SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"Today’s meeting is meant to ensure the future of Venezuela is being shaped in a way that maximizes Big Oil profits and Trump’s power."
US President Donald Trump is set to meet at the White House on Friday afternoon with executives from some of the world's largest fossil fuel companies to discuss the future of Venezuela's oil infrastructure, a gathering that critics said throws into stark relief the true aims of the administration's military assault on a sovereign nation and abduction of its president.
The meeting, scheduled for 2 pm ET, will come after Trump declared on social media early Friday that "at least 100 Billion Dollars will be invested by BIG OIL," an industry that donated heavily to the president's 2024 campaign and inaugural fund. Attendees of Friday's White House meeting will reportedly include the CEOs of Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Halliburton, and Shell.
Harold Hamm, the founder of Continental Resources and major Trump donor, is also expected to attend. Hamm organized the now-infamous 2024 event where Trump asked oil executives for $1 billion in campaign donations in exchange for industry-friendly policies.
“American fossil fuel companies who’ve bought access to the Trump administration stand to benefit most from Trump’s illegal acts of aggression in Venezuela," Allie Rosenbluth, US program manager at Oil Change International, said in a statement ahead of Friday's gathering.
"Today’s meeting is meant to ensure the future of Venezuela is being shaped in a way that maximizes Big Oil profits and Trump’s power," said Rosenbluth. "Trump’s aggression in Venezuela is leading us to a hotter, more polluted, and more dangerous world—all to enrich himself and his fossil fuel donors. Today’s meeting is proof of that. To protect our communities from climate disasters and more wars for oil, we need to reject extractive energy models and build democratic systems that prioritize community health and safety."
Despite Trump's lofty promises and suggestion of taxpayer reimbursement, major US oil companies have yet to make any concrete investment pledges related to Venezuela's oil infrastructure.
Earlier this week, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright said the Trump administration intends to manage Venezuela oil sales and revenue indefinitely. On Tuesday, Trump proclaimed that he himself would control the proceeds from the sale of Venezuelan oil.
While Venezuela's known oil reserves are the largest in the world, some leading oil executives have "privately expressed reservations about committing the kind of money it would take to meaningfully boost Venezuelan oil production," the New York Times reported Friday.
"Some oil companies have discussed the possibility of seeking some form of financial guarantee from the federal government before agreeing to establish or expand production in Venezuela," the Times added.
"Along with blocking further military action against Venezuela, Congress must act to ensure US taxpayers don’t subsidize Big Oil’s exploitation of Venezuela’s oil resources.”
The watchdog group Public Citizen noted in a report released Thursday that "Big Oil companies have a long history of demanding that taxpayers shoulder their risks, even when they choose to operate in politically volatile jurisdictions."
"They rake in billions in profit exploiting the natural resources from impoverished nations, then demand taxpayer compensation if those nations require them to clean up their pollution or if affected communities convince their governments to halt harmful projects," the group observed. "And so it seems likely that these companies are going to require their investments in Venezuela to have some sort of 'guarantees and conditions'—that’s the exact phrase [US Secretary of State] Marco Rubio used on 'Face the Nation' on Monday."
Robert Weissman, Public Citizen's co-president, said in a statement that "the Trump administration’s shocking actions to use force to exploit Venezuela’s oil resources echo the imperial arrogance of the United States after the invasion of Iraq and a century of military intervention in Central and South America."
"Along with blocking further military action against Venezuela," said Weissman, "Congress must act to ensure US taxpayers don’t subsidize Big Oil’s exploitation of Venezuela’s oil resources.”
"Complicity, tacit agreement, appeasement, silence: these have a cost."
Amnesty International Secretary General Agnes Callamard expressed agreement Thursday that the US under President Donald Trump is tearing down world order, while also pointing the finger at other major Western powers for being part of the problem.
In a post on X, Callamard reacted to a warning delivered by German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier that the Trump administration was undermining systems developed decades ago with the help of the US to ensure greater international stability.
Callamard agreed with Steinmeier's basic argument, but added that Germany has not been an innocent bystander.
"The US is destroying world order," wrote the Amnesty International chief. "And so did Israel for the last two years. With Germany support."
She then accused Germany and other US allies of ignoring past US violations of international law and only getting upset now that it's come back to bite them.
"German and other European leaders cannot suddenly discover that the rule-based order is on its knee when they have governed over its demise for the last two years," she wrote. "Complicity, tacit agreement, appeasement, silence: these have a cost. A high cost. And you/we will all end up paying for it."
Steinmeier's remarks came in response to increased US aggression against both Latin America, where Trump ordered the invasion of Venezuela and the abduction of President Nicolás Maduro, and Europe, where Trump has once again stated his desire to seize Greenland from Denmark.
"Then there is the breakdown of values by our most important partner, the USA, which helped build this world order," the German president said. "It is about preventing the world from turning into a den of robbers, where the most unscrupulous take whatever they want, where regions or entire countries are treated as the property of a few great powers."
