Trump's Venezuela Escalation Could Destroy MAGA, Warns Rand Paul
Blowing up boats won’t stop drugs—but it could sink Trump.
Since September, President Donald Trump has ordered 21 strikes on boats in the Caribbean and Pacific oceans, killing 83 people. He says the boats were carrying dangerous narcotics to the United States (a claim that has been disproved). Now, the president appears to be ramping up his military escalation against Venezuela's socialist regime, which, like the drug boat strikes, he's doing without congressional authorization. Republicans in Congress have thus far been silent about Trump's use of force, except for Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.), who delivered a fiery rebuke of the president's strikes on the Senate floor last month.
During a recent interview with Reason's Nick Gillespie, Paul pointed out that "when the coast guard boards vessels off of Miami or off of San Diego, one in four vessels they board does not have drugs on board, so their error rate is about 25 percent." The moral and strategic implications of this hit rate are enormous; if the president can incinerate unknown civilians at sea without evidence of wrongdoing, due process, or congressional approval, what's to stop the president from using the military to sanction other murders abroad under the guise of national security?
These strikes, as well as Trump's other actions against Venezuela and involvement in the Ukraine war, also have political implications, according to Paul. "If he invades Venezuela, or if he approves significant arms sales, which are really gifts to Ukraine, or more welfare to Ukraine, if he does either of those, the rift with Marjorie Green will pale in comparison to what happens to his movement," Paul said. "If he invades Venezuela or gives more money to Ukraine, his movement will dissolve."
Sen. @RandPaul has a foreign policy warning for Donald Trump: "If he invades Venezuela or gives more money to Ukraine, his movement will dissolve," he says on The Reason Interview podcast with @nickgillespie. pic.twitter.com/QwqEi17wtL
— reason (@reason) November 20, 2025
Trump's MAGA base has been in flux in recent weeks. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green (R–Ga.), who was once one of the president's strongest supporters, has become one of his loudest critics. In October, she came out against Trump's immigration and trade policies and has since been a regular thorn in the side of the administration. Her antics have led Trump to pull his support from her reelection campaign. Sen. Ted Cruz (R–Texas), meanwhile, has begun to lay the groundwork for a 2028 presidential run by distancing himself from Trump-aligned firebrands like Tucker Carlson and Vice President J.D. Vance.
These defections serve as a vivid example of how fractured the MAGA coalition has become. With many of its core voters despising neoconservative foreign policy and believing Trump's 2016 message that America should stop policing the world, a U.S. conflict in Venezuela would make the already-bad MAGA blowup even worse. It would also combine all the worst elements of past failures: shaky intelligence, freelance presidential action, and a war of choice with no clear American interest.
Paul's warning is blunt: a Venezuela intervention wouldn't just be disastrous abroad—it could politically detonate the MAGA movement itself. For a president who ran on ending "the forever wars," starting a new one remains the fastest way to break the coalition that got him elected.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
No drug should be illegal. End the war on drugs and end all govt funding of welfare, education, health insurance, and supplemental food. If junkies want their lives jenky, let them be but leave the taxpayer out of it.
Arrest rhe violent criminal jenkys and allow for self defense and I agree. Also no welfare to the jenky.
You must have a newsletter. Are all your pithy insights in front of a paywall or behind it?
It is on X: @JFreeHatesTheJews88
Bot account.
Not until all laws coddling addicts are repealed. All of them.
Agreed.
I'll tell you what. We can wait, say, a month. If MAGA is, by that time, destroyed, we can pay attention to Rand Paul. If it isn't, we never listen to him again, and we can have a Volokh post saying "Trump's Venezuela escalation didn't destroy MAGA after all!"
It's easy to exaggerate the effect of things if you face no backlash for ever getting it wrong. So every policy disagreement turns into a prediction of doom.
Also, notice that this prediction of doom also applies to Ukraine. But Volokh won't put up a headline reading "Trump giving Ukraine weapons could destroy MAGA, warns Rand Paul", and there's a reason for that--giving weapons to Ukraine isn't very controversial and that would be equally bad as a prediction, but a lot worse in terms of making libertarians look foolish.
Killing drug runners is not libertarian. Neither is giving taxpayer funded materiel to any other nation much less a bandera dictator. But also, don’t think many are claiming that MAGA is libertarian.
"don’t think many are claiming that MAGA is libertarian"
More libertarian than Reason, but that's a very low bar.
Free America’s Growing Libertarianism, on the other hand, does dovetail with being libertarian.
FAGL?
They sometimes turn the other cheek.
Did you coin that?
JD Vance is wrong about how coining terms will impact MAGA’s view of Trump.
No, they aren't.
