WTF just happened in Venezuela…and what can we expect to see next?
How a President Accused of Corrupting the Rule of Law Used “Justice” to Justify Force-and What That Means for America and the World
WTF just happened in Venezuela…and what can we expect to see next?
How a President Accused of Corrupting the Rule of Law Used “Justice” to Justify Force-and What That Means for America and the World
The Jack Hopkins Now Newsletter #715: Saturday, January 3rd, 2026.
Let me say the quiet part out loud:
If this had happened under any other flag…we’d be calling it what it is.
A strike inside a sovereign country.
A high-value capture mission in a capital city.
A head of state and his spouse taken into custody.
A public “trophy photo.”
And then the President of the United States…yes, that president…posturing as Mr. Law and Order while hinting America will “run” Venezuela “temporarily.”
If you’re feeling whiplash, good.
Whiplash is the body’s way of telling you your neck just got snapped by reality.
Because what’s being sold to you right now is a story with a shiny label:
“Justice.”
“Indictment.”
“Arrest.”
“Rule of law.”
And what critics…lawmakers…legal scholars…international observers…are yelling is something darker:
This looks like war powers by ambush.
A constitutional bypass.
A UN Charter violation.
A dangerous precedent.
An empire move dressed as a courtroom drama.
And here’s the part that should make you furious, not just afraid:
The man who has spent years treating our institutions like a chew toy…who has normalized contempt for legal boundaries…has now discovered the magic of the words “law and order”… and he’s using them to launder a military operation into a righteous narrative.
It’s not just embarrassing.
It’s chilling.
Because if this is allowed to stand…legally…politically…psychologically…then we just taught the world a new lesson:
“If you’re powerful enough, legality is a branding exercise.”
And that is how the rules-based order dies.
Not with a bang.
With applause.
The part nobody wants to admit
If you’re reading this, you already know the headline version:
Maduro and his wife are in U.S. custody.
They’ve been moved through U.S. military assets.
They’re headed into the SDNY machine.
The administration is trying to frame it as an arrest.
But that framing is exactly the problem.
Because it’s not just “did we get him?”
It’s how we got him.
It’s who decided.
It’s what authority was used.
It’s what precedent was created.
And…it’s the grotesque spectacle of a president with a reputation…fair or not…for corruption…self-dealing…and institutional vandalism suddenly cosplaying as an incorruptible sheriff.
The most corrupt president in U.S. history (as his critics and many historians argue) is suddenly starring as America’s top cop.
That would be funny if it weren’t so dangerous.
Because when the sheriff is the one who keeps moving the fence posts…
Nobody is safe.
Not the target.
Not the public.
Not even the people cheering the loudest.
Let’s be honest about what this feels like
This moment triggers something primal in people:
Some are thrilled-“finally, we got the bad guy.”
Some are disgusted-“this is kidnapping.”
Some are confused-“wait, can we do that?”
Some are afraid-“what happens next?”
Here’s my promise:
I’m not going to ask you to pick a team.
I’m going to ask you to pick a principle.
Because you can hate Maduro…and still understand that a president unilaterally ordering strikes and captures overseas…without clear authorization…turns the United States into something unrecognizable.
And you can dislike Trump…and still understand that the question isn’t “is he bad?”
The question is:
What kind of system lets one man do this…then calls it justice…then implies he may govern another country “temporarily”?
That’s not a partisan question.
That’s a civilization question.
The constitutional critique that’s exploding right now
Critics of this operation…especially lawmakers and constitutional scholars…are laser-focused on one core issue:
You don’t get to take the country to war by yourself.
Yes…the President is Commander-in-Chief.
No…that does not mean the President…is a one-man legislature.
Congress has the war power for a reason.
Not because it’s cute.
Not because it’s ceremonial.
Because the Founders understood the temptation:
Leaders love “necessary” wars.
They rally the public.
They bypass debate.
They brand dissent as disloyalty.
They expand executive power…permanently.
So when you see critics calling this unconstitutional…they’re not “being dramatic.”
They’re pointing to the design of the American system and saying:
“This looks like hostilities against a sovereign country…launched without Congress.”
And when reporting indicates Congress was notified after the operation began, that inflames the critique:
“We weren’t consulted. We were informed. After the fact.”
That’s not oversight.
That’s theater.
And if we accept that model…if we accept “notify later” as normal…then the war power is effectively transferred from Congress…to a single individual.
You can’t call that a republic with a straight face. Well…you can, but I’ll probably never take you seriously again.
The international law critique is worse
Now zoom out.
