WASHINGTON — A grand jury in Washington refused Tuesday to indict Democratic lawmakers in connection with a video in which they urged U.S. military members to resist “illegal orders,” according to a person familiar with the matter.
The Justice Department opened an investigation into the video featuring Democratic Sens. Mark Kelly and Elissa Slotkin and four other Democratic lawmakers urging U.S. service members to follow established military protocols and reject orders they believe to be unlawful. All the lawmakers previously served in the military or at intelligence agencies.
Grand jurors in Washington declined to sign off on charges in the latest of a series of rebukes of prosecutors by citizens in the nation’s capital, according to the person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss the matter. It wasn’t immediately clear whether prosecutors had sought indictments against all six lawmakers or what charge or charges prosecutors attempted to bring.
Grand jury rejections are extraordinarily unusual, but have happened repeatedly in recent months in Washington as citizens who have heard the government’s evidence have come away underwhelmed in a number of cases. Prosecutors could try again to secure an indictment.
Spokespeople for the U.S. attorney’s office and the Justice Department didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday.
The FBI in November began contacting the lawmakers to schedule interviews, outreach that came against the backdrop of broader Justice Department efforts to punish political opponents of the president. President Trump and his aides labeled the lawmakers’ video as “seditious” — and Trump said on his social media account that the offense was “punishable by death.”
Besides Slotkin and Kelly, the other Democrats who appeared in the video include Reps. Jason Crow of Colorado, Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire and Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania.
Slotkin, a former CIA analyst who represents Michigan, said late Tuesday that she hopes this ends the Justice Department’s probe.
“Tonight we can score one for the Constitution, our freedom of speech, and the rule of law,” Slotkin said in a statement. “But today wasn’t just an embarrassing day for the Administration. It was another sad day for our country,” she said.
Kelly, a former Navy pilot who represents Arizona, called the attempt to bring charges an “outrageous abuse of power by Donald Trump and his lackies.”
“Donald Trump wants every American to be too scared to speak out against him,” Kelly said in a post on X. “The most patriotic thing any of us can do is not back down.”
In November, the Pentagon opened an investigation into Kelly, citing a federal law that allows retired service members to be recalled to active duty on orders of the defense secretary for possible court-martial or other punishment. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has censured Kelly for participating in the video and is trying to retroactively demote Kelly from his retired rank of captain.
The senator is suing Hegseth to block those proceedings, calling them an unconstitutional act of retribution. During a hearing last week, the judge appeared to be skeptical of key arguments that a government attorney made in defense of Kelly’s Jan. 5 censure by Hegseth.
California lawmakers are expressing concern about how the future of Warner Bros. Discovery could affect Hollywood’s workforce.
In an open letter addressed to Netflix Chief Executives Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters and Paramount Skydance Corporation CEO David Ellison, U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Glendale) call for the industry giants to make “concrete commitments to Californian and American workers.”
With all of these moving pieces, there’s a bipartisan fear among the nation’s lawmakers about how the acquisition could affect jobs in the U.S. entertainment industry . As stated in the letter, the industry “supports more than 680,000 jobs and contributes over $115 billion annually to the regional economy.”
Given the slowdown the industry has seen post-COVID and the growing number of international productions, Los Angeles film activity was down 13.2% from July through September 2025 when compared with the same period last year. This downward trend continues to build on the loss of 42,000 jobs in L.A. between 2022 and 2024.
Ellison and Sarandos have made arguments for why they believe their respective companies are best positioned to take over Warner Bros.
But each deal comes with major cuts. Paramount is projected to slash $6 billion in expenses over three years, and Netflix is projecting to cut $2 billion to $3 billion. Some analysts believe these cuts will have a significant effect on the workforce.
Previously, Ellison said, “We believe that what we are offering is better for Hollywood. It’s better for the customers and it’s pro-competitive.”
Sarandos is also quoted in the letter saying: “We think it’s great for consumers. We think it’s a great way to create and protect jobs in the entertainment industry.”