Truly extraordinary language by German President Steinmeier: pic.twitter.com/povGBrPmr9
He says the US's values are "broken", that they're changing the world "into a den of thieves in which the most unscrupulous take what they want," and treat "whole countries" as their "property".…
— Arnaud Bertrand (@RnaudBertrand) January 9, 2026
Top Trump aide Stephen Miller earlier in the week explicitly advocated returning to an era in which great military powers are free to take whatever they want from weaker powers.
"The United States is using its military to secure our interests unapologetically in our hemisphere,” Miller said during an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper. “We’re a superpower and under President Trump we are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower. It is absurd that we would allow a nation in our backyard to become the supplier of resources to our adversaries but not to us.”
Critics pointed out that Trump has often endorsed violence against protesters when they opposed him.
President Donald Trump doubled down on his threats to attack Iran on Thursday in response to its government's increasingly violent crackdown on ongoing protests.
"If they start killing people, which they tend to do during their riots—they have lots of riots—if they do it, we're going to hit them very hard," he said.
Addressing the Iranian people, he added: "You must stand up for your right to freedom. There is nothing like freedom. You are a brave people. It’s a shame what’s happening to your country."
The Norway-based Iran Human Rights (IHR) reported on Thursday that Iranian security forces have killed at least 45 protesters since demonstrations against the regime began in late December. Wednesday was the bloodiest day yet, with 13 people reportedly killed.
On Thursday, Iranian authorities shut down internet access for the population, which has limited the flow of information in and out of the country.
The protests kicked off in response to the sudden collapse in the value of Iran's currency, the rial, which exacerbated the country's already spiraling cost-of-living crisis, heightening inflation and putting many basic goods out of reach for many Iranians.
This economic crisis has been shifted into hyperdrive since Trump returned to office last year and re-implemented his “maximum pressure” strategy against Iran, including more severe economic sanctions and a 12-day war in June during which the US struck several Iranian nuclear sites. Over the past year, the average cost of food has increased by 70%, while the cost of medicine has increased by 50%.
The rial has lost 95% of its value since 2018, when Trump withdrew the US from the nuclear agreement with Iran, which included sanctions relief.
Last Friday, just one day before he bombed Venezuela as part of an operation to overthrow its leader Nicolás Maduro and seize the nation's oil reserves, Trump wrote on Truth Social that "if Iran shoots and violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue. We are locked and loaded and ready to go."
On Tuesday, US Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), a leading proponent of regime change, warned Iran's leaders that "if you keep killing your people who are demanding a better life—Donald J. Trump is going to kill you." Just days before, Graham said that Iran's "weakened" state was thanks in part to Trump's efforts to "economically isolate" the country.
Iran has blamed the unrest on "interference in Iran’s internal affairs” by the United States. The nation's president, Masoud Pezeshkian, has urged authorities to exhibit the “utmost restraint” in handling protesters. But earlier this week, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini said "rioters" must be "put in their place," while a top judge accused demonstrators of being agents of the US and Israel.
The latest swell of protests began after Reza Pahlavi, the former crown prince and son of Iran's former US-backed shah, called for demonstrators to take to the streets. On Thursday, Pahlavi, who has lived most of his life in the US after the royal family was run out of Iran during the 1979 revolution, met with Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Isaac Herzog.
Critics pointed out that Trump has often endorsed violence against protesters when they opposed him. Just a day before he issued his latest threat, he defended a federal immigration agent who fatally shot an unarmed mother in Minneapolis, while members of his administration falsely described her as a "domestic terrorist."
He has previously advocated for the US military to be deployed to use force against protesters and threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to quell peaceful protests, including the No Kings demonstrators who mobilized nationwide in October.
"With this historic, bipartisan vote to prevent further war in Venezuela, Congress has begun the long-overdue work of reasserting its constitutional role in decisions of war and peace," said one observer.
Amid President Donald Trump's admission that his intervention in Venezuela could last years, US senators voted Thursday to advance legislation aimed at blocking the president's use of military forces against the oil-rich South American nation.
Senators voted 52-47 to advance a war powers resolution introduced last month by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) "to block the use of the US armed forces to engage in hostilities within or against Venezuela unless authorized by Congress" as required by the 1973 War Powers Act.
The Senate will now continue debating the measure, which, if passed by both the upper chamber and the House of Representatives, would be subject to a likely veto by Trump—who has sunk two previous war powers resolutions unrelated to Venezuela.
In addition to Paul, four other GOP senators voted to advance the resolution: Susan Collins of Maine, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Todd Young of Indiana. While lawmakers often assent during the procedural phase, only to cast ballots against legislation during final votes, at least one of the GOP senators signaled they will vote the same as they did Thursday.
