Rep. Sam Liccardo, D-San Jose, who represents Palo Alto in the House, says President Trump’s decision to remove Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro is illegal.
“We can all agree that dictator Nicolas Maduro deserves no sympathy, but recasting petro-motivated military aggression as a battle against narco-terrorism isn’t law enforcement, it’s subverting the law—namely, Article I of our Constitution. Recent history shows how this movie ends, and it’s a horror show,” Liccardo wrote on X.
Sen. Adam Schiff, who represents California, said this morning that President Trump should have brought his plans to remove Maduro to Congress.
“… starting a war to remove Maduro doesn’t just continue Donald Trump’s trampling of the Constitution, it further erodes America’s standing on the world stage and risks our adversaries mirroring this brazen illegal escalation,” Schiff said on X.
He said Trump’s real motive wasn’t stopping drugs, but regime change in an oil-rich nation.
Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., agreed with his Democratic colleagues that Trump’s action was illegal.
“There’s no clear objective, no endgame, and no plan for what comes next. This is a dangerous recipe for chaos in the region,” Padilla wrote on X.
No reaction yet from Rep. Kevin Mullin, D-San Francisco, who represents the city of San Mateo and northern San Mateo County.
Did any of the Democrats quoted in the article object to Obama arranging to have Qaddafi overthrown and killed without congressional approval? Both parties have flexible policies on military adventures depending upon whether their party controls the White House.
That’s hilarious that you equate Qaddafi with Maduro. Qaddafi sponsored numerous international attacks, including the bombing of PanAm flight 103 that killed 189 Americans. Libya was in the midst of a civil war and it was NATO that intervened on behalf of his opponents. He wasn’t kidnapped but was killed by Libyan militants. Funny, I don’t recall Obama then saying U.S. would govern Libya and take over oil operations to benefit his billionaire friends, either. Nor is prevention of drug trafficking a credible reason since trump has pardoned multiple convicted drug felons. Considering trump ran on staying out of wars and touts that he’s the ‘peace president,’ it just shows how gullible his supporters are.
Venezuelans who survived this murderous dictator are literally dancing in the streets and thanking the US. But Democrats know better and believe Maduro should continue his blood-thirsty reign. Gee, I wonder which side is right?
Biased media sources and social media trolls are using AI and completely unrelated images (such as from soccer victory celebrations) to spread misinformation that many Venezuelans are ‘dancing in the streets’ in that country. But trump supporters don’t care about actual facts or that he violated U.S. and international law so long as trump can install a puppet government and get the oil, right?
You’re starting to sound like Karine Jean-Pierre. Remember when Biden froze up in that event at the White House and a week later during that fundraiser with George Clooney? She denied Biden had any problems and argued that the video shot by NBC-CBS-ABC-CNN had been altered by AI. She almost got away with that lie until the debate. So, sure, convince yourself the celebrations in South Florida are fake. Pretend that the Venezuelans want Maduro back in power.
So you admit the videos are from South Florida, who cares what they think, they left Venezuela. Trump and the puppy killer probably want to deport them anyway. Jean-Pierre never said anything about altered video, MAGA really need to get over their Biden obsession, especially since Trump is exhibiting classic signs of dementia and psychiatric disorders. Or maybe MAGA like incoherent word salads. Interesting that MAGA are now in favor of regime change notwithstanding that trump (the ‘peace president’), vance, hegseth, et al have been so critical of it in the past. You want to spend millions or billions of U.S. taxpayer money and put U.S. military at risk to take over other countries when there are so many pressing issues here at home and the national debt is at record levels? Trump continues to talk about taking over Greenland and Canada, are those examples of ‘blood-thirsty’ reigns. It’s so hard to keep up with the hypocrisy.
You can’t have a debate with a liberal democrat because they lie about the facts and deny what they’ve said. I realize the democrats are desperate, especially with that CNN poll that came out yesterday. But this thread demonstrates that they can’t even tell the truth about obvious things, so why bother debating with them. Sad.
Mateo cannot rebut the facts I laid out so defaults to typical maga gaslighting and deflection. And it’s maga that is desperate since Dems flipped a number of Republican‑held seats and made gains in traditionally red areas in 2025 and trump’s poll numbers are at record lows, and that was even before an ICE goon murdered an innocent woman. Pathetic.
Karen, you contend that the pictures (video and still) showing Venezuelans celebrating were created by AI. Got any proof of that?
If you have a brain why don’t you post examples or proof of legit celebrations? Mateo is the one who claimed Venezuelans were celebrating, although he now admits this was in Florida. While you’re at it, post evidence that Dems want to publish Epstein victim identifying info so they can be doxxed, as you alleged. In fact, the law that passed specifically provides that victim information must be redacted; it does not, however, say perp info should be redacted, as DOJ obviously is doing to protect trump. The government also continues to withhold over a million documents and untold numbers of photos and tapes, wonder why that is.
Actually, I’ll play. Both Grok and ChatGPT confirm that AI-generated deepfakes and older video purporting to show Venezuelans celebrating and thanking trump were shared extensively on social media and were proven false. As GPT said: “These fabricated materials were so prevalent that some news sites and even the official White House X account reposted them.”