Scumby the Scummy Chimp-Chump says...
"But also, don’t think many are claiming that MAGA is libertarian."
There are oodles and boodles of them posting said shit here every day, all day!!!
Twat is REALLY libertarian, says Scumby the Scummy Chimp-Chump, is to BRAG about one's ignorance, in REFUSING to read the facts and data written by the data-driven ones!!! Be PROUD of Yer PervFected Ignorance, says Scumby the Scummy Chimp-Chump, so long ass Yer Pervfected Ignorance is of the RIGHT (right-wing wrong-nuts) Sacred Tribe!!!
SSqrlsy pearlsy puddin pie,
He likes the twinks he likes the guys.
He thinks they’re hot and oh so cute,
He wants their cocks in his poop chute.
SSqrlsy pearlsy, wants Tim’s wand,
Broken boomer on golden pond.
Issued himself that magic paper,
Gives a free pass to foreign raper.
SSqrlsy pearlsy, takes it up the ass,
Farts out semen when he passes gas.
When he’s with them will take in his hole,
“Free illegals not even parole.”
SSqrlsy pearlys takes it in his mouth,
Likes Lindsay Graham who’s from down south.
When gathering nuts, he’s Squirrelock Holmes,
Strokes on the shafts, mouth hugs the domes.
He’s the pearlsy SSqrlsy pearlsy pearlsy SSqrlsy.
Latest polling shows 60% of Americans support drug dealing fish bait.
Umm...Cruz distancing from Tucker has nothing to do with MAGA, in fact the opposite. It has to do with Tucker's criticism of Israel. And Trump being the greatest friend to Israel...yeah not buying the Cruz distancing from MAGA. If anything Tucker is distancing himself from MAGA (MAGA just being a stand in Trump's policies).
Not sure about the distancing from Vance part, other then well the two would presumably be running against each other, so distancing oneself from one's opponent just makes sense.
Paul 2028, though! One can dream.
"If anything Tucker is distancing himself from MAGA"
Do you even Reason narratives, SaGN? Do you not understand orangemanbad?
Or Israel just isn't in the upper echelon of priorities except when we're being told to fund their defense. None of this is going to matter.
That and it being clear now that Tucker has gone off the deep end like Owens.
More like Tucker's association with Nick Fuentes, a Hispanic white supremacist, who likes Stalin, hates Hews, thinks sex with women is gay, and uses a blacklight to hunt for cum stains.
I'm old enough to remember when Reason was shitting it's drawers over Trump insulting North Korea, and warning about WW3 with Iran.
But shooting narcotraficantes running coke and meth to the US out of the water, that will destroy MAGA this time.
Some of the editors wishcast as much as the Soros apologist commenters.
Exactly. The walls are closing in.
If Libertarians run a strong enough candidate to siphon off the libertarianish Republican voters, we could cause conservative and Republican electoral defeat. We should be kingmakers. If Republicans want libertarian votes, they should earn them by being libertarian. Vote Libertarian and contribute to Libertarian candidates who will siphon votes from the Republicans causing their election defeat, unless the Republicans dump the drug war or at least don't push it.
Reason -
MAGA - Collection of people who share all the same ideas, violent, wear red hats, worship Trump, racist, and Nazi adjacent.
Antifa - doesn't exist.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/5-plead-guilty-to-terrorism-related-charges-tied-to-antifa-after-texas-shooting
I said Reason, not Texas.
MAGA is just an idea. Like Antifa. But much more dangerous.
AntiFa is not in power, but the Republicans are. Antifa's not pushing the limits of executive power, but Trump is.
"what's to stop the president from using the military to sanction other murders abroad under the guise of national security?"
There is NOTHING to stop any President from using the military sanction. Nothing stopped Biden from killing innocent people in Afghanistan in 2021 because of faulty intellegince (both military and personal) or numerous other examples.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58604655
Biden didn't deliberately murder civilians nor deliberately mischaracterize drug dealing as terrorism as Trump has done, not deliberately.
Tiresome in 2017, more so now:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcmJwmvnMkY
For a president who ran on ending "the forever wars," starting a new one remains the fastest way to break the coalition that got him elected.
Maybe. Maybe not. Can he sell the idea - beyond his dingleberry worshippers here - that he alone prevented control of VZ oil from going to Islamists and commies?
Post the list of the worshippers!
No need to sell facts. The willfully ignorant are broke anyway.
The Islamists and commies don't need Venezuelan oil.
He says the boats were carrying dangerous narcotics to the United States (a claim that has been disproved).
Wait, you actually believe they are going from Venezuela to Europe? In open boats? Running four outboards? They can't be smuggling drugs then. Those boat aren't big enough to hold enough gas let alone people or cargo.