Earlier this week during a Senate subcommittee hearing, Sarandos said Netflix plans to increase its film and television production spending to $26 billion this year, with a majority of that happening in the U.S.
The lawmakers’ letter raises a series of questions surrounding the livelihood of creators, the use of AI and “concrete steps” about preserving jobs in L.A. Schiff and Friedman also offer the CEOs an opportunity to meet with them to discuss their answers.
In an effort to ensure “America continues to lead the world in the creative economy,” the letter said that Congress is currently working on bipartisan legislation that would establish a federal film tax incentive. It will be modeled after state programs in California, Louisiana and Georgia.
“We view this as a tool to not just protect but encourage more domestic filming and sustainable job creation on American soil,” wrote the lawmakers.
As film and television post-production work has increasingly left California, workers are pushing for a new standalone tax credit focused on their industry.
That effort got a major boost Wednesday night when a representative for Assemblymember Nick Schultz (D-Burbank) said the lawmaker would take up the bill.
The news was greeted by cheers and applause from an assembled crowd of more than 100 people who attended a town hall meeting at Burbank’s Evergreen Studios.
“As big of a victory as this is, because it means we’re in the game, this is just the beginning,” Marielle Abaunza, president of the California Post Alliance trade group, a newly formed trade group representing post-production workers, said during the meeting.
The state’s post-production industry — which includes workers in fields like sound and picture editing, music, composition and visual effects — has been hit hard by the overall flight of film and TV work out of California and to other states and countries. Though post-production workers aren’t as visible, they play a crucial role in delivering a polished final product to TV, film and music audiences.
Last year, lawmakers boosted the annual amount allocated to the state’s film and TV tax credit program and expanded the criteria for eligible projects in an attempt to lure production back to California. So far, more than 100 film and TV projects have been awarded tax credits under the revamped program.
But post-production workers say the incentive program doesn’t do enough to retain jobs in California because it only covers their work if 75% of filming or overall budget is spent in the state. The new California Post Alliance is advocating for an incentive that would cover post-production jobs in-state, even if principal photography films elsewhere or the project did not otherwise qualify for the state’s production incentive.
Schultz said he is backing the proposed legislation because of the effect on workers in his district over the last decade.
“We are competing with other states and foreign countries for post production jobs, which is causing unprecedented threats to our workforce and to future generations of entertainment industry workers,” he said in a statement Thursday.
During the 1 1/2 hour meeting, industry speakers pointed to other states and countries, including many in Europe, with specific post-production incentives that have lured work away from the Golden State. By 2024, post-production employment in California dropped 11.2%, compared with 2010, according to a presentation from Tim Belcher, managing director at post-production company Light Iron.
“We’re all an integrated ecosystem, and losses in one affect losses in the other,” he said during the meeting. “And when post[-production] leaves California, we are all affected.”
WASHINGTON — Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan is refusing to voluntarily comply with a Justice Department investigation into a video she organized urging U.S. military members to resist “illegal orders” — escalating a dispute that President Trump has publicly pushed.
In letters first obtained by the Associated Press, Slotkin’s lawyer informed U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro that the senator would not agree to a voluntary interview about the video. Slotkin’s legal team also requested that Pirro preserve all documents related to the matter for “anticipated litigation.”
Slotkin’s lawyer separately wrote to Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi, declining to sit for an FBI interview about the video and urging her to immediately terminate any inquiry.
The refusal marks a potential turning point in the standoff, shifting the burden onto the Justice Department to decide whether it will escalate an investigation into sitting members of Congress or retreat from an inquiry now being openly challenged.
“I did this to go on offense,” Slotkin said in an interview Wednesday. “And to put them in a position where they’re tap dancing. To put them in a position where they have to own their choices of using a U.S. attorney’s office to come after a senator.”
‘It’s not gonna stop unless I fight back’
Last November, Slotkin joined five other Democratic lawmakers — all of whom previously served in the military or at intelligence agencies — in posting a 90-second video urging U.S. service members to follow established military protocols and reject orders they believe to be unlawful.
The lawmakers said Trump’s Republican administration was “pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens” and called on troops to “stand up for our laws.”
