 30, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said, in the latest restriction to come since a man from Afghanistan was accused of shooting two National Guard members.


Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem listens as President Donald Trump answers questions from reporters during a meeting with the White House task force on the 2026 FIFA World Cup in the Oval Office of the White House, Monday, Nov. 17, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)© The Associated Press
The expansion would build on a travel ban already announced in June by the Republican administration, which barred travel to the U.S. for citizens from 12 countries and restricted access to the U.S. for people from seven others. In a social media post earlier this week, Noem had suggested more countries would be included.


U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem stands near flags after speaking in a news conference at Harry Reid International Airport, Saturday, Nov. 22, 2025, in Las Vegas. (AP Photo/Ronda Churchill)© The Associated Press
Noem, who spoke late Thursday in an interview with Fox News Channel host Laura Ingraham, would not provide further details, saying President Donald Trump was considering which countries would be included.

In the wake of the National Guard shooting, the administration already ratcheted up restrictions on the 19 countries included in the initial travel ban, which include Afghanistan, Somalia, Iran and Haiti, among others.

Ingraham asked Noem whether the travel ban was expanding to 32 countries and asked which countries would be added to the 19 announced earlier this year.

“I won't be specific on the number, but it's over 30. And the president is continuing to evaluate countries,” Noem said.

“If they don't have a stable government there, if they don't have a country that can sustain itself and tell us who those individuals are and help us vet them, why should we allow people from that country to come here to the United States?” Noem said.

The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to requests for comment about when an updated travel ban might go into effect and which countries would be included in it.

Additions to the June travel ban are the latest in what has been a rapidly unfolding series of immigration actions since the shooting Thanksgiving week of two National Guard troops in Washington.

more

Rahmanullah Lakanwal, who emigrated to the U.S. from Afghanistan after the U.S. withdrawal, has been charged with first-degree murder after one of the two victims, West Virginia National Guard Specialist Sarah Beckstrom, died of wounds sustained in the Nov. 26 shooting. The second victim, Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, was critically wounded. Lakanwal has pleaded not guilty.

The Trump administration has argued that more vetting is needed to make sure people entering or already in the U.S. aren't a threat. Critics say the administration is traumatizing people who've already gone through extensive vetting to get to the U.S. and say the new measures amount to collective punishment.

Over the course of a little more than a week, the administration has halted asylum decisions, paused processing of immigration-related benefits for people in the U.S. from the 19 travel ban countries and halted visas for Afghans who assisted the U.S. war effort.

On Thursday, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services announced it was reducing the time period that work permits are valid for certain applicants such as refugees and people with asylum so they have to reapply more often and go through vetting more frequently.

Rebecca Santana, The Associated Press
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
86,435
131,299
113
Admiral says boat targeted in deadly strike was headed toward South America — not the US


The alleged drug boat at the center of a developing controversy was not on a course toward the United States, according to a new report.

CNN reported Friday that during his recent closed-door session with lawmakers about the September 2 boat strike, Admiral Frank M. Bradley — who was the commander overseeing the mission – said the boat in question was actually headed toward Suriname, on the northern coast of South America.



more

Two of CNN's unnamed sources who have "direct knowledge" of the admiral's comments said Bradley testified that the boat was on a path to another vessel, where it was expected to transfer drugs on board toward its final destination. The network cited drug enforcement experts, who said that trafficking routes via Suriname are typically bound for Europe, whereas drug shipments to the U.S. are typically concentrated in the Pacific Ocean.

Admiral Bradley's testimony counters President Donald Trump's official justification for the ongoing boat strikes in the Caribbean Sea, in which 86 people have been killed in 22 total strikes this year. Both Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have maintained that the strikes are necessary to prevent the flow of drugs into the U.S.

"The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States," Trump wrote on Truth Social of the September 2 strike.
more


The Washington Post reported last week that Hegseth ordered the officers overseeing the September 2 strike to "kill everybody" after two survivors were seen clinging to wreckage of the vessel in the wake of the initial strike, which capsized the boat. Bradley testified, however, that Hegseth never gave such an order.

Rules 46 and 47 of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) prohibit "no-quarter" orders and the killing of anyone deemed hors de combat, ("out of the fight") respectively. If the initial reports are true, the Trump administration's actions would be considered illegal under both U.S. and international law.

Click here to read CNN's report in its entirety.
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
86,435
131,299
113
Hegseth says US 'just sunk another narco boat' amid uproar


Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on Thursday evening confirmed that the U.S. had launched another boat strike, this time in the Eastern Pacific.