Why can't you asshats make well reasoned, fact based arguments?
Just ignore the recovered drugs and even the AP article interviewing the families admitting they were drug runners.
Maduro claimed that as well (after boat #4?).
The U.S. is 1000 miles away from Venezuela at the closest point. Those boats destroyed were short-range boats. If they were carrying enough fuel to reach the U.S., there would have been MUCH larger fireballs when they were destroyed. Those boats and drugs were not going to the U.S.
Attacking Venezuela would be an act of aggression. Aiding Ukraine is standing up to Russian aggression. So the two are very different. Trump's latest "peace" plan for Ukraine advocates surrender to Russian aggression. It will not bring peace.
Is Venezuela not being aggressive by allowing criminal smugglers to have a safe base of operations?
The US helped foment the (illegal per the Ukrainian constitution) color revolution then continued to encourage the breaking of Minsk…a third of the way around the globe.
The US getting completely out of the eastern European issues, allowing the locals to figure things out should help end hostilities. And also importantly, get coerced US tax dollars out of the mess.
You should be free to send your money to the bandera sympathizer puppet dictator in Kiev if you’d like. Or volunteer for his foreign legion.
Thanks to Vicky Nudelman and her cookies.
NATO was obviously involved as well and I strongly suspect so was MI-6.
The resulting massacre of over 12,000 ethnic Russians in the Donbass sure put the icing on the cake.
AND Now.....$100,000,000 that was nearly stolen by one of the little coke head's buddies. Still in the Federal Reserve wrappers.
No more anything for Ukraine.
F*** Zelensky.
You misspelled NATO aggression, now go back to Maddow.
NATO
North
Atlantic
terrorist
organization
Citing an opinion posted on NBC is not proof nor evidence which can back a statement like this.
"He says the boats were carrying dangerous narcotics to the United States (a claim that has been disproved)."
Did you even read the article you cited? Just because there is other drug traffic occurring in the Caribbean and Europeans are doing more cocaine today you make this incomprehensible leap to Trump is blowing up European coke shipments?
It's as if you believe there is no drug trafficking coming through the Caribbean to the US.
Also suggesting that the coast guard boarding and finding 1 of every 4 ships were found to have no drugs relates in any way to the military operation in the Caribbean is laughable.
Remember. They think shipping everything from China is a good thing. So this never crosses their mind.
"Also suggesting that the coast guard boarding and finding 1 of every 4 ships were found to have no drugs relates in any way to the military operation in the Caribbean is laughable."
Just so we're clear, they Coast Guard found that 75% of boats did have drugs?
That jumped out at me as well.
Even if it is backwards and just 25%, I'm sure the strikes account for far less than 25% of total traffic.
Venezuela is 1,000 miles from the U.S. at the closest point. Those boats destroyed were short-range boats. If they were carrying enough fuel to reach the U.S., there would have been MUCH larger fireballs when they were destroyed. Those boats and drugs were not going to the U.S.
Look, drug smuggling is considered piracy under maritime law, and any military is allowed to kill pirates on sight.
What we should be doing is demanding evidence, not just asserting this action is illegal.
No, it's not. They're separate categories. https://criminal-justice.iresearchnet.com/criminal-justice-process/international-aspects-and-extradition/piracy-and-maritime-crime-in-international-waters/
Blowing up people didn't sink Obama.
You know Sullum, when you're boarding you can be a lot more free with who you stop.
When you blow them up there is a lot more work done pre-strike.
Trump's not running for re-election in '28. Besides, MAGA's old hat, and can be thrown under the bus. In '28 there'll be new faces, new slogans and new hats.
Here in the hopes someone mistakenly clicks on your name and doubles you weekly hits? Or just slinging your ignorant shit?
TBF, I don’t think he’s necessarily wrong about the possibility of rebranding in 2028.
I continue to have a lot of respect for Rand Paul. And I continue to believe that Trump is the closest thing to a libertarian president I'll ever see in my lifetime. I'm not exactly sure what MAGA is but if it's anti war I'm in. Very leery of CIA or military regime change in Venezuela. I think I understand Trump's overarching goal which is a multipolar world with the US dominating it's hemisphere and it kind of makes sense. But if it ends up being a repeat of the decades of military adventures that have been US policy for my rather lengthy lifetime I'm out. We shall see but I hope Trump is artfully dealing and weaving at this point. No way I will see my grandkids spreading democracy in Venezuela.
“if it ends up being a repeat of the decades of military adventures that have been US policy”
I think that will depend on who takes the White House in 2028.
Are you kidding? MAGA loves the war on drugs.
Cite missing, TDS-added (new) shit, or sock.