The video sparked a firestorm in Republican circles and soon drew the attention of Trump, who accused the lawmakers of sedition and said their actions were “punishable by death.”
The Pentagon later announced it had opened an investigation into Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, a former Navy pilot who appeared in the video. The FBI then contacted the lawmakers seeking interviews, signaling a broader Justice Department inquiry.
Slotkin said multiple legal advisers initially urged caution.
“Maybe if you keep quiet, this will all go away over Christmas,” Slotkin said she was told.
But in January, the matter flared again, with the lawmakers saying they were contacted by the U.S. attorney’s office for the District of Columbia.
Meanwhile, security threats mounted. Slotkin said her farm in Michigan received a bomb threat, her brother was assigned a police detail due to threats and her parents were swatted in the middle of the night.
Her father, who died in January after a long battle with cancer, “could barely walk and he’s dealing with the cops in his home,” she said.
Slotkin said a “switch went off” in her and she became angry: “And I said, ‘It’s not gonna stop unless I fight back.’”
Democratic senators draw a line
The requests from the FBI and the Justice Department have been voluntary. Slotkin said that her legal team had communicated with prosecutors but that officials “keep asking for a personal interview.”
Slotkin’s lawyer, Preet Bharara, in the letter to Pirro declined the interview request and asked that she “immediately terminate any open investigation and cease any further inquiry concerning the video.” In the other letter, Bharara urged Bondi to use her authority to direct Pirro to close the inquiry.
Bharara wrote that Slotkin’s constitutional rights had been infringed and said litigation is being considered.
“All options are most definitely on the table,” Slotkin said. Asked whether she would comply with a subpoena, she paused before responding: “I’d take a hard look at it.”
Bharara, who’s representing Slotkin in the case, is a former U.S. attorney in New York who was fired by Trump in 2017 during his first administration. He’s also representing Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California in a separate case involving the Justice Department.
Kelly has similarly pushed back, suing the Pentagon last month over attempts to punish him for the video. On Tuesday, a federal judge said that he knows of no U.S. Supreme Court precedent to justify the Pentagon’s censuring of Kelly as he weighed whether to intervene.
Slotkin said she’s in contact with the other lawmakers who appeared in the video, but she wouldn’t say what their plans were in the investigations.
A rising profile
Trump has frequently and consistently targeted his political opponents. In some cases, those attacks have had the unintended consequence of elevating their national standing.
In Kelly’s case, he raised more than $12.5 million in the final months of 2025 following the “illegal orders” video controversy, according to campaign finance filings.
Slotkin, like Kelly, has been mentioned among Democrats who could emerge as presidential contenders in 2028.
She previously represented one of the nation’s most competitive House districts before winning a Senate seat in Michigan in 2024, even as Trump carried the state.
Slotkin delivered the Democratic response to Trump’s address to Congress last year and has since urged her party to confront him more aggressively, saying Democrats had lost their “alpha energy” and calling on them to “go nuclear” against Trump’s redistricting push.
“If I’m encouraging other people to take risk, how can I not then accept risk myself?” Slotkin said. “I think you’ve got to show people that we’re not going to lay down and take it.”
The statements are objectively true: The Timbisha Shoshone have lived in what’s now popularly known as Death Valley for thousands of years. And they still live there, in a small village inside the national park that has about 30 full-time inhabitants.
In 2000, Congress officially recognized these two facts in the text of the hard-fought Homeland Act, which transferred nearly 7,800 acres of land, including the village site, back to the Timbisha Shoshone.
You’re reading Boiling Point
The L.A. Times climate team gets you up to speed on climate change, energy and the environment. Sign up to get it in your inbox every week.
But federal officials have now taken issue with those seemingly innocuous sentences, according to Mandi Campbell, tribal historic preservation officer for the Timbisha Shoshone and a resident of the village.
The rationale? Orders from President Trump and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum directing the National Park Service to review interpretive materials for content that the administration feels “inappropriately disparages Americans.”
Only certain types of Americans, as it turns out: The executive order also has been cited in a lawsuit by the city of Philadelphia as the presumptive reason the NPS removed an exhibit on enslaved people from Independence National Historical Park.
Participants take time out for a photo during a march organized by the Timbisha Shoshone to mark the 25th anniversary of the Homeland Act.
(Kim Stringfellow)
And it’s prompted Lowell National Historical Park in Massachusetts to stop showing films about women and immigrant textile mill workers, according to the New York Times, which also reported that plaques referencing climate change have been removed from Muir Woods National Monument in California and Fort Sumter and Fort Moultrie National Historical Park in South Carolina.
On top of that, Trump officials recently ordered the removal or editing of signs and other materials in at least 17 national parks in Arizona, Texas, Colorado, Utah, Montana and Wyoming, The Washington Post reports.
Back to Death Valley — a name that, by the way, members of the Timbisha Shoshone have never liked. Campbell told me that a celebration of the Homeland Act’s 25th anniversary that took place Friday at the national park’s Furnace Creek Visitor Center was supposed to include the unveiling of updates to its interpretive exhibit. The tribe had planned to place in a display case earrings and a medallion that members once gifted to former park Superintendent J.T. Reynolds to mark the passage of the act, along with some descriptive language, she said.
Ahead of the event, the Park Service submitted the additions to its parent agency, the Interior Department, for review. Campbell said that agency officials replied that not only could the new exhibit not include the new phrases “these are our homelands” or “we are still here,” but that similar language that’s been on display since 2012 would also be placed under review.
Interior Department spokesperson Elizabeth Peace said this is not true. “The Department has a long-standing history of working closely with tribal partners as part of exhibit development and review, and the park was never told they could not use that specific language or phrases,” she wrote in an email.
Peace went on to explain that although the new exhibit is under review pursuant to the executive and secretarial orders — both titled “restoring truth and sanity to American history” — the department hasn’t made any final decisions.
The review, according to Peace, is meant to ensure that parks tell “the full and accurate story of American history,” which includes addressing enslaved and Indigenous people, “informed by current scholarship and expert review, not through a narrow ideological lens.”
So, the 25th anniversary celebration went ahead without acknowledging the ongoing debate about the new exhibit.
There was a march from the village to the visitor center in which tribal members walked behind a banner that read, “We are still here,” which, Campbell said, was meant to echo a protest staged on Memorial Day in 1996 in which the Timbisha Shoshone demanded the restoration of their homelands after negotiations with the federal government broke down. That rally was widely credited with restarting the talks that eventually led to the passage of the Homeland Act.
Three decades later, the struggle continues. “Why do we still have to fight to be heard?” Campbell wondered earlier this week. “We weren’t even in history books. And we still can‘t tell our story. When do we get our chance?”
Despite the recent controversy, the tribe has a good relationship with the Death Valley-based NPS officials, Campbell said, and she’s confident they’ll be able to work through whatever happens next together.
After Friday’s march, tribal council members and park officials gave a series of speeches at the visitor center saluting their strong partnership and all the work that it’s taken to get to this point. Then they took pictures and ate cake.
More recent land news
If you’re a regular reader of this newsletter, you probably are aware of how lawmakers have been using the Congressional Review Act, which enables Congress to overturn recent federal rules with a majority vote, to revoke specific Bureau of Land Management plans that limit mining and drilling in specific places. This was unprecedented until last year but has since been used to throw out BLM plans in Alaska, Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming.
Now, a decision by the Government Accountability Office has cleared the way for Congress to throw out the BLM plan for Utah’s Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, which protects the land from mineral extraction, limits grazing and prioritizes conservation. Experts expect Republican Rep. Celeste Maloy or another Utah member of Congress to introduce a bill to do so this year, according to Caroline Llanes of Rocky Mountain Community Radio. If it passes, it would mark the first time the act has been used to roll back protections in a national monument.
Four former U.S. Forest Service chiefs are speaking out against the agency’s move to repeal the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The 2001 rule protecting 58 million acres of national forests from road building and logging was supported by both political parties, and is needed to protect sensitive wildlife and maintain clean drinking water, argues an op-ed published in the Hill.
