al Jazeera:
US Senate advances resolution to curb Trump military authority in Venezuela
Move, while incremental, underscores unrest over Trump’s unilateral military abduction of Maduro among some Republicans

Birds fly past the US Capitol building dome in Washington, DC, US, January 4, 2026 [File: Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters]

ByJoseph Stepansky
Published On 8 Jan 2026
Washington, DC – The US Senate has advanced a resolution that would bar President Donald Trump from taking further military action against Venezuela without congressional authorisation.
The vote on Thursday on the procedural measure to advance the war powers resolution was 52 to 47. Several members of Trump’s Republican Party broke with the president to join every Senate Democrat in voting in favour of moving ahead.
If eventually passed, the resolution would require Trump to remove US armed forces from “imminent engagement” in hostilities “within or against Venezuela” without further approval from Congress.
The resolution will now go to a full floor debate in the Senate. It must be passed by both Chambers of Congress to reach Trump’s desk. The president could then veto the resolution. Overriding the veto would require two-thirds support from both the Republican-controlled House and Senate, a likely insurmountable threshold.
Still, observers hailed Thursday’s vote as symbolically significant, underscoring discontent over Saturday’s abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in a dramatic military raid in Caracas, as well as Trump’s threats to again attack Venezuela and other countries in the region.
In a post on X, Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, called the move “a major rebuke” to Trump.

UN Chief meets Venezuelan ambassador: Guterres offers support for national dialogue
Cavan Kharrazian, senior policy director for the Demand Progress advocacy group, called the vote “a rare ray of good news for the nation and our Constitution”.
Advertisement
“With this historic, bipartisan vote to prevent further war in Venezuela, Congress has begun the long-overdue work of reasserting its constitutional role in decisions of war and peace,” Kharrazian said.
Several attempts to advance similar resolutions were blocked by both the Senate and House last year, with Republicans largely coalescing around support for Trump. The five Republicans who voted to advance on Thursday included senators Rand Paul, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Todd Young and Josh Hawley.
Their vote appeared to hit a nerve for Trump. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said the Republican quintet should be “ashamed” and “should never be elected to office again”.
It was not immediately clear when a final vote on the Senate resolution would be held, although it was expected sometime next week.
‘Clear-cut case’
US military assets have remained deployed to the Caribbean since the abduction of Maduro and the Trump administration has said strikes on alleged drug boats will continue.
While no US troops are known to be on the ground in the country, Trump has threatened interim leader, Maduro’s former deputy Delcy Rodriguez, that if she does not comply with US demands, she could “pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro”.
Trump has also threatened to use military force against other countries in the Western Hemisphere, including Colombia, as well as Greenland – an autonomous territory of Denmark. How the US military will play into Trump’s promises to indefinitely assert control over Venezuela’s government and open the country’s oil industry to US companies has not yet been clarified.

At least 100 people killed in US attack on Venezuela, minister says
Legal experts have said Congress has, for decades, backed away from asserting its authority when it comes to US military engagement abroad.
Under the US Constitution, only Congress can declare war, something it has not done since World War II.
The War Powers Act of 1973, meanwhile, created a process for the legislative branch to rein in a president’s unilateral use of the military. Many experts argue the Constitution only grants the president the ability to take unilateral military actions in matters of immediate self-defence or in responding to an imminent attack.
Speaking to Al Jazeera earlier this week, David Janovsky, the acting director of the Constitution Project at the Project on Government Oversight, called Trump’s actions in Venezuela a “clear-cut case” of presidential overreach “crying out for congressional action”.
‘No more endless wars’
But many Republicans have rejected that position, adopting Trump’s claims that the US needed to take urgent action against Maduro, even as little evidence has emerged to justify the position.
“Unlike the former president, President Trump demonstrated he is a man of action, he was decisive, and did what he promised the American people he would do, and that is to keep them safe,” Senator James Risch said before Thursday’s vote.
Risch further argued that actions against Maduro were a one-off “47-minute” operation, and not part of a prolonged military engagement, and therefore did not require congressional intervention.

