What "Unprecedented" Actions The U.S. Took In Venezuela In 4 Mins
What’s really going on with the U.S. and Venezuela? Michael Knowles breaks down the explosive developments sweeping TikTok and X — from Maduro's dramatic capture to Trump's bold claims about running the country and reviving its massive oil reserves.
In just five minutes, Knowles explains the backstory, what the administration's plan actually entails, the geopolitical stakes, and why this controversial move has sparked fierce debate worldwide.If you've seen the viral videos, the celebrations (real or AI?), or the outrage — here’s the quick, no-nonsense explainer you’ve been waiting for.Watch, learn, and decide for yourself.
- - -
Become a Daily Wire Member and watch all of our content ad-free: https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe
- - -
Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacy
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
In the wake of President Trump's capturing Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, politicians are coming out of the woodwork to criticize the military action as unprecedented and illegal.
Kamala Harris, the Democrat presidential nominee who lost to Trump, came out within hours to call the arrest of Maduro unlawful.
A tough argument to make when Harris's own administration attempted the exact same policy a year earlier and even offered 25 million bucks to anyone who could help them do it.
Maybe Trump should call her up and try to claim his reward.
In terms of law, not only had there been a warrant for Maduro's arrest for over five years, not only did Venezuela steal American property and traffic drugs to the United States, but over 50 countries in the international community had not even recognized Maduro as the legitimate president of Venezuela after he stole the Venezuelan presidential election.
Just about any way you slice it, the arrest was lawful and publicly defended, at least for a while, by both Republican and Democrat administrations.
But how about the other claim, that Trump's intervention in Venezuela was unprecedented?
It was an unprecedented military action, and this operation was flat out illegal.
This is not a win for the American people.
I don't know if any of those Democrats are history buffs.
I suspect they're not.
But when we examine the claim that Trump's action in Venezuela was unprecedented, we find a lot of precedent.
By my count, since the Mexican-American War in 1846, the total number of U.S. interventions in Latin America has been 88, which is coincidentally the number of minutes which elapsed from the time the U.S. troops reached Maduro's palace to the time they had completely evacuated the country.
Pretty impressive.
In the middle to late 19th century alone, the United States military intervened in Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Nicaragua, Haiti, Panama, Nicaragua again, and Cuba.
But it wasn't until the 20th century that we really got involved, intervening in Guyana, Puerto Rico, Costa Rica, Argentina, Paraguay, and Grenada.
Twice, respectively, in Colombia, Ecuador, Brazil, Uruguay, Mexico, and Chile.
Three times in Haiti, five times each in El Salvador and Bolivia, six times each in Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, and Nicaragua, seven times in Cuba, ten times in Honduras, and a whopping dozen times in poor old Panama.
Even if you only count the successful operations that led to a change in regime, since 1906, the U.S. has helped to swap out governments in Cuba, Nicaragua, Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Guatemala, Ecuador, the Dominican Republic again, Brazil, the Dominican Republic again, Bolivia, Chile, Grenada, Panama, and Haiti again.
Turn ahead to our own century, and we helped to overthrow regimes in Haiti again, that's the last one for now, and Honduras in 2009.
And then, most recently, we arrive at the unprecedented action in Venezuela, which is unprecedented only in its efficiency, its legal predicate,