I was woken in the middle of the night by a notification that the United States had taken military action in Caracas and removed President Maduro and his wife. I followed developments as they unfolded. What remains unclear are the details, and those details will be filtered through the mouth of a serial liar, so I am not anchoring this post on whatever version is being sold today. Except the important piece that the U.S. would be leading Venezuela. What the hell does that mean?
This is a 10,000 foot view. Not a tactical analysis. Not a defence of Maduro, who has been under indictment in the U.S. since 2020, as he is no democratic hero. This is about power, precedent, and what this moment represents. Because it is almost never just about the man being removed.
In any other version of the United States we once recognized, something like this would unfold in the Situation Room. Structured. Constrained. Informed by institutions that understood the weight of military force. Instead, this president is watching events unfold from Mar-a-Lago, like a television show (his words). Standing around him are people like Pete Hegseth, Marco Rubio and Stephen Miller. Not as restraints, not as dissenting voices but as loyal enablers.
There are boots on the ground, and that phrase matters deeply to me. Not just posturing or using sanctions. This is a deliberately planned military operation in the Western Hemisphere. That is not how power has traditionally been exercised in this hemisphere, and we should not pretend otherwise.
When it comes to oil, this is not speculation. Trump himself has said this is not just about regime change. Those are his words. So when we hear, again and again, that U.S. Gulf Coast refineries are retrofitted for heavy crude and therefore the United States must rely on Canada, that argument weakens considerably when another source of heavy crude is suddenly back in play.
There are other realities we cannot ignore. China and Russia are deeply invested in Venezuela. That may not concern Donald Trump but it concerns me. There is an elected opposition figure waiting in the wings. Whether that person can realistically assume power, under what conditions, and whether democracy can actually be restored through military force are all open questions. These are early hours. Nothing about this is settled.
Which raises the harder question that cannot be avoided. Even if democracy is the stated goal, is it the role of the United States to enter another sovereign country and decide the outcome by force. The international reaction so far has been mixed. That matters. There will be time to unpack that. This is not that post.
To Alberta separatists who believe their future aligns more naturally with the United States than with Canada, if that is still your position this morning, then we have nothing in common in our worldview. Disagreement is one thing. Willful alignment with an increasingly unrestrained power is another.
For Canada, this is not academic. I have a son serving in the Canadian Armed Forces. I come from a military family. When I talk about sovereignty, preparedness, and the need to take defence seriously, even when it costs money and makes people uncomfortable, I am not speaking hypothetically. Military actions like this do not remain contained. They ripple outward. They always do.
Which brings me back, once again, to Congress. This is where restraint, accountability, and legitimacy are supposed to live, or not live at all. No matter how this moment is ultimately defined, the response of the United States Congress may be one of the most consequential factors for the entire world. Speaker Mike Johnson and others like him, men who loudly claim Christian values, appear to serve only one master and that master was sitting at Mar-a-Lago, likely rewatching the same spectacle he watched last night.
Congress either asserts authority now, over all decisions, including military ones, or it confirms that it has surrendered that authority entirely. There is no meaningful middle ground left. Congress returns Monday, January 5. To the people of the United States this part is on you. Make your representatives accountable. Demand oversight, restraint, and that institutions function before they are hollowed out beyond repair. The consequences of failure will not stop at your borders.
I said I was not going to watch the press conference, and for the most part I haven’t. I have it on mute. I turned the volume up briefly, and what struck me immediately was not substance, but fatigue. A tired, familiar voice delivering the same well worn lines. I am not going to listen further before posting this, because there is nothing coming that will meaningfully change what matters here. The danger is not in what is said. It is in what is being done, and where accountability is failing.
And one more thing. Do not let this distract you from Epstein. Do not let it disappear from public view. Ask yourself whether creating a global spectacle might serve another purpose entirely. At this point, it would be naïve to assume distraction is not part of the strategy.
One final clarification. Going forward, I am going to stop using the word American to describe the citizens of the United States. Donald Trump treats “American” as if it belongs to him and extends over everything in the Americas, and I am not granting him that authority. We are all Americans in this hemisphere. They are citizens of the United States.
This morning, I looked out at a calm, frosty Alberta landscape. Everything looked unchanged, quiet and familiar. History has taught us that calm is not the same thing as security. Sometimes the world shifts while everything still looks exactly the same. And sometimes, that is when we should be paying the closest attention.
Nancy's Notes 