Tuesday, January 6, 2026, episode of the podcast The Excerpt: Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife are currently in detention following the US military attack on Caracas. Was this legal? USA TODAY White House Correspondent Bert Jansen joins The Excerpt to discuss.
Press play in the player below to listen to the podcast and follow the transcript below. This transcript was automatically generated and edited in its current format for clarity. There may be some differences between audio and text.
Podcast: For true crime stories, in-depth interviews, and more USA TODAY podcasts, click here
Dana Taylor:
Early Saturday morning, U.S. troops descended on Venezuela’s capital, Caracas. Hours later, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife were taken into U.S. custody. Hello. Welcome to this excerpt from USA TODAY. I’m Dana Taylor. Today is Tuesday, January 6, 2025.
Now, President Donald Trump has been threatening to arrest Maduro for weeks, a move that has many questions swirling around. The first question is, “Was this legal and what does it look like now?” Helping us dig into all the issues is USA TODAY White House correspondent Bert Jansen. Bart, thank you so much for joining us.
Bert Jansen:
Thank you for having me.
Dana Taylor:
Bart, this was an unusual action by the Trump administration. President Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were arraigned in Manhattan on Monday afternoon. What was the charge?
Bert Jansen:
The basic charges are four counts: drug terrorism, conspiracy to import cocaine, and two weapons charges. Essentially, the accusation is that President Maduro participated in, and ultimately became part of, a criminal conspiracy by the Venezuelan government to funnel cocaine into the United States for about 25 years.
Dana Taylor:
And what evidence supports those charges?
Bert Jansen:
The indictment described the conduct quite broadly. The charges include that by 2020, 200 to 250 tons of cocaine was being shipped from Venezuela to the United States every year. So there’s a massive conspiracy, a lot of drugs, but the nitty-gritty details of what exactly President Maduro did to contribute to the alleged conspiracy are not really detailed. One of the charges in the indictment is that he served as acting foreign minister from 2006 to 2008 and issued diplomatic passports to drug traffickers so they could more easily bring drugs into the United States, but the remaining allegations, spanning 25 years of conduct, are not detailed in the relatively short indictment. We will continue to focus on action in court and future litigation to further elaborate on these details.
Dana Taylor:
Bart, were their arrests legal? What are US experts saying here, and what are the rest of the world saying about this?
Bert Jansen:
Trump, of course, maintains that the arrest was legal and that it was essentially a law enforcement action, pursuing someone who had been indicted in the United States for prosecution here. But using the military to seize Maduro and bring him back to New York City raised many questions among European leaders who say they want to review what happened and consider what laws and policies are at issue, but also drew criticism from Venezuela’s neighbors such as Brazil, Mexico and Colombia. Leaders of those countries issued a joint statement saying the violence and military had set a bad precedent. The UN chief said it was a bad precedent, and the leaders of Venezuela’s allies Russia and China said the military action should be condemned. As such, Venezuela’s allies have criticized the move, although mainly European allies continue to study the situation.
Dana Taylor:
What happens next?
Bert Jansen:
In court, defense attorneys are expected to begin challenging all aspects of the charges. Legal experts say the trial may not start until 2027 because of the controversy. The problem may be that because Mr. Maduro’s military capture was illegal, he need not be charged with a crime. Another argument is that Trump could be immune from prosecution as a head of state, just as the Supreme Court ruled that Trump could be immune from criminal charges if he was acting in an official capacity. And a trial is not expected to happen soon, as they will likely spend months or more arguing over these issues, and whoever loses in any of these court decisions could appeal the decision.
Dana Taylor:
Ironically, however, Maduro’s arrest occurred 36 years ago when former Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega was arrested by the US military on similar charges. What do these similarities tell us?
Bert Jansen:
Now, the actions against Noriega completely removed him from power, removed his leadership, and led Panama in a new direction. The question now is: What does the removal of President Maduro mean for Venezuela? You have removed the supreme leader, but the argument is that much of his regime remains in place. So how could that government be dismantled, or, if left in place, could he be replaced by another leader with similar policies?
Dana Taylor:
In his address to the nation on Saturday, President Trump said the United States would “run Venezuela in the short term.” What does that mean practically?
Bert Jansen:
Well, we are waiting for details about that too. Yes, President Trump said the United States would run Venezuela. He indicated that Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth would be among the U.S. officials working with the Venezuelan people to resolve what President Trump called the chaos in his country. The idea is to root out suspected corruption throughout the government. One of its biggest aspects is restoring the domestic oil industry.
Although Venezuela has vast oil reserves and, as I mentioned, many countries around the world, including Russia and China, rely on its oil flows, President Trump says the country is producing only a fraction of its potential. So he says oil companies will spend billions of dollars to fully restore Venezuela’s oil export capacity, which will be reimbursed from oil revenues. So while the promise of better management is one of President Trump’s reasons for optimism about this transition, U.S. officials and Venezuelans are wondering what it means for the U.S. to effectively run the country. How detailed will it be? How far will U.S. officials intervene in government?
Dana Taylor:
Sticking to that, Trump talked about oil and said that American companies, oil companies, would take over that industry, but many have criticized this move and suggested that the whole operation could become a large-scale oil heist. Is there any truth to these theories?
Bert Jansen:
Now, President Trump has accused Venezuela of seizing control of U.S. oil facilities and stealing U.S. assets decades ago. The country called this the nationalization of foreign interests. Meanwhile, countries have been trying to restart oil production. Chevron, for example, has a special contract to produce oil from Venezuela, but President Trump has argued that he can restore the oil company to being a top-tier oil producer by attracting billions of dollars of investment back into the company by repairing aging facilities that he claims are simply outdated, dilapidated and dilapidated. The goal therefore appears to be to restart oil production from Venezuela. We’ll have to wait for more details on who will benefit most from it.
Dana Taylor:
Bart, what is the reaction from Venezuelans?
Bert Jansen:
There have been public demonstrations of people so happy to have removed Maduro, holding flags, signs and banners in the streets, celebrating the removal of an authoritarian ruler who has long been criticized as not a very pleasant person. The United States and the European Union did not recognize President Maduro’s recent election, so there were high expectations that he was not a good leader and that something needed to be done. However, what remains, or remains, among people on the streets is, “What will the future hold?” We know that the United States will contribute to the Venezuelan government, but who will lead it and how will they act? What will their policies be? These are all open-ended questions, and Venezuelans are waiting for answers.
Dana Taylor:
What’s the next step here? Are there any other countries in the spotlight for suspected drug trafficking?
Bert Jansen:
Well, of course, Mexico is another country that President Trump has accused of drug trafficking into the United States. One of the terrorist organizations cited in the indictment as profiting from Venezuelan drug trafficking is Mexico’s Sinaloa Cartel. This organization has also been designated as a terrorist organization by President Trump, and one path the administration can take is to pay more attention to Mexico from the perspective of drug trafficking. Another is that Cuba has long been a beneficiary of Venezuela’s oil industry and mutual protection, and President Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have also said they want a change in Cuba’s leadership, so we will have to see whether the United States will now turn its attention to the island nation that has long opposed communist leadership.
Dana Taylor:
Bert Jansen is USA TODAY’s White House correspondent. Bart, thank you so much for sharing your insight here.
Bert Jansen:
Thank you for having me.
Dana Taylor:
We would like to thank Senior Producer Kaely Monahan for production assistance. Executive producer is Laura Beatty. Let us know what you thought about this episode by sending a note to podcast@usatoday.com. Thank you for your attention. I’m Dana Taylor. Tomorrow morning, we’ll be back with another episode of USA TODAY Excerpts.