The Forest Service has revised its oil and gas leasing rules to “streamline” the permitting process by replacing parcel-by-parcel environmental reviews with a broader review that can sometimes cover millions of acres, reports Jake Bolster of Inside Climate News. Environmental groups told Bolster that the move will increase the likelihood that the agency misses sensitive habitat when deciding where to allow drilling.
Some environmental advocates are concerned about a new order from Interior Secretary Burgum that seeks to expand hunting and fishing access on federal public lands. “It flips conservation on its head and treats wildlife protection as the exception,” said Michelle Lute, executive director of nonprofit Wildlife for All. Others say the directive is more of a statement of values than something that will result in drastic changes on the ground. “It’s a nice nod to the hunting and angling community that acknowledges ‘we know these areas mean a lot to you,’” said Ryan Callaghan, president and chief executive of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers.
A few last things in climate news
Much has been made of a record-setting rainy season that’s helped lift California out of drought. But an extraordinarily warm January has left the snowpack across the Sierra Nevada and much of the Western U.S. far smaller than usual, Times water and climate change reporter Ian James writes. That means more hard times for the snowmelt-fed Colorado River, which provides water for farms and cities across seven states.
Peninsular bighorn sheep seeking to migrate back and forth across the California-Mexico border, as they’ve long done, are now being hampered by razor wire installed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in the Jacumba Wilderness, according to our wildlife and outdoors reporter Lila Seidman. Similar scenarios are playing out across the Southwest, where the 1,954-mile border cuts through the habitat of more than 80 threatened and endangered species.
This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our Boiling Point podcast here.
California once had specialists dedicated to resolving conflict between people and wolves, mountains lions and coyotes. But after funding ran dry in 2024, the state let all but one of them go.
The move came as clashes between us and our wild neighbors are increasing, as climate change and sprawl drive us closer together.
Now, a coalition of wildlife advocates is calling for the state to bring back, expand and fund the coexistence program, at roughly $15 million annually.
Sen. Catherine Blakespear (D-Encinitas) will soon introduce legislation that would create the program, her office confirmed. Nonprofits Defenders of Wildlife and the National Wildlife Federation are co-sponsors.
You’re reading Boiling Point
The L.A. Times climate team gets you up to speed on climate change, energy and the environment. Sign up to get it in your inbox every week.
The money supporters want would be used to pay 50 to 60 staffers to focus on the Herculean task of balancing the needs of people and wildlife, as well as buy equipment like “unwelcome mats” to shock bears or fencing to protect alpacas from hungry lions.
Wildlife agencies acknowledge that education is key for coexistence, said Pamela Flick, California program director for Defenders of Wildlife, at a hearing Tuesday at the state Capitol dedicated to human-wildlife conflict. “But then staff time and resources don’t get allocated by agencies that are already chronically understaffed and underfunded.”
The hearing gave floor time to local law enforcement, representatives of affected regions and academics.
Since the funding expired, “I want to make it clear, the Department [of Fish and Wildlife] recognizes that we have potentially seen a gap in service, and folks have felt that,” Chad Dibble, deputy director of the department’s wildlife and fisheries division, said at the hearing.
Some aspects of the program live on — notably, a system that allows people to report run-ins with wildlife that may prompt the state to take action.
Both tragedies unfolded in rural Northern California, with the fatal lion mauling occurring in El Dorado County.
Assemblymember Heather Hadwick — a Republican who represents El Dorado, as well as Lake Tahoe, which is ground zero for bear problems — called conflicts with predators her district’s biggest issue. “We’re at a tipping point,” she said.
Along with El Dorado, Los Angeles County, at the opposite end of the rural-urban continuum, leads the state for the highest number of reported wildlife “incidents.” These range from just spotting an animal to witnessing property damage.
Debates over how to manage predators can be fierce, but beefing up the state’s ability to respond is uniting groups that are often at odds.