US says it will control Venezuelan oil indefinitely
The top Democrat in the chamber, Chuck Schumer, meanwhile, called on the Senate to assert “the authority given to it in the Constitution on matters of war and peace”.
“We must send Donald Trump a clear message on behalf of the American people, no more endless wars,” he said.
In an editorial published by Responsible Statecraft on Wednesday, Republican Rand Paul accused his party of having “lost its grip and become eunuchs in the thrall of presidential domination”.
“But make no mistake, bombing another nation’s capital and removing their leader is an act of war plain and simple,” he said. “No provision in the Constitution provides such power to the presidency.”
Interesting.
ReplyDeleteThe former DIA director, even during under Obama had raised his warning and got kickout and targeted.
Seeing this may triggered our local guys here...even now, in a fb account, their cry of "Laknatullah, laknatullah..." and their variation is coming forth in fb page, as comment to post or in post itself. Can forsee more cognitive dissonance responses appearing as their operation becoming more overt in the future...
One of many battlefront that include this, cartel, the "liberal left"...
Will see how.
~~~
https://x.com/i/status/2009416537019699600
BREAKING: The United Arab Emirates is restricting their nationals from enrolling at British universities over fears that UK campuses are being radicalized by radical Islamist groups.
THIS IS BEYOND HILARIOUS! The UAE has a lower tolerance for radical Islam than the freaking UK.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-east/uae-restricts-scholarships-for-students-to-study-in-uk-amid-concerns-over-islamist-radicalisation/articleshow/126432669.cms
https://www.business-standard.com/world-news/uae-government-funding-uk-universities-radicalisation-muslim-brotherhood-126010900280_1.html
https://x.com/i/status/1992756731944816848
Almost ten years ago (circa 2016), I issued the warning on national television that too many in Washington and the media refused to hear.
"We have a significant problem with radical islam and we have to address it."
For speaking the truth, I was attacked, smeared, and silenced. Fast forward to today, Europe is under siege, ISIS is rebuilding footholds across Africa, Iran's proxy network is expanding into every vacuum our leaders create, and Biden's open border has invited threats we have and will continue to pay for in American lives.
What I said in 2016 was an honest assessment and a warning to every American. The threat didn't disappear because politicians ignored it. It didn't shrink because the media censored it. Instead, it grew.
We still refuse to name the enemy. Until that changes, Americans will continue to pay the price at home and abroad.
@realDonaldTrump
@SusieWiles
@DNIGabbard
@AmyMek
@SecRubio
@SecWar
Something for awareness.
ReplyDeleteHe already spoken about unapolegectically exercising their power in many places, campaign trail, UN General Assembly hall, forums, etc.
He think big, real big, when setting out to cleanup America, like an epoch defining big. Only time will tell if he become the god emporer of the world and let go of it once order is restored in the "universe" as some have speculated in online forum he will do. It parallel an ancient Roman general, something of the like of Cincinnatus, to rescue Rome from some kind attack and left once it over. This is because he made some symbolic gesture before in Cincinnati, Ohio, that brought this speculation.
In the meantime, we are living through the force of storm called Donald J Trump, like it or not...
~~~
https://x.com/i/status/2009522290875355577
⚡️Trump is already running the presidency like a wartime CEO.
The cartel strike rhetoric is a strategic trial balloon. Every word has layered purpose: to frame sovereignty violations as moral imperatives, to condition the public for militarized borders, and to introduce “domestic war powers” logic without saying martial law.
This is not random saber-rattling. It’s narrative groundwork.
It creates a reflexive field where military escalation becomes imaginable, then justifiable, then inevitable. The true move may be hybrid: drone strikes, special ops, electronic warfare, cyber disruption. All deniable. All effective. All narratively pre-cleared.
The real purpose is to signal power, to both the electorate and adversaries, that Trump will weaponize state authority without delay or apology. It says: I don’t care what the UN thinks. I don’t need your permission. I will do what must be done. That is the encoded message.
