The Dictatorship
Venezuela seeks to criminalize oil tanker seizures
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — Venezuela’s parliament on Tuesday approved a measure that criminalizes a broad range of activities that can hinder navigation and commerce in the South American country, such as the seizure of oil tankers.
The bill — introduced, debated and approved within two days in the National Assembly — follows this month’s seizures by U.S. forces of two tankers carrying Venezuelan oil in international waters. The seizures are the latest strategy in U.S. President Donald Trump’s four-month pressure campaign on Venezuela’s leader Nicolás Maduro.
The tankers are part of what the Trump administration has said is a fleet Venezuela uses to evade U.S. economic sanctions.
The unicameral assembly, which is controlled by Venezuela’s ruling party, did not publish drafts on Tuesday nor the final version of the measure. But as read on the floor, the bill calls for fines and prison sentences of up to 20 years for anyone who promotes, requests, supports, finances or participates in “acts of piracy, blockades or other international illegal acts” against commercial entities operating with the South American country.
Venezuela’s political opposition, including Nobel Peace laureate María Corina Machadohas expressed support for Trump’s Venezuela policy, including the seizure of tankers. Machado and Trump have both repeatedly said that Maduro’s days in power are numbered.
The bill, which now awaits Maduro’s signature, also instructs the executive branch to come up with “incentives and mechanisms for economic, commercial and other protections” for national or foreign entities doing business with Venezuela in the event of piracy activities, a maritime blockade or other unlawful acts.
The U.S. Coast Guard on Saturday seized a Panama-flagged vessel called Centuries that officials said was part of the fleet moving sanctioned cargo. With assistance from the U.S. Navy, it seized a rogue tanker called Skipper on Dec. 10. That ship was registered in Panama.
Trump, after that first seizure, said the U.S. would carry out a “blockade” of Venezuela. He later demanded that Venezuela return assets that it seized from U.S. oil companies years ago, justifying anew his announcement of the blockade against sanctioned oil tankers traveling to or from the South American country.
At an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council called by Venezuela, U.S. Ambassador Mike Waltz on Tuesday stressed that sanctioned oil tankers “operate as the primary economic lifeline for Maduro and his illegitimate regime.”
“Maduro’s ability to sell Venezuela’s oil enables his fraudulent claim to power and his narco-terrorist activities,” Waltz said. “The United States will impose and enforce sanctions to the maximum extent to deprive Maduro of the resources he uses to fund Cartel de los Soles.”
Maduro was indicted in 2020 on narcoterrorism charges in the U.S. and accused of leading the Cartel de los Soles, which the Trump administration designated as a foreign terrorist organization last month. But the entity is not a cartel per se.
Venezuelans began using the term Cartel de los Soles in the 1990s to refer to high-ranking military officers who had grown rich from drug-running. As corruption expanded nationwide, its use loosely expanded to police and government officials as well as activities like illegal mining and fuel trafficking.
At Tuesday’s meetingVenezuela’s U.N. Ambassador Samuel Moncada accused the U.S. of acting “outside international law” and its own domestic laws, by demanding that Venezuelans vacate the country and hand it over to the Trump administration, including all its oil fields.
“What right does the United States government have to appropriate, to date, almost 4 million barrels of Venezuelan oil?” Moncada asked, referring to the cargo of the two seized tankers. “This alleged naval blockade is essentially a military act aimed at laying siege to the Venezuelan nation, degrading its economic and military apparatus, weakening its social and political cohesion, and causing internal chaos to facilitate aggression by external forces.”
Many countries expressed concern about violations of international maritime law and adhering to the United Nations Charter, which requires all 193 member nations to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every other country. The United States’ actions were supported by a few countries, including Panama and Argentina.
___
Associated Press writer Edith Lederer in New York contributed to this report.
The Dictatorship
U.S. launches fresh strikes on ISIS targets in Syria
The U.S. has carried out “large-scale strikes” against multiple Islamic State targets in Syria along with partner forces, U.S. Central Command said on Saturday.
The attack is a part of an operation launched on Dec. 19, when U.S. forces struck “more than 70 targets” in central Syria as retaliation for the killing of three Americans by an ISIS gunman in early December.
“The strikes today targeted ISIS throughout Syria as part of our ongoing commitment to root out Islamic terrorism against our warfighters, prevent future attacks, and protect American and partner forces in the region,” CENTCOM said in a statement.
Tom Barrack, the Trump administration’s special envoy for Syria, announced on Saturday that he met with Syria’s new leadership in Damascus “to discuss recent developments in Aleppo and the broader path forward for Syria’s historic transition.”
The deadly attack in December marked the first fatalities of U.S. troops in the country since former President Bashar al-Assad was ousted last year. Three other U.S. service members were injured in the attack in December, and a state-run news agency reported that two members of the Syrian security forces were also wounded.