The announcement came hours after Hegseth faced immense scrutiny as Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley, the Navy SEAL officer who now leads the U.S. Special Operations Command, briefed members of Congress at Capitol Hill about the controversial “double-tap” strike that took place on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean on Sept. 2. The incident is considered by some to be a potential war crime, as a follow-up strike on a boat, ordered by Bradley, killed survivors of the first attack.

Andrew Kolvet, a spokesperson for the late Charlie Kirk’s Conservative nonprofit Turning Point USA, showcased ardent support for the Secretary of Defense via social media, saying “Every new attack aimed at Pete Hegseth makes me want another narco drug boat blown up and sent to the bottom of the ocean.”

In response, Hegseth said: “Your wish is our command, Andrew. Just sunk another narco boat.”


The somewhat casual response to the military action came shortly after the U.S. Southern Command had confirmed what is understood to be the 22nd boat attack carried out by the U.S. in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean.


The latest strike killed four people, reportedly bringing the total of deaths to 87.


Confirming that the latest boat strike had been carried out under the direction of Hegseth, the U.S. Southern Command said: “Joint Task Force Southern Spear conducted a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel in international waters operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization. Intelligence confirmed that the vessel was carrying illicit narcotics and transiting along a known narco-trafficking route in the Eastern Pacific. Four male narco-terrorists aboard the vessel were killed.”



Since launching the initial strike in the Caribbean Sea in September, the Trump Administration has argued that the U.S. military action is necessary to curb the flow of narcotics into the United States. While the Administration has yet to release any public evidence showcasing that the boats being targeted are carrying drugs, lawmakers who attended Thursday’s briefing said officials had confirmed drugs were found aboard the vessels.


Read More: Which Countries Have Stopped Sharing Intelligence With U.S. Over Boat Strikes in Caribbean?

Hegseth has come under fire in recent days, with bipartisan calls for an investigation, after the Washington Post reported that he had given a “kill everybody” directive that resulted in a second strike being extended upon a vessel to which survivors from the initial strike were still clinging on.



Hegseth has denied issuing a “kill everybody” instruction for the Sept. 2 strikes, and during the briefing on Capitol Hill, Adm. Bradley also vehemently denied that Hegseth ordered his subordinates to “kill everybody” aboard the vessel.


The White House, after confirming the second strike on the alleged drug boat, defended the move as lawful. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said last week that Bradley had acted “within his authority and the law.”

Lawmakers were divided upon reviewing video footage of the contentious Sept. 2 strikes during Thursday's briefing.

Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, who chairs the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, defended the military’s actions as “righteous strikes,” telling reporters on Capitol Hill that such attacks were “entirely lawful and needful.”

Elsewhere, Democratic Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, a ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he was “deeply disturbed” by the footage.

“This briefing confirmed my worst fears about the nature of the Trump Administration’s military activities, and demonstrates exactly why the Senate Armed Services Committee has repeatedly requested—and been denied—fundamental information, documents, and facts about this operation. This must and will be the only beginning of our investigation into this incident,” said Reed in a statement to TIME, adding that the Pentagon has “no choice” but to release the unedited footage of the strike.


Trump previously said the vessels targeted on Sept. 2 were manned by members of the Venezuelan cartel Tren De Aragua, which he claims is under the control of Venezuela's President Nicolás Maduro. (A claim reportedly at odds with an assessment by U.S. analysts.)


The U.S. military has spent the past three months placing warships, fighter jets, marines, and drones—along with other surveillance and intelligence-gathering equipment—in the Caribbean Sea. The Navy’s most advanced aircraft carrier has also been placed in the Latin American region.

During a Tuesday Cabinet meeting, Trump reiterated the U.S. is planning to elevate its military campaign against Venezuela and its alleged drug vessels by carrying out land strikes, too.

“We’re doing these [sea] strikes and we’re going to start doing those strikes on land, too, you know, the land is much easier, much easier,” Trump said.

Venezuela’s leader Maduro has vowed to defend “every inch” of the country’s land, amid growing tensions with the U.S. At a rally in late November, Maduro—dressed in camouflage fatigues and brandishing a sword—told a roaring crowd: “We must be ready to defend every inch of this blessed land from imperialist threat or aggression, no matter where it comes from.”

He added: “There is no excuse for anyone to fail at this decisive moment, for the existence of the Republic, no excuse.”


The Trump Administration, much like the Biden Administration before them, does not recognize Maduro as the legitimate leader of Venezuela. Maduro, who became President of Venezuela following Hugo Chavez’s death in 2013, was sworn in for a third term in January, despite widespread concern over the legitimacy of the country's election results.

Write to Olivia-Anne Cleary at olivia-anne.cleary@time.com.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts