Name: US Congress divided over capture of Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro | BBC News
Uploaded: 2026-01-06T16:55:47.000Z
Duration: 8 min 17 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

So we're going to look at developments in Washington surrounding Venezuela.

Members of Congress are split after senior officials from the Trump administration briefed the lawmakers late last night on the US Removal of the Venezuelan president, Nicolas Maduro.

The Republican House Speaker, Mike Johnson, describes the action as justified, adding that Congress did not need to be informed of the operation beforehand with regard to the war powers and the compliance with federal law.

We do not have US Armed forces in Venezuela and we are not occupying that country.

The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, that is true, but

it also vests the president of the United States with vast authorities.

As commander in Chief under Article 2 of the Constitution, the president has the authority, as all presidents do, to deploy military forces, to address threats to the US and to enforce US Law.

Meanwhile, the US Senate's top Democrat and its minority leader, Chuck Schumer, said the meeting had raised more questions than answers.

Their plan for the US Running Venezuela is vague, based on wishful thinking and unsatisfying.

I did not receive any assurances that we would not try to do the same thing in other countries.

And in conclusion, when the United States engages in this kind of regime change and so called nation building, it always ends up hurting the United States.

I left the briefing feeling that it would again.

So a split Congress there over the United States actions when it comes to the Venezuelan leader.

And talking of that, we can take you over to Brooklyn to the detention center for the Brooklyn Metropolitan Detention center where Nicolas Maduro and his wife are being held.

The only outward sign of security, trio of armed officers apparently.

This is of course where he is spending his days up until he will then face court proceedings.

We saw yesterday him coming up and plead alongside his wife not guilty in the accusations against against him, the accommodation there.

Numerous rather people who are held there, conspicuous very criticized this, this place, this commodity as unsafe and unsanitary.

So Nicolas Maduro being held there along with his wife.

We're going to pick up on all of this because part of our regular US Politics series this hour, we can talk to Tanya Nouri, who's a reporter for the military.

Tanya, we were just looking at the outside shot of the in Brooklyn, the exterior view of the Metropolitan Detention center where Nicolas Maduro is being held.

And we see Congress being split over the decision of the Trump administration as to seizing the Venezuelan leader, bringing him to the United States.

Politically, what does this mean for US Politicians going forward forward in terms of their influence on the Trump administration?

The reaction has been split along party lines since President Trump announced what happened in Venezuela.

That briefing on Capitol Hill last night was for a select group known as the Gang of Eight, and

that includes the House and Senate leaders from both parties.

And the Trump administration ultimately left those lawmakers completely in the dark about the operation in Venezuela out of what they say was concern that the lawmakers would leak details of it before the mission was carried out and ultimately putting the lives of US Service members at risk.

So that's why they chose not to disclose the attack beforehand.

And so the roughly two hour closed door session that was led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and

the Attorney General Pam Bondi, ultimately was to brief them on what had took place in Venezuela.

Democrats continue to publicly debate the legality of the capture of Nicolas Madur bureau, and

Republicans continue to defend the operation and the White House's decision to bypass Congress altogether.

So the administration will now brief all members of the House on Wednesday.

And the Senate is also set to get a briefing sometime later this week.

And we are expecting to see President Trump for the first time today since he's returned to Washington, D.C.

He's set to deliver remarks in a few hours at the House Republican Retreat at the Kennedy Center.

So we'll be hearing from him again shortly.

Tanya, these briefings were meant to happen quickly.

As the reporter for the Military Times, you'll be well aware of the 1973 War Powers act that was brought in in the wake of the Vietnam War.

Is that something that is just being ignored now?

President Trump became the latest president over the past couple of decades who did not wait on Congress to weigh in on war plans prior to striking a country.

President Trump made a similar move in June when he authorized those B2 bombers to attack the underground nuclear facilities in Iran.

But the War Powers Resolution that was passed by Congress in 1973 is essentially to ensure that lawmakers have a role in approving armed conflicts involving the United States.

And the resolution requires, in the absence of a declaration of war, that a president report to Congress within 48 hours of introducing the US military into hostilities, which must end within 60 days unless Congress permits an extension.

But presidents have largely ignored parts or all of this resolution since 1973, and

they're relying on the commander in chief power itself or on the ground that these are unconstitutional intrusions of the president's war powers.

And we also saw this during the Obama administration when he ordered a military intervention in Libya without asking for congressional approval.

And that lasted around eight months after.

And the argument was that the military presence didn't fall under this resolution.

So we see how President Trump is saying that the opposition leader, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, isn't ready to be the leader of Venezuela.

He's working with the current regime of Maduro.

What does this say to you about the intentions of the Trump administration?

And also given that we're now hearing these remarks about him wanting to take over Denmark as well, totally taking the coalition of the willing in Paris off track.

But now talking about Denmark, what does this say to you about the direction of travel for Donald Trump?

Yes, the after the toppling of Maduro, ultimately there has been no assurances that the United States was going to stop at Venezuela.

And there has been a renewed push by Trump and his top administration officials that the United States needs Greenland from the standpoint of national security.

And we heard late last night Stephen Miller, he is a top aide of President Trump who has been a powerful behind the scenes player when it comes to U.S.

And he basically said that Denmark and its European allies do not have the military force to prevent the United States from taking over the island of Greenland.

And he asserted that nobody is going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland.

But this is this rhetoric is not new for the Trump administration.

And it dates back to 2019 during the first term in office and since the start of his second term, since his inauguration in January of 2025.

And it been the formal position of Team Trump that Greenland should be a part of the United States in order for the United States to secure the Arctic region and to defend and protect Naito.

So President Trump says that this is still on the White House's agenda.

Tanya Neuri, reporter for the Military Times, thank you for joining us on our regular US Politics series this hour.