[Portion removed — Terms of Use violation. Please do not post links.]
Now your turn to prove Dems want to dox Epstein victims.
Let’s go through Karen P’s claims one by one:
1. People around the world are celebrating Maduro’s removal. For just one example, read the Reuters’ Jan 3 story headlined “Venezuela diaspora celebrates Maduro’s deposition, wonders what’s next”. I don’t think anybody regards Reuters as a MAGA news source.
2. See post by “Anonymous” on Jan 5 at 1:50 p.m.
3. We know why parts of the Epstein files have been withheld — to protect the victims from harm. Dems doxed National Guard members, putting the safety of their families and children at risk. But that kind of doxxing is OK for Dems. They promise they won’t do it to Epstein’s victims, even if they turn out to be accusers of prominent Dems.
4. You’re relying on AI bots for your information? Would that hold up in court? With that low of a standard of evidence, I’m surprised you’re not bringing Wikipedia into the mix.
5. Asked and answered.
6. Karine Jean-Pierre at a 6/17/24 press briefing said the following: “Instead of talking about the president’s performance in office — and what I mean by that is his legislative wins, what he’s been able to do for people across this country — we’re seeing these deepfakes, these manipulated videos.”
Thank you for proving the correctness of those of my points you focus on, since disregarding facts and asserting strawman arguments do not help your position. You also fail to rebut all my other points, including the hypocrisy of Venezuelan regime change given the longstanding assertions by trump (the “peace president”) and his accomplices that they were opposed to military interventions; how the primary purpose was to unlawfully seize oil; how trump is continuing to threaten takeovers of other sovereign nations, including allies; and how the national debt is exploding and taxpayers should not have to fund trump’s reckless military games. But let’s go through your list.
1. I said videos purporting to show people IN VENEZUELA celebrating Maduro’s kidnapping were manufactured. Your citing one source that depicts some OUTSIDE VENEZUELA celebrating does not refute this. “People around the world” frequently demonstrate against trump, by your logic I assume you think this would justify his ouster. It is undeniable that pro-trump AI and social media bots are being used to gin up support for Maduro’s capture:
a) New York Times, Jan.5:
A.I. Images of Maduro Spread Rapidly, Despite Safeguards
b) APNews.com, Jan. 5:
FACT FOCUS: Fabricated and misrepresented images shared widely online after US removal of Maduro
“President Donald Trump contributed to the deluge, sharing multiple videos he falsely claimed showed Venezuelans celebrating the operation.”
c) CNBC.com, Jan. 6:
AI-generated content spreads after Maduro’s removal — blurring fact and fiction
“AI-generated videos purporting to show Venezuelan citizens celebrating in the streets have gone viral on social media.”
2. I have no idea what you are referring to, but a post by someone who calls themself “Anonymous” is hardly authoritative.
3. I specifically said Epstein files were being redacted to protect VICTIMS. Your reference to some unidentified “Dems” purportedly doxing National Guard is an unsupported strawman argument. The victims are more afraid of trump and maga, as they should be, given how unhinged and vengeful he is. One teenage victim dismissed her lawsuit against him before the 2016 election because of the threats she was getting. Duly noted you do not deny that many redactions conceal info about trump and that the DOJ is withholding voluminous files in violation of the law he signed.
4. AI chatbots use sophisticated machine learning algorithms to process vast amounts of text data. I refer to them for quick, succinct answers but always doublecheck. Not surprised you are unfamiliar with this advanced technology. Ridiculous to ask whether they would “hold up in court” since the laws of evidence do not apply to news publication comments last time I checked.
5. No idea what you are referring to.
6. Mateo said – without any sourcing – that President Biden’s press secretary “argued that the video shot by NBC-CBS-ABC-CNN had been altered by AI,” supposedly to refute manufactured health issues. Not sure how this is even relevant to the conversation. In any event, she never mentioned these media sources. Instead, as shown by your own excerpt, she was talking about unspecified, online manipulated videos. Of course, there are plenty videos of trump’s actual remarks and speeches that prove daily his unfitness for office, don’t need AI for those.
We should just agree to disagree, because you will never be able to convince me that trump’s war games are lawful and in this country’s best interests. He is taking reckless actions to benefit his billionaire donors and rile up his easily manipulated base, while engaging in a wag-the-dog exercise to distract from the Epstein files, the multitude of U.S. economic and other problems, and his failing physical and mental health.
Dishonest Karen insists that Karine Jean-Pierre never claimed the videos of Biden freezing up were “deep fakes.” But you can fact check Karen’s claim by putting the following quote in your search engine:
“Instead of talking about the president’s performance in office — and what I mean by that is his legislative wins, what he’s been able to do for people across this country — we’re seeing these deepfakes, these manipulated videos.”
You’ll get several news stories about KJP’s claim about deep fakes and the Biden White House’s official transcript of the news conference where she says that.
So, Karen, you lied. And I could point out numerous other lies in what you said.
