The origin of power story behind the US kidnapping Maduro

A comment here led me to became aware of an interesting non-profit group calling itself the National Security Archive (NSA). It is located at George Washington University. This group combs through and pieces together government information, including content obtained under the Freedom of Information Act law and other reliable sources. Declassified government documents are among the information sources the NSA analyzes. 

Detailed research and analysis like this is about the only way the American people can get useful, trustworthy glimpses into what our government wants to keep secret from us. Investigative journalists also do this kind of public service work, but as we all know, the US government routinely keeps us as ignorant as it can about most of the bad things it does.

This link is to a detailed, deep dive into the origins of the power a US president has to mess with other nations' internal affairs, including kidnapping their leaders, rigging elections and staging coups. The article is entitled Imperial Prerogative: How the Panama Invasion and the “Barr Doctrine” Set the Stage for the Maduro “Snatch” Operation. Our old friend Bill Barr was an attorney that helped cook up the "legal reasoning" to give US presidents the power to, more or less, wreck other nations, including democracies. The article focuses on the US involvement with Panama in the 1980s, but extrapolates that to the US messing with Venezuela in 2026.

The article notes that 1989 legal memos said a US president has "inherent constitutional authority" to act unilaterally and "contravene customary international law". Right there is a basis for the US to "legally" ignore international laws it wants to ignore. That can make a person wonder what the point of international law is. 

The NSA article points out that In 1989, Barr, then Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), wrote at least five legal opinions related to US efforts to remove Panamanian strongman Manuel Noriega from power. At least two of the Barr memos are still classified. Chief among them was a finding that the President had the inherent constitutional authority to arrest individuals abroad even if those actions contravene customary international law and even if they contravene unexecuted treaties or treaty provisions, such as Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter. The UN charter bars threats and use of force among member states except in self-defense.

So despite being a member state, the US seriously blows off the UN and its charter when its convenient to do so.

The NSA analysis points out that both Operation Just Cause (Panama 1989) and Operation Absolute Resolve (Venezuela 2026), are strikingly similar. Both rely on (1) executive branch legal memoranda claiming inherent constitutional authority unconstrained by international law, (2) invocation of drug enforcement as justification, and (3) significant civilian casualties, and clear violations of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.

The legal foundation for the US invasion of Venezuela was laid out in a classified December 2025 memo drafted by Elliot Gaiser, the 36-year-old Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel. The heavily redacted memo, released publicly on January 13, 2026, cites the 1989 Barr opinion extensively. Glaiser's legal analysis adopted Barr's legal reasoning. Also, Glaiser's memo asserts that the United States's use of force against Venezuela is lawful despite violating UN Charter Article 2(4) and customary international law prohibitions on the use of force. This argument extends Barr's 1989 reasoning that international laws do not limit US presidential action.

Apparently, the US operation in Venezuela today is illegal under international law. And the reasons for intervention, narco-terrorism and drug enforcement, appear to be nonsense. 

CONTEXT

In case anyone is wondering, the NSA is the gold standard for declassified document research about US national security policy. It was founded in 1985 by journalists and scholars at George Washington University. The NSA has the world's largest nongovernmental collection of declassified US documents. Media Bias/Fact Check rates the NSA as Least Biased with High Credibility, based on its minimal editorializing of historical and contemporary issues, and based on its extensive use of declassified documents and its extensive use of primary and secondary information sources.

Q: Is it better to keep the American people in the dark about the bad things the US government does to other countries? Or should we be kept reasonably well informed* so that the public knows what is going on and can express support or disapproval?

* Just reasonably informed, not completely informed about things that reasonably need to be kept secret from us.

Trump and MAGA elites: Some comparison to fascism

Accumulating evidence indicates that Trump and MAGA elites are getting ready to declare martial law, use the Insurrection Act or otherwise start another coup attempt. How close that is to happening isn't clear, but it feels rather close. All it might take is a single shooter to kill one or more ICE agents to give Trump the excuse he is looking for to finish off our democracy and rule of law. Are we really that close to that kind of an Armageddon? I hope not. But maybe we're close to end of the American experiment.

 

The MSM may or may not be waking up. Or, maybe it's not capable of waking up, having been subverted.

A Common Dreams opinion piece, Mussolini Had His Blackshirts, Hitler Has the SS, and Trump Has ICE, is some evidence that parts of the MSM are still up for engagement. The evidence keeps pointing to increasing similarities between Trump and his MAGA elites and 1900s fascists and fascism. 

Apparently, the shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis has got a lot of Americans riled up. According to a poll, the shooting appears to have catalyzed a major shift in public opinion. The Economist/YouGov poll conducted January 9-12, 2026, found that for the first time, more Americans support abolishing ICE (46%) than oppose it (43%). This was a substantial huge from July 2025, when only 27% supported abolition. Remarkably, 69% of Americans reported seeing video of the shooting, indicating unprecedented visibility into ICE operations.

Maybe it will mean something,

maybe it won't

Anyway, some Americans are starting to wake up. Whether it will make a major difference or will be too little or too late is unclear.  

FWIW, if anything, MAGA's radicalization and weaponization of ICE into what the Common Dreams article calls as "Trump's SS" reflects a gigantic expansion in resources and authority. MAGA's July 2025 spending bill allocated $75 billion to ICE over four years, tripling its budget from $10 billion in FY2024 to $28.7 billion in FY2025. There will be an average of approximately $37.5 billion annually through 2029. The MAGA weaponized ICE budget now exceeds the combined budgets of every other federal law enforcement agency—including the FBI, DEA, ATF, U.S. Marshals Service, and Bureau of Prisons.

That's exciting -- in a bad way, in my opinion.

Italian Fascism under Mussolini emphasized state supremacy over racial doctrine. The Doctrine of Fascism prioritized nationalism, corporatism, totalitarianism, and militarism with the state as all-encompassing. No human value existed beyond that. Fascism preserved the class system while promoting "corporatism" that integrated all societal elements into state structures. By contrast, German Nazism under Hitler elevated racial supremacy as its core doctrine, particularly the belief in Aryan superiority and biological antisemitism.

That this is even a topic for serious discussion is, IMHO, evidence of how bad our politics is and how shockingly weak our democracy and rule of law have become.

Regarding Trump's attacks on civil rights laws

Recently Trump, Vance and other MAGA elites have criticized civil liberties laws as reverse discrimination that has treated white people very badly, especially white men. What MAGA bigots and racists never mention is any of the benefits of civil rights laws and DEI initiatives. The following is a brief analysis to help balance the discussion.

An important thing that anti-civil liberties and anti-DEI demagoguery and propaganda never mention is the benefits of civil liberties laws and DEI initiatives. This is a standard MAGA deceit and irrational emotional manipulation tactic. Yes, some white people and others, e.g., Asians with high academic scores, have been negatively impacted by DEI implementation. Some DEI implementation has been unfair and harmful to some people.

But what does a reasonable cost-benefit analysis look like? Racists and bigots like Trump and Vance will never, ever mention any benefits from civil liberties laws. To them its only about bad impacts to white people. That is cynical, intentional deceit and irrational emotional manipulation by morally rotted MAGA demagoguery.

Here is some commentary about the benefits that Trump and MAGA elites love to ignore, and presumably deny if the benefits are shoved in their lying, authoritarian faces:

Civil rights legislation and DEI initiatives have generated substantial economic returns since the 1960s. Research demonstrates that reduced barriers to talent allocation, i.e., jobs for talented people previously blocked from good jobs by discrimination. That was enabled primarily by civil rights laws. By one analysis , those laws accounted for ~40% of U.S. GDP growth per person between 1960 and 2010. This translates to the improved allocation of talent among women and Black Americans contributing roughly 0.7 percentage points annually to GDP growth during this period. A 2019 analysis by economists commented :

When we view these facts through the lens of our general equilibrium model, we find that these shifts account for roughly two fifths of growth in U.S. market GDP per person between 1960 and 2010. They also account for most of the rise in labor force participation over the last five decades.