And the deeper pattern: Trump is reframing the border not as a migration issue, but as a sovereignty warzone.
This gives him legal narrative architecture to invoke executive action under war powers, national emergency frameworks, and terrorism authorities - all without declaring war.
What comes next is a shadow war. Invisible until it’s undeniable. Prepared now. Activated later.
The strike already began - in the mind.
https://x.com/i/status/2009453148017238021
BREAKING: Trump says U.S. forces will begin special operations & land strikes on Mexican soil.
Attributed to Robert Kiyosaki's FB page.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.facebook.com/share/1ASfuEuEZR/
TRUMP JUST PUT A PRICE TAG ON RUSSIAN OIL — AND THE WORLD FELT IT IMMEDIATELY
This isn’t a headline about Russia.
It’s a headline about leverage.
The Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025 would allow the U.S. president to impose up to 500% tariffs on countries that keep buying Russian oil, gas, or uranium.
Read that again.
Five. Hundred. Percent.
Countries like India, China, and Brazil are suddenly in the crosshairs.
And the market reaction tells you everything you need to know.
India’s markets dropped immediately.
Not because of politics.
Because discounted Russian energy is baked into their economic model.
THIS IS HOW MODERN WAR IS FOUGHT
No tanks.
No invasions.
TARRIFS.
This bill isn’t about punishing Russia directly.
It’s about raising the cost for anyone who helps Russia fund its war.
Instead of blocking supply, the U.S. is taxing demand.
That’s smart power.
When energy discounts disappear:
- Inflation rises
- Growth slows
- Political pressure builds internally
The battlefield isn’t Ukraine.
It’s balance sheets.
WHY THIS BILL HAS TEETH
This isn’t fringe legislation.
It has 80+ bipartisan cosponsors.
That tells you something important:
When it comes to energy and money, parties fight — until power is threatened.
Then they align.
Trump’s backing accelerated this bill.
Not because he wants chaos.
Because tariffs are leverage he understands.
They’re blunt.
They’re fast.
And they work.
WHY INDIA PANICKED
India didn’t just buy Russian oil.
They built a system around cheap Russian oil.
- Refineries optimized for it.
- Margins depended on it.
- Growth benefited from it.
Now imagine that oil suddenly carries a 500% penalty.
Even the threat of that changes behavior.
That’s why markets reacted before any vote.
Markets don’t wait for laws.
They front-run them.
My rich dad taught me:
“When governments argue, watch energy.
When energy gets political, money moves.”
This bill isn’t about morality.
It’s about control of cash flow.
Oil is still the bloodstream of the global economy.
And whoever controls the pricing rules controls the pressure points.
WHAT THIS MEANS GOING FORWARD?
Expect three things:
Energy routes will reshuffle
↳ Buyers will scramble for alternatives
Prices will reprice risk
↳ “Cheap oil” just got political
Allies will quietly negotiate exemptions
↳ Power is enforced publicly, adjusted privately
This is not the end of globalization.
It’s the end of cheap neutrality.
You’re either aligned…
or you pay more.
.
.
.
Wars used to be funded with taxes.
Today they’re funded — and defunded — with tariffs.
And when tariffs reach 500%…
That’s not trade policy.
That’s economic warfare.
The rich don’t debate whether this is good or bad.
They ask one question:
Where does money move when the rules change?
That’s always the winning question.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/1241
Trump Is About to Bankrupt China the Soviet Union Way.
ReplyDeleteHe just set a Soviet-Style trap for China.
Trump plans to raise U.S. defense spending by 50% to $1.5 trillion in 2027, about 5% of GDP.
This isn’t about Russia.
Russia’s economy can’t keep up.
This is aimed squarely at China.
It’s Reagan vs the Soviet Union—version 2.0.
Beijing now faces a dead-end choice:
Match U.S. spending → crush an already fragile economy
Don’t match it → fall behind militarily and lose face globally
Either way, China loses.
That’s exactly how the arms race bankrupted the USSR.
And that’s why Beijing is panicking about this decision.
https://x.com/Ken_LoveTW/status/2009814015791464464?s=20
UN & Gutteres offers sapot for Venezuela....but what about Iran?....
ReplyDeleteBREAKING: The UN, Amnesty International, and the Red Cross release a joint statement condemning the Islamic Republic for murdering unarmed Iranian protestors.
See their statement below 👇
https://x.com/EYakoby/status/2009500192995987529?s=20