"While I support the operation to seize [Venezuelan President] Nicolás Maduro, which was extraordinary in its precision and complexity, I do not support committing additional US forces or entering into any long-term military involvement in Venezuela or Greenland without specific congressional authorization," Collins said in a statement, referring to Trump's threats to acquire the Danish territory by force if he deems it necessary. Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) this week introduced a bill that would ban the president from any such action.
"I believe invoking the War Powers Act at this moment is necessary, given the president’s comments about the possibility of ‘boots on the ground’ and a sustained engagement ‘running’ Venezuela, with which I do not agree," added Collins, who is facing a serious challenge for her Senate seat from candidates including former Maine Gov. Janet Mills and progressive Graham Platner, both Democrats who oppose US military action in Venezuela.
At the time of bipartisan war powers resolution's introduction last month, Trump had not yet attacked Venezuelan territory, although he had threatened to do so, deployed warships and thousands of US troops to the region, authorized covert CIA action to topple Maduro, and ordered the bombing of boats the administration claimed—without evidence—were smuggling drugs in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean.
However, Trump dramatically escalated US intervention in Venezuela, first with a December drone strike on a port facility and then by bombing and invading the country and abducting Maduro and his wife.
Asked during a Wednesday interview with the New York Times whether the US intervention in Venezuela would last a year, or longer, Trump replied, "I would say much longer," explaining that "we will rebuild" the country "in a very profitable way," including by "taking oil" from it.
The specter of yet another US "forever war" like the ongoing open-ended War on Terror that's left nearly 1 million people dead in at least seven countries since 2001 has prompted the introduction of several congressional war powers resolutions. So far, none have passed.
“If there was ever a moment for the Senate to find its voice, it is now," Schumer said on the Senate floor ahead of Thursday's vote. "Today, the Senate must assert the authority given to it on matters of war and peace. We must send Donald Trump a clear message on behalf of the American people: No more endless wars. Donald Trump’s ready for an endless war in Venezuela, and lord knows where else. The American people are not.”
Kaine made it clear during his pre-vote Senate floor remarks that the resolution does not challenge the "execution of a valid arrest warrant against Nicolás Maduro," which—despite experts concurring that the invasion and abduction were illegal—he called "good for America and good for Venezuela."
However, Kaine said, given that Trump's intervention "will go on for a long period of time," US troops "should not be used for hostilities in Venezuela without a vote of Congress as the Constitution requires.”
“No one has ever regretted a vote that just says, Mr. President, before you send our sons and daughters to war, come to Congress," he added.
However, such votes have very rarely succeeded in stopping any president from proceeding with military action.
In 2019 during Trump's first term, the House and Senate both passed a war powers resolution introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to cut off US military support for the Saudi-led coalition’s atrocity-laden war on Yemen. Trump vetoed the measure, and senators lacked the two-thirds majority needed to override his move.
The following year, both houses of Congress passed another war powers resolution—this one introduced in the Senate by Kaine—to terminate military action against Iran. But Trump again vetoed the legislation, and the Senate could not muster the two-thirds majority required for an override. After returning to office last year, Trump ordered sweeping attacks on Iran—and is threatening to do so again.
While Trump took to his Truth Social network to blast the five Republican senators who voted to advance the war powers resolution on Thursday and Vice President JD Vance called the War Powers Act "fundamentally a fake and unconstitutional law," progressive and anti-war advocacy groups hailed the advancement.
"With this historic, bipartisan vote to prevent further war in Venezuela, Congress has begun the long-overdue work of reasserting its constitutional role in decisions of war and peace," Demand Progress senior policy adviser Cavan Kharrazian said in a statement.
"We commend the leadership of Sens. Kaine and Paul in forcing this vote, and we thank Sens. Collins, Young, Hawley, and Murkowski for their principled votes," Kharrazian continued. "Senators should move quickly to adopt the resolution to prevent further unauthorized military escalation and the House should follow suit."
"Congress should also make clear, using the full force of the law, that no president has the authority to unilaterally launch hostilities anywhere in the world," he added, "whether in Venezuela or against other countries the administration has openly threatened, including Cuba, Greenland, Colombia, and Iran.”
"The dam has broken." Afghanistan War Veteran Max Rose applauds the Senate’s bipartisan vote advancing the War Powers Resolution. He calls it a stunning rebuke of Trump’s unilateral wars, reminding the President that the military belongs to America, not him.
[image or embed]
— VoteVets (@votevets.org) January 8, 2026 at 9:05 AM
Jose Vasquez, executive director of Common Defense and an Army veteran, said, "The vote is a victory for the Constitution, the stability of the region, and for the veterans and military families who organized, spoke out, and refused to accept another reckless slide toward forever war."
"By drawing this vote, Congress sends an essential message that accountability still matters and that no one person or presidential administration can send Americans to war," he added. "Veterans will remain organized and vigilant, but today shows what is possible when Congress listens to the will of the people and leans toward peace rather than war."