Trump Acted. Raskin Whined.
by David Lee
Jamie Raskin wants Americans to believe that the capture of Nicolás Maduro was reckless, unconstitutional, and hypocritical. He is wrong on all three counts and dangerously so.
Let’s start with the core reality Raskin tiptoes around while pretending to acknowledge it: Nicolás Maduro is not a normal head of state. He is not a misunderstood reformer. He is a narco-dictator indicted by the United States, accused of turning an entire nation into a cocaine pipeline while starving its people and exporting chaos throughout the hemisphere. When the U.S. government acts against someone like Maduro, it is not “imperialism.” It is law enforcement on a scale.
Raskin’s constitutional argument collapses under scrutiny. The president did not declare war on Venezuela. He authorized a targeted military operation to apprehend an indicted criminal enemy of the United States. Presidents of both parties have conducted such operations for decades without prior congressional approval against terrorists, warlords, pirates, and narco-traffickers. Congress is not consulted before every special operation any more than a judge convenes a jury before issuing an arrest warrant. The Constitution makes the president commander-in-chief for a reason.
Raskin’s second claim that drug trafficking was merely a “pretext” is even more detached from reality. The U.S. Department of Justice has spent years building a case against Maduro, accusing him of conspiring to flood the United States with cocaine using state institutions and foreign terrorist groups. This is not speculative. It is documented. Maduro’s regime has been sanctioned, indicted, and internationally isolated precisely because it operates as a criminal enterprise masquerading as a government.
To distract from that reality, Raskin points to President Trump’s pardon of former Honduran president Juan Orlando Hernández. This is classic whataboutism masquerading as moral clarity. Hernández’s pardon, controversial or not, does not magically erase Maduro’s crimes. Nor does it invalidate the mountains of evidence against the Venezuelan regime. Law enforcement does not stop arresting bank robbers because one criminal elsewhere received clemency. That argument would be laughed out of any courtroom.
Vice President JD Vance was correct to respond directly to the claim that Venezuela has “nothing to do” with drugs. While fentanyl largely enters through Mexico, cocaine is the financial engine of the Latin American cartel system, and Venezuela has long served as its primary transit hub. Cutting off that revenue stream is not symbolic, it is strategic. If you want to weaken cartels, you go after their money. And yes, as Vance bluntly noted, cocaine is still devastating American communities.
Raskin’s geopolitical alarmism, his suggestion that Putin or China will now feel “validated,” is perhaps the most ironic part of his statement. Vladimir Putin does not need U.S. permission to invade neighbors. He invaded Ukraine because he believed the West was weak, divided, and unwilling to act. Strong enforcement of international law against criminal regimes does not embolden tyrants; it deters them. Russia’s own condemnation of the operation underscores the point: Moscow is angry precisely because one of its allies was removed from power.
Then there is the oil argument, which critics deliberately mischaracterize. The United States is not “stealing” Venezuela’s resources. Venezuela’s oil infrastructure has collapsed under socialist corruption and incompetence. Allowing American companies to rebuild it under a legitimate, post-Maduro government is not colonialism it is reconstruction. It benefits Venezuelans, stabilizes global energy markets, and reduces dependence on hostile regimes.
Raskin warns of a “rules-based international order” while defending a man who shattered every rule imaginable. That is not principle; it is selective outrage. There is nothing rules-based about allowing an indicted narco-dictator to operate freely because arresting him makes academics uncomfortable.
For decades, America has been criticized for weakness, hesitation, and endless process. This time, it acted decisively. The result was the removal of a criminal tyrant without a prolonged war, without civilian carnage, and with a clear legal foundation. That is not imperialism. That is leadership.
History will not remember Jamie Raskin’s press statements. It will remember that when confronted with a criminal regime poisoning our country with drugs and tyranny, the United States finally chose action over excuses.
Endnotes & Sources
U.S. Department of Justice, Indictment of Nicolás Maduro and senior Venezuelan officials
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/venezuelan-president-nicolas-maduro-charged-narco-terrorismDrug Enforcement Administration, Venezuela’s role in cocaine trafficking
https://www.dea.gov/press-releases/2020/03/26/dea-acts-against-venezuelan-narco-terrorismU.S. Constitution, Article II – Commander in Chief powers
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-2/Congressional Research Service, Presidential authority to use military force without Congress
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R42738U.S. Department of State, Sanctions and criminal findings against the Maduro regime
https://www.state.gov/venezuela-related-sanctions/Russia Foreign Ministry statement condemning U.S. action (reported coverage)
https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/russia-condemns-us-capture-maduro-venezuela-2026-01-04/