President Donald Trump said at the time that the attack by ISIS took place “in a very dangerous part of Syria, that is not fully controlled by them.” He also said Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, whom he had met in November at the White House, was “extremely angry and disturbed by this attack.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said last month that the operation was “a declaration of vengeance” over the deaths of the American service members.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Clarissa-Jan Lim is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW. She was previously a senior reporter and editor at BuzzFeed News.
The Dictatorship
When it comes to ICE encounters, what are the rules — and your rights?
In the wake of Renee Nicole Good’s death, Americans are asking, with heightened urgency, what authority ICE and CBP agents have when they engage with U.S. citizens. And as with many areas of the law, the answer is largely, “It depends.”
Can ICE use deadly force on U.S. citizens – or ever?
When it comes to the use of force, and specifically, the use of firearms, ICE has its own specific policy that was last updated in 2023. That policy was filed in the Chicago-area litigation over ICE and CBP’s treatment of protesters, clergy, and journalists. (Interestingly, on ICE’s website, that same policy is almost entirely redacted.) This policy does not vary depending on the subject’s immigration or citizenship status. Here’s what it says:
First, the policy authorizes the use of force “only when no reasonably effective, safe, and feasible alternative appears to exist and may use only the level of force that is objectively reasonable in light of the totality of facts and circumstances confronting the officer at the time force is applied.” But the policy is equally clear that an officer does not have to meet force with equal or lesser force, does not have to wait for an attack before using force, and does not have any duty to retreat to avoid the reasonable use of force.
Second, where feasible and without creating any greater threat to his own safety or that of others, an ICE officer must attempt to “de-escalate by the use of communication or other techniques during an encounter to stabilize, slow, or reduce the intensity of a potentially violent situation without using physical force, or with a reduction in force.”
Third, ICE policy is also clear that officers have a “duty to intervene to prevent or stop a perceived use of excessive force” so long as it is safe to do so. It further states that a failure to intervene and/or report such incidents is itself misconduct — and potential grounds for discipline.
What’s the guidance if U.S. citizens are given orders by ICE?
Short of using force or deadly force, however, can ICE give orders to U.S. citizens? For example, it appears that ICE agents directed Renee Nicole Good to get out of her car shortly before she was killed.
ICE can give orders to U.S. citizens, but again, only in limited circumstances that are directly tied to the ICE agent’s immigration-related authority. For example, ICE can give orders to U.S. citizens — or even detain them temporarily — if they are obstructing or interfering with immigration enforcement activity.
These situations are often very subjective. U.S. citizens do have significantly more freedom in their interactions with ICE than non-citizens. For example, according to guidance issued by the ACLU and the City of New Yorkamong others, if ordered or detained by ICE, a U.S. citizen can ask, “Am I free to leave?” and they should then be allowed to leave on their own free will.
Can ICE agents search a car without a warrant?
ICE agents also have the authority to search a car without a warrant in limited scenarios. The Fourth Amendment includes the automobile exceptionwhich allows federal agents to search a vehicle without a warrant if there’s probable cause to believe there’s evidence to a crime or contraband. Because a car can be driven away quickly, it may not be practical to secure a warrant beforehand without jeopardizing the investigation.
But federal agents must have specific probable cause to search a car without a warrant. A hunch or a feeling that the car conceals evidence of illegal activity is not enough for a federal agent to search a car without a warrant. ICE does have broader authority to search vehicles within 100 miles of the U.S. border, but even so, these searches typically require probable cause. Notably, ICE cannot search a car without a warrant simply because they suspect someone may be an undocumented immigrant.
However, car searches are the only major exception. ICE officers require search warrants for all other searches. Without a warrant, both U.S. citizens and non-citizens can say, “I do not consent to a search,” according to guidance issued by immigration rights organizations.
What’s the guidance on U.S. citizens recording or taking photos of ICE during enforcement activities?
Civil liberties groups generally advise that under the First Amendment, U.S. citizens can record or take photos of ICE performing law enforcement activities in public places so long as the recording does not interfere with ICE activity, like an arrest. Bystanders are allowed by law to collect important information, including names and badge numbers of the ICE agent executing the immigration activity.
Some states, including Florida, Tennessee, and Louisiana, have enacted their own laws requiring observers — or anyone else — to move back 25 feet or more from law enforcement or other first responders upon their request. While other, similar laws passed by Arizona and Indiana have been struck down, the constitutionality of these states’ laws has not been determined.
Finally, citizens and non-citizens alike share one fundamental right when it comes to encounters with ICE, or any other law enforcement agency, for that matter: the right to remain silent.
Lisa Rubin is MS NOW’s senior legal reporter and a former litigator.
Fallon Gallagher is a legal affairs reporter for MS NOW