Because even if the U.S. legal story were airtight (and critics say it’s not), there’s the global story.
International law doesn’t care about your domestic talking points.
International law cares about sovereignty and the use of force.
This is why international institutions are reacting the way they are…why diplomats are choosing their words like they’re handling a grenade.
Because if the United States…normalizes the idea that it can strike another country and seize its leader under a “law enforcement” wrapper…
Then the entire UN Charter framework becomes optional.
And once it’s optional for the most powerful country…
It becomes optional for everyone.
That’s the part people keep missing.
This isn’t just “about Venezuela.”
It’s about the precedent.
If the U.S. can do this because it says the target is a “criminal,”
then Russia can do it for “terrorists.”China can do it for “separatists.”
Any regional power can do it for “security.”
The rule becomes:
“Label your enemy criminal.
Strike. Capture. Declare it justice.”
That is not order.
That’s a permission slip…for chaos.
Why the “Law and Order” costume is the tell
Here’s what the administration is doing…psychologically, strategically:
They’re taking a military act and laundering it through courtroom language:
“Superseding indictment”
“SDNY”
“Narco-terrorism”
“Arrest”
“Justice”
Because those words…do something to the human brain.
They create the feeling of legitimacy.
They make you imagine a judge…not a helicopter.
A courtroom…not a strike package.
A warrant…not a raid.
And that is exactly why critics are enraged.
Because the message is:
“We didn’t attack a country.
We enforced the law.”
But law doesn’t work like that.
You don’t get to treat the planet like your jurisdiction…just because you have the hardware to do it.
And you definitely don’t get to do it while hinting you might “run” the target country afterward.
Which brings us to the line that should set off alarms in every serious person:
“We’re going to run Venezuela temporarily.”
That’s not “law enforcement.”
That’s the language of protectorates.
And you don’t say that unless you want the world to understand the truth:
This wasn’t just about Maduro.
This was about control.
Or…at least…the appearance of control.
The chilling embarrassment: how this makes America look to the world
America has spent decades selling a brand:
“Rules-based order.”
“International law.”
“Democracy.”
“Human rights.”
“Sovereignty matters.”
Now imagine being an ally watching this unfold.
Imagine being Germany…or France…or…Canada.
You are now forced to do diplomatic gymnastics:
You may hate Maduro.
You may believe he’s corrupt.
You may even think he belongs on trial.
But you cannot openly endorse a precedent that says:
“The U.S. can strike a country and seize its leader…whenever it wants.”
Because if you endorse that…
You are endorsing the destruction…of the very rules that protect you from the strong doing whatever they want.
So instead you’ll hear the language of restraint:
political solution
respect for international law
de-escalation
stability
That’s not weakness.
That’s them…trying to tape the rulebook back together…while America lights it on fire.
And then there’s the propaganda gift.
Do you understand what you just handed Russia and China?
A trophy.
A talking point they can recycle for years:
“The U.S. is not a guardian of law.
The U.S. is an empire that uses law as a mask.”
Even if you think that’s unfair…fine.
It’s still effective.
And what matters in geopolitics…is not what’s fair.
It’s what spreads.
What happens next, if critics are right
If you accept the critics’ premise…
…that this was unlawful or unconstitutional…then the “next chapter” is not just foreign policy.
It’s domestic survival of constitutional boundaries.
Here are the three fights coming immediately:
1) The War Powers fight
This becomes the test:
Will Congress assert itself?
Or…will it fold…because nobody wants to be the politician…who “defended Maduro” on cable news?
That’s the trap.
The trap is to make constitutional oversight…politically radioactive.
Because if oversight becomes impossible…
Then executive power becomes permanent.
And the presidency becomes something else entirely.
2) The legitimacy fight in the UN and with allies
Even if the U.S. shrugs off the UN, this will shape global posture.
You will see:
emergency meetings
condemnations
hedged statements
diplomatic distancing
Not because the world loves Maduro.
Because the world…fears precedent.
3) The “strongman psychology” fight at home
This is the most dangerous and the least discussed:
When a president performs unilateral power theatrics, it trains the public to crave the feeling.
It creates a hunger for action over process.
It teaches people:
“The law is for enemies.
Power is for us.”
That is exactly how democracies rot.
Not because people suddenly become evil.
Because they become addicted…to certainty.
And authoritarian leaders…supply certainty…the way dealers supply drugs.
The “But Maduro is bad” argument doesn’t save this
You’re going to hear the defenders say:
“Maduro is a dictator.”
“Maduro is corrupt.”
“Maduro traffics drugs.”
“Maduro deserved it.”
