The US military operation that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has stirred up political divisions in Congress. Democrats have raised concerns about the operation’s legality and the potential consequences, emphasizing that Maduro is not recognized as Venezuela’s legitimate leader. Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut, a senior Democrat, criticized the lack of congressional authorization for the military action, highlighting that lawmakers were only informed after the fact.
On the other hand, the administration defended the operation, citing President Trump’s authority as commander in chief and the perceived threat posed by Maduro’s government. Senator Andy Kim of New Jersey accused administration officials of providing misleading information to Congress, expressing skepticism about the operation’s true intentions. He warned that the strike could endanger Americans in Venezuela and beyond, damaging the country’s global reputation.
In response to the operation, Senator Ruben Gallego of Arizona labeled it as an “illegal” and “unjustified” war, criticizing the decision to engage in military action against Venezuela. Representative Jim McGovern of Massachusetts echoed similar sentiments, condemning the strike as unauthorized and unlawful. Meanwhile, Republicans supported the operation and defended the lack of prior notification to Congress, with Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas arguing that such secrecy was necessary for the operation’s success.
Senator Lindsey Graham praised the capture of Maduro as a significant achievement under President Trump’s leadership, emphasizing the removal of a “narcoterrorist dictator.” House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast hailed the operation as a victory for US security interests, asserting that it would disrupt criminal activities in the region. Senate Republican leader John Thune characterized the capture as a crucial step towards holding Maduro accountable for drug-related charges.