If MAGA didn't love the war on drugs, then why aren't any of them questioning Trump bombing those drug boats? Or exerting any kind of inhibiting influence?
Rand is right with the wrong accusation. Congress should be controlling the military. Instead the [D] party handed that over to the Executive; so really it's a Congress mistake.
And frankly the 'drug' excuse is always BS. If the USA is at war with Venezuela *Socialists* under what delusions should it allow those socialists to immigrate? Perhaps it might be painted as a war crime if those boats were completely UN-warned but I suspect they were notified and all the alarm-ism is just more TDS-BS.
Congress should be issuing letters of marque and reprisal on the drug smugglers.
Someone with a letter of mark would be entitled to board and take the drugs for their own business. How do you think privateers have always worked? They were after the booty.
Congress should be legalizing drugs.
The Constitution provides for the Executive Branch to have direct control over the military.
WRONG. The Constitution provides the President as the Commander & Chief
...of/to Execute congressional law by directing the military.
The only reason D.C. likes to think that's how it works is because of crappy [D] legislation (93rd [D][D] Congress) usage of wildly vague words that the President can direct w/o congress when "responding forcefully to prevent serious threats".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution
Wiki-article outlines nicely all military actions as Constitutionally Congresses power w/ref.
Literally the ONLY people in America who cares about Trump blowing up drug boats are you ridiculous junkies.
The conservatives are like, "Yea, kill those poison-spreading scumbags." The moderates are like, "NGL it's kinda cool to watch them explode. I made it my screensaver." Even the left is like, "...I don't know how we're going to keep pretending these are fisherman when they're obviously drugrunners."
Reason is the ONLY place I regularly go to that is keeping up this ludicrous pretense.
"If he invades Venezuela or gives more money to Ukraine, his movement will dissolve."
Not if he keeps punting out illegals. That's the hill right there. MAGA will forgive a lot so long as he keeps dragnetting the illegals, sticking them in cages, and getting them off American soil as quickly as possible. (If anything, MAGA's concern should be with Donald's recent H1B defenses.)
But blowing up criminal drug smugglers? Nobody in America except the TDS-Media and all you smackheads cares about that.
Getting rid of the illegals is an absolute necessity. Sounds you’re really not wrong. And I have no real problem with him putting the squeeze on Maduro, although I don’t favor an invasion of Venezuela.
Maduro must be getting close to his breaking point. Then his own people can execute him, annd establish a less Marxist government. Preferably one that will not allow themselves to be a ChiCom client state.
Trump won because libertarians voted for him rather than for the Libertarian candidate for whom they would normally have voted. The usual Libertarian share of the vote went to Trump. The Libertarian Party should run candidates to specifically draw the libertarianish Republican voters away from the Republicans thereby causing their defeat, unless they back off on the drug war.
Chumby's decriminalization of all drug use will work when we throw OD'd imbeciles over a fence into a hole in the ground and charge the drug suppliers the cost of covering the corpses with dirt and the cost of the real estate.
Yes, people should be allowed to make asses of themselves, ingesting anything they please, but until I don't have to pay for their imbecility, bomb the fuckers delivering the problem and profiting from my costs in even burying the shits.
Drug legalization can work, as long as the how we treat shitty add it behavior is just as libertarian.
If the drugs were legal, the government could enact and collect a "death tax" on the drugs sufficient to cover funeral expenses of people who overdose.
Actually, Sevo, I think you exaggerate any expenses you supposedly have to pay.
Rand may very well be correct. Another needless war, another foreign policy disaster. Just like all the others for the past 80+ years, from the Korean war to Viet Nam to the middle east, those wars have been disastrous for not only the people whom we bombed, strafed and blew up but for the Americans tricked into fighting, bleeding and dying where the only ones benefitting from all the carnage is the military industrial complex.
If Trump goes through with is little war it is going to result in the loss of many of those who supported and voted for trump in the past. It could lead to a disaster for the Republican party in the mid terms and probably the next presidential election.
Many will simply sit the next one out and other will find a new party to support such as the Constitutional party.
Good luck Donnie, so far you are batting 0 for 10. What's another disaster, after all we Americans have grown use to them.
"If he invades Venezuela..."
Paul's prediction is probably spot on, though no one's crystal ball is working very well right now.
In my head is an image I find amusing, and I have no idea why I thought it up. It's a picture of Commander-in-Chief Trump hitting the beach along with the first wave of Marines. He's extremely visible, given that he's sporting the bearskin shako of the Old Guard, holding a cavalry saber in one hand, raised high, and a Navy Colt in the other. He's hollering,"C'mon boys! We'll give 'em the cold steel and the hot lead!" Damn, I wish I'd learned how to draw.