Even if we grant every single one of those claims…
It still doesn’t answer the central question:
By what authority did the President order strikes inside a sovereign nation and seize its leader?
Because legality…isn’t a popularity contest.
It’s a boundary.
And boundaries are the only thing standing between a constitutional republic and a charismatic monarchy.
This is where critics are brutally clear:
Once you justify this because the target is “bad,” you have created a formula:
Label the target criminal
Invoke “security”
Use force
Call it law
Dare anyone to stop you
That formula can be used again.
And again.
And…again.
Until you look up…and realize the exception…became the rule.
What you should watch in the next 72 hours
If you want to see where this is headed, ignore the chest-thumping and watch these signals:
In Washington
Does Congress demand a legal justification?
Do leaders call for hearings?
Do they accept “we told you after” as normal?
In New York
How does the administration handle the courtroom optics?
Do they try to turn SDNY into a stage play for legitimacy?
Does the defense raise jurisdictional or due process arguments that make this uglier?
In Caracas
Who consolidates power?
Does the regime fracture…harden…or pivot?
Does the humiliation narrative become the glue…that holds the system together?
In the UN and allied capitals
Do allies quietly distance themselves?
Do they cooperate…while pretending they aren’t?
Do adversaries weaponize this as propaganda?
What I want you to take from this
If you’re still thinking this is “about Venezuela,” you’re missing the point.
This is about what America just told the world it will do.
And…it’s about what America just told its own citizens to accept:
unilateral force
executive-first decisions
legal theater after the fact
sovereignty as optional
“temporary” control of other countries as a talking point
That’s why critics are calling it unconstitutional.
That’s why legal scholars are calling it unlawful.
That’s why international officials are calling it a dangerous precedent.
Because once the world learns that “law and order” can be a costume…
Every authoritarian on Earth…will start shopping for the same costume.
And the next time it happens…it may not be the U.S. doing it.
It may be someone…doing it to us…or to our allies…using our own logic.
So yes.
This is an embarrassment.
But it’s not just embarrassment.
It’s danger.
Because when the most powerful country on Earth…starts behaving like the rules are optional…
The world gets very dark…very fast.
And history does not forgive nations…that confuse power…with legitimacy.
#HoldFast…now…more than ever.
Back soon,
-Jack
Jack Hopkins
P.S. (for paid subscribers)
If you want the version of this story that the mainstream press will not write…because it’s too blunt…too politically risky…and too honest about how power works…I’m going to publish it for paid subscribers sometime in the next 48 hours.
Hopefully sooner. I’ll see what I can make happen…time wise.
the “law-and-order laundering” playbook
the War Powers trap that makes oversight politically toxic
the three likely escalation paths (and what signals confirm each)
and the uncomfortable question nobody wants to ask: what happens when presidents discover they can do this… and face no consequences?
If you’re already paid…you’ll get it in your inbox.
If you’re not, this is exactly why the paid tier exists: to tell the truth when the truth has a price.
If you’re not a paid subscriber-and have no plans to be-that’s fine. I still want you here.
Don’t shortchange yourself…just because there’s another tier available.
These free articles are designed to stand on their own.
I load them with high-quality analysis and hard-earned insight for a reason…because it’s useful…and because most people never bother going this deep.
Resources
Reuters-reporting on the operation (Operation Absolute Resolve), custody claims, force posture, UN reactions, and Congressional notification timing
CBS News-reporting on Maduro and Flores being transported to the New York area and SDNY superseding indictment details
The Washington Post-reporting on custody imagery and political dynamics involving Venezuelan leadership
Associated Press-live coverage on immediate post-operation conditions and Trump’s “run Venezuela temporarily” remarks
The Guardian-legal analysis and international law expert critiques of legality and precedent
U.S. Department of Justice-background on prior Maduro-related charges and “Cartel of the Suns” case framing (2020)
U.S. Department of State-reward announcements and background on Maduro pursuit
Congressional Research Service-background on U.S. policy posture toward recognition/legitimacy and related context
Let’s stop lying to ourselves. This wasn’t justice — it was a military kidnapping carried out without Congress, without international law, and without consent of the Venezuelan people. You don’t “arrest” a head of state by bombing a capital and flying them out at gunpoint. That’s a coup with a PR team. If any other country did this to a leader we like, we’d call it an act of war. Empire doesn’t become democracy just because Americans do it.
Just another FAILED ATTEMPT to cover that the Orange Idiot is a rapist and pedophile! He is so senile and demented that he could barely read his bullshit speech about this act of war! The Orange Idiot and his cult cannot run the USA let alone another nation!!!