Other analysis indicates that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 alone narrowed the Black-white wage gap by 5.5% in covered jurisdictions. That accounted for about one-fifth of total wage gap narrowing between whites and Blacks. Companies with top-quartile gender diversity on executive teams had 25-39% higher profitability. Corporate and business ethnic diversity correlates with about a 35% greater likelihood of outperformance compared to peers. Diverse leadership teams generate 19% higher innovation revenues.

What about estimated cost-benefit ratios? Darned good question. There another question that arrogant, racist and bigoted MAGA liars will never mention. So, I'll mention it for them.

Economic Terms: The economic cost:benefit is estimated to be at least ~1:100 by one analysis. The improved talent allocation due to civil rights laws causing reduced discrimination suggests indicates a contribution of ~$1-1.5 trillion to GDP between 2019-2028 from reduced racial wealth gaps alone. Federal affirmative action programs also have outstanding positive return on investment impacts with minimal efficiency costs.

Human terms: Cost:benefit impacts of civil rights laws and DEI greatly exceed 1:10 . Human benefits include expanded educational access, reduced wage discrimination. Black male earnings increased from 55% to 80% of white earnings 1950-1980). Also, civil rights laws led to decreased mortality from reduced incarceration disparities, enhanced political participation, and improvement in intergenerational economic and social mobility. Of course, it is impossible to precisely quantify this. That said, the transformation from systematic exclusion (94% of doctors/lawyers were white men in 1960 versus 60% by 2010) is fundamental human dignity gain that rationally exceed costs by orders of magnitude, maybe 1:1,000.

How much of the benefits has Trump, Vance or other lying, deceiving elite MAGA blowhards mentioned? I suspect almost none or none at all. The goal of authoritarian MAGA demagoguery isn't to inform. It is intended to deceive and manipulate.

This is a prime example of why I trust absolutely nothing that Trump, Vance and other morally rotted MAGA elites say, unless there is solid evidence to believe otherwise. There is no good reason to believe lying liars and their morally rotted lies.

Regarding Republican authoritarianism: Clintons' letter to Comer

First page of the Clintons' letter

Radical right elite MAGA authoritarian James Comer has subpoenaed and is threatening Bill and Hillary Clinton for their refusal to testify under oath about Epstein and pedophilia. The Clintons had been voluntarily cooperative, but apparently they are tired of plying the stupid MAGA game. The letter is at this link. Comer has been trying to nail Democrats about Epstein for a long time with no major success. But he is a persistent jackass.

The main argument the Clintons assert to blow Comer off is fairly simple. They argue that Comer's subpoena and threat are invalid and legally unenforceable because they are not connected to any valid legislative purpose. Congressional subpoenas have been required by USSC precedent that to serve Congress's legislative function. Subpoenas for other purposes are unconstitutional. The Clintons' letter states that Comer had not established why their appearance would be relevant to any valid legislative purpose. (link 1, link 2)

The Clintons' letter also points out that (1) they have already provided the limited information they have about Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell to the Comer Committee, and (2) they did so proactively and voluntarily. They say their prior cooperation makes compelled testimony unnecessary and unjustified. Comer is threatening the Clintons with contempt of congress charges. (link 3, link 4)

The Clinton letter makes clear the weakness in Comer's position. He had been arguing to the Clintons that their testimony was necessary for conduct of congressional oversight of the federal government’s enforcement of either sex trafficking law generally or as to Epstein and Maxwell in particular. That’s nonsense -- Epstein is dead and Maxwell is in the slammer. 

However, being the arrogant cuss he is, Comer revised his reason for his testimony demand. Comer's new reason for harassing the Clintons is that they are needed for investigation of how Epstein befriended powerful people to avoid scrutiny of his sex trafficking operation. Comer asserts that may assist Congress in its exploration of potential legislative remedies to more effectively combat sex trafficking rings. What a load of pig manure.[1]

But with vindictive, authoritarian MAGA thugs in power, this is the new normal.

Comer has not explained why he hasn't subpoenaed Trump.

Comer

Footnote:

1. There's also this: Comer subpoenaed eight people initially but dismissed seven without them saying a word. Only the Clintons remain targeted. If this were truly about legislative fact-finding, why the selective enforcement? This is obviously not about legislative fact-finding. It is all about vindictive MAGA authoritarianism.