A coalition that includes ranchers, farmers and rural representatives supports bringing back the conflict program, and also wants $31 million to address the state’s expanding population of gray wolves.
Most of that money would go to compensate ranchers for cattle eaten by wolves and for guard dogs, scaring devices or other means to keep them away from livestock.
The wildlife advocates support funding wolf efforts, but believe ranchers should be compensated only if they’ve taken steps to ward off the predators.
Asked his thoughts on it at the hearing, Kirk Wilbur, vice president of government affairs for the California Cattlemen’s Assn., a trade group, called it “a complicated question.”
“Ranchers should be doing something in the realm of nonlethal deterrence, and they are, but we have to be careful to make sure that our nonlethal solutions are not overly prescriptive,” he said.
The elephant in the room: The state’s budget is strained, and many are clamoring for a piece of the pie.
More recent wildlife news
Twenty starving wild horses stranded in deep snow near Mammoth Lakes recently survived an emergency rescue by the Forest Service, I wrote last week. Several died, including one after the rescue, from starvation and exposure. Some, beyond saving, were euthanized.
For some, the Forest Service acted exceptionally, but others questioned the handling of the situation. It’s the latest controversy for these horses. Wildlife advocates have long opposed relocating a large portion of the herd, which the feds say is necessary to protect the landscape.
If you need a pick-me-up, take a gander at a video of an Austrian cow using a long brush to scratch herself. It’s not just adorable; as noted by the Washington Post’s Dino Grandoni, it’s the first documented case of a cow using a tool.
Need even more awww? Read about sea turtle Porkchop’s recovery journey at Long Beach’s aquarium. She had a flipper amputated and a fishing hook removed from her throat, and could return to the wild in a matter of weeks.
Coyote mating season is here and that means you are likely to see more of the animals in your neighborhood, per my colleague Karen Garcia.
A few last things in climate news
More than a year after the Palisades and Eaton wildfires, contamination remains a top concern. A state bill introduced this week aims to enforce science-based guidelines for testing and removing contamination in still-standing homes, schools and nearby soil, my colleagues Noah Haggerty and Tony Briscoe report.
Highway 1 through Big Sur (finally) fully reopened after a three-year closure from landslides. As fellow Times staffer Grace Toohey writes, the iconic route is expected to face more challenges from the effects of climate change: stronger storms, higher seas and more intense wildfires.
Per Inside Climate News’ Blanca Begert, the Bureau of Land Management has revived an effort to open more of California’s public lands to oil extraction. Will it be successful this time?
This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our Boiling Point podcast here.
WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Marco Rubio left the door open Wednesday to future U.S. military action in Venezuela, telling lawmakers that while the Trump administration does not anticipate further escalation, the president retains the authority to use force if Venezuela’s interim leadership or other American adversaries defy U.S. demands.
Rubio’s remarks came hours after President Trump deployed what he called a “massive armada” to pressure Iran back to the negotiating table over its nuclear weapons program, amid broader questions about how recent U.S. tensions with Denmark over Greenland are affecting American relations with NATO allies.
“The president never rules out his options as commander in chief to protect the national interest of the United States,” Rubio told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “I can tell you right now with full certainty, we are not postured to, nor do we intend or expect to take any military action in Venezuela at any time.”
The appearance marked Rubio’s first public testimony before a congressional panel since U.S. forces seized former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and brought him to New York to face narco-trafficking charges nearly a month ago. Rubio was pressed by Democratic lawmakers over congressional war powers and whether the operation had meaningfully advanced democracy in Venezuela.
“We’ve traded one dictator for another. All the same people are running the country,” said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.). Acting President Delcy Rodríguez “has taken no steps to diminish Iran, China or Russia’s considerable influence in Venezuela.”
Rodríguez, who formerly served as Maduro’s vice president, has committed to opening Venezuela’s energy sector to American companies, providing preferential access to production and using revenues to purchase American goods, according to Rubio’s testimony.
But questions remain about Rodríguez’s own alleged ties to trafficking networks. The Associated Press reported that she has been on the DEA’s radar for years for suspected involvement in drug and gold smuggling, though no public criminal charges have been filed.