Anonymous — who apparently is afraid to use their own name — is lying again or just can’t read. OP said Ms. Jean-Pierre accused “NBC-CBS-ABC-CNN” of using AI videos when she never said that about those media sources, which is what I pointed out while also asking how this is even relevent to current discussion. Of course, Anon continues to bring up Pres. Biden – who is no longer in office – in an attempt to distract from the infirmities and illegal conduct of the current occupant. Because that’s what maga does. And engage in projection, they do that a lot too.
Karen and John Panzer are upset that those who disagree with them are not willing to provide their identity. But if you look at all the violence Dems are committing here and across the country, who would take the risk? People who were wound up by the crazy talk from Dems tried to assassinate Trump, went to the front door of a Supreme Court justice to threaten violence, shot Congressman Steve Scalise at a baseball game, and so on. The risk isn’t worth it.
Every member of Congress should call for impeachment and removal; this conduct on its own clearly violates the Constitution and separation of powers that this country agreed to _at its inception_. If this is allowed to stand, that founding agreement is exposed as a de facto nullity.
John, please read Article II of the Constitution and get back to us.
Anonymous M: Please read Article I, Section 8, Clause 11:
“[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water”
John, you can’t cherry pick. Article II says:
“The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States …”
I don’t see anywhere in there where the commander in chief powers are to be shared with members of Congress, but maybe I’m wrong.
Section 1 is clear that the President may order military action without the advice or consent of Congress.
Once military actions have begun, the President is only required to do two things:
1. notify Congress within 48 hours after the beginning of military operations, giving the source of his authority for the action.
2. Once legal notification is given to Congress, military action can continue for up to 60 days without further authorization from Congress, or up to 90 days if the President determines further action is necessary.
And, one more thing John, nothing in our system trumps the Constitution. No resolution passed by Congress can cancel these Constitutional requirements.
M, I’m not John, but I’m getting back to you. I am familiar with article II. It (intentionally) does not provide the president with the power to declare war or attack another country. The power to declare war rests with the Congress and you can find it in Article 1, section 8.
Forget Libya. Let’s talk about Iraq.
How about Obama going into Pakistan without their permission to kill bin Laden? Was is legal? Are national boundries sacrosanct?
Anonymous Squidsie: Show us the Congressional authorization equivalent to the 2001 AUMF passed after bin Laden atracked the U.S., and we’ll talk. (You can’t; there isn’t one.)
Nice try, Donno. Release the full Epstein files!
Yeah, release the Epstein files. All of it. Even the part that identifies the victims so that us lefties can dox them for the rest of their lives. Yeah, release the Epstein files!
To the owners of this paper: Are you really going to allow anonymous trolls — perhaps just one troll with many masks — to fill your comment section with easily debunked lies? No one is calling for Epstein victims’ identifying information to be released. No one on “the left” is attempting to “doxx” them.
Is that like saying, “I want to talk to your manager!”
Anonymous M: Your accusation of cherry-picking is a confession. You cannot read Article II without the context of Article I. We don’t need to play lawyer here; just listen to the debate among the Founders:
‘Pierce Butler of South Carolina was the only delegate to the Philadelphia Convention who suggested giving the executive the power to take offensive military action.[9] He suggested that even if the President should be able to do so, he, in practice, would have the character not to do so without mass support. Elbridge Gerry, a delegate from Massachusetts, summed up the majority viewpoint saying he “never expected to hear in a republic a motion to empower the Executive alone to declare war.” George Mason, Thomas Jefferson, and other contemporaries voiced similar sentiments.’
[Portion removed. Terms of Use violation. No links, please.]
All of the provisions you talk about are for defensive measures if the U.S. is suddenly attacked. So they’re not relevant here.
At least Pierce Butler had the courage to put his name behind his (wrong) opinion.
John Panzer says: “No one is calling for Epstein victims’ identifying information to be released.”
But earlier, Anonymous said: “Nice try, Donno. Release the full Epstein files!”
He didn’t say the “redacted Epstein files.”
No, he wants the whole file. Wonder why.
Anonymous troll: Stop arguing in bad faith. OP clearly means to follow the law and release the full set of files, according to the law, with victims identities redacted. “ DOJ admits it has only released 12,285 documents required by Epstein Files Transparency Act. More than 2 million documents still need to be reviewed/released.” DOJ should stop breaking the laws, stop protecting Trump’s friends, and follow the law and release the files with only the necessary redactions. Are you going to g to stop now, or are you going to continue the anonymous trolling?
Good to see that local Democrats are speaking on behalf of Venezuelans. Those Venezuelans don’t know how good they had it under a socialist dictator where you had to eat your pets or die of starvation. And if our local dems have to lie in order to make their arguments, no problem!
You Democrats who wanted Maduro to stay in power, what do you think about the political prisoners held by his regime? I imagine you’re OK with that, right?
Obama, H. Clinton and Biden all wanted Maduro out, but they did nothing. Trump also wanted him out, but unlike the Democrats he backed up his talk with action. Now Democrats are angry he did the very thing they had wanted. If Biden had removed Maduro, they would be cheering him. But because it’s Trump, they’re furious. I’m not a doctor but it looks like a case of TDS to me.