And despite Trump’s warning that Rodríguez would “pay a very big price” if she does not cooperate, she has pushed back in public against U.S. pressure over trade policy.
“We have the right to have diplomatic relations with China, with Russia, with Iran, with Cuba, with all the peoples of the world. Also with the United States. We are a sovereign nation,” Rodríguez said earlier this month.
Venezuela is among the largest recipients of Chinese loans globally, with more than $100 billion committed over recent decades. Much of that debt has been repaid through discounted oil shipments under an oil-for-loans framework, financing Chinese-backed infrastructure projects and helping stabilize successive Venezuelan governments.
U.S. military leaders have warned Congress about Iran’s growing strategic presence in the hemisphere, including concerns over ballistic missile capabilities and the supply of attack and surveillance drones to Venezuela.
“If an Iranian drone factory pops up and threatens our forces in the region,” Rubio said, “the president retains the option to eliminate that.”
Democrats also argued that the administration’s broader foreign policy is undercutting U.S. economic strength and alliances, particularly in competition with China.
Despite Trump’s tariff campaign, China posted a record global trade surplus in 2025, lawmakers noted, while estimates show U.S. manufacturing employment has declined by tens of thousands of jobs since the tariffs took effect.
Senators pushed back on the State Department’s assertion that U.S. policy has unified allies against China, arguing instead that tariffs and recent military escalations involving Greenland, Iran and Venezuela have strained relations with key partners. They pointed to Canada as an example, noting that Ottawa recently reached a trade deal with China amid concerns about the reliability of the United States as a partner.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a Republican dissenter on Venezuela, rejected the Trump administration’s framing of Maduro’s capture as a law enforcement operation rather than an act of war.
He pressed Rubio on congressional authorization.
“If we said that a foreign country invaded our capital, bombed all our air defense — which would be an extensive bombing campaign, and it was — removed our president, and then blockaded the country, we would think it was an act of war,” Paul said as he left the hearing.
Congressional Republicans voted to dismiss a war powers resolution earlier this month that would have limited Trump’s ability to conduct further attacks on Venezuela after two GOP senators reversed course on supporting the legislation.
They did so based on informal assurances from the administration that it would consult members of Congress before taking military action.
“I was a big fan of [congressional] consultation when I was sitting over there,” Rubio said, joking about his tenure as a senator on the committee. “Now, you know, it’s a different job, different time.”
The War Powers Act dictates how the executive must manage military operations, including that the administration must notify Congress within 48 hours of a military operation.
“And if it’s going to last longer than 60 days, we have to come to Congress with it. We don’t anticipate either of these things having to happen,” Rubio said.
He added that the administration’s end goal is “a friendly, stable, prosperous Venezuela,” and cautioned that free and fair elections would take time as the administration works with Rodríguez to stabilize the country.
“You can have elections all day, but if the opposition has no access to the media … those aren’t free and fair elections,” Rubio said. “There’s a percentage of the Venezuelan population … that may not have liked Maduro, but are still committed to Chavista ideology. They’ll be represented in that platform as well.”
Rubio fell short of providing concrete timelines, prompting skepticism from lawmakers who cited ongoing reports that political prisoners remain jailed and that opposition figures such as Edmundo González Urrutia and María Corina Machado would still be blocked from seeking office. He will meet with Machado this week to discuss her role in the ongoing regime change.
“I’ve known Maria Corina for probably 12 or 13 years,” Rubio said. “I’ve dealt with her probably more than anybody.”
But the reality on the ground remains difficult, he said, adding the administration has hedged its bets on the existing Venezuelan government to comply with U.S. efforts to stabilize the economy and weed out political violence before fair elections can be held.
“The people that control the guns and the institutions of government there are in the hands of this regime,” Rubio said.
Jan. 28 (UPI) — A French court sentenced former Sen. Joel Guerriau to four years in prison after finding him guilty of drugging a minister of the French parliament in November 2023.
Guerrieau, 68, will spend 18 months of his 48-month prison sentence behind bars, but he has appealed the decision and would not be imprisoned if the appellate court overturns his conviction.
The court also ordered him to pay MP Sandrine Josso, 50, the equivalent of $5,975 in the Tuesday ruling.
Guerriau formerly represented the Loire-Atlantique region in western France and was found guilty of spiking a drink with ecstasy and serving it to Josso in November 2023.
Prosecutors accused him of inviting Josso to his flat in Paris and drugging her with the intent of sexually assaulting her, but reports do not indicate whether a sexual assault is alleged in the matter.
Guerriau admitted he spiked her drink but said it was an accident and that he did not intend to commit sexual assault.
Following Tuesday’s verdict, Josso told media that she “had gone to visit a friend” on the night that she was drugged.
Instead of visiting a friend, she said, “I discovered an aggressor,” adding that “he looked at me insistently” and that she never had seen him like that.
“I didn’t want to show him my weakness because I was worried that if I told him I wasn’t feeling well, he would have forced me to lie down,” Josso said.
She left Guerriau’s flat and, with the help of a friend, went to a hospital, which determined her blood contained three times the normal dosage of a recreational MDMA.
Guerriau claimed he had been depressed and was using MDMA to treat it and meant to consume the spiked drink himself.
Instead of drinking it, he told the court that he accidentally served it to Josso, adding that he feels sorry for her.
“I am disgusted with myself, with my recklessness and my stupidity,” Guerriau told the court.
He said not enough is done to discuss “the effects of these drugs enough,” adding that he wants to “speak out on the dangers of these products.”
Guerriau was a member of France’s center-right Horizons Party and was suspended after being charged. He resigned is Senate seat in October.
Josso is a member of France’s center-right MoDem Party and has become a vocal opponent of “chemical submission” after her encounter with Guerriau.
Plane vanished in remote jungle near eastern border with Venezuela; search hindered by dense terrain and adverse weather.
Published On 28 Jan 202628 Jan 2026
Share
Bogota, Colombia – Search and rescue teams in Colombia are searching for a passenger plane carrying 15 passengers that went missing near the eastern border with Venezuela.
Two crew members were among the passengers, which included a Colombian congressional representative and a candidate running in the upcoming elections, according to local officials and media reports.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
It remains unclear what caused the disappearance, but local Air Traffic Control sources say the plane’s flight history shows a sudden altitude drop 11 minutes before it was expected to land in Ocana.
The flight, operated by government-run commercial airline Satena, was en route from Cucuta to Ocana, two cities in the North Santander department bordering Venezuela, when it left radar coverage.
“The Accident Investigation Directorate of @AerocivilCol reports that it is gathering information regarding the loss of communication from aircraft HK4709, which was flying the Cucuta-Ocaña route with 13 passengers and 2 crew members,” wrote Maria Fernanda Rojas, Colombia’s minister of transport, in a post on X.
“The corresponding protocols have been activated, and we have already initiated PMU,” added Rojas, referring to the “Unified Command Post” set up to respond to emergencies.
The plane disappeared in a remote region characterised by dense jungle, complicating search-and-rescue efforts.
Among the passengers was Diogenes Quintero, a lower house lawmaker who holds a seat specially reserved for conflict victims. He was accompanied by Carlos Salcedo Salazar, a candidate running for the same seat.
A local government official, who requested anonymity since they were not authorised to speak to the press, told Al Jazeera that authorities suspected that the plane had been affected by adverse weather conditions.
Drug trade
The Catatumbo region is also an active conflict zone and is home to the world’s largest cultivations of coca, the plant which produces the raw ingredient used to make cocaine.
Both the drug trade and the region’s strategic location on the Venezuelan border have made it a historic hotbed for armed conflict between rebel groups.
In January last year, violent clashes between the National Liberation Army (ELN) and Frente 33, a dissident group of the demobilised FARC fighters, displaced more than 50,000 people in the region.
The route from Cucuta to Ocana began operating only in June last year, marking an important milestone for a region that has historically had poor road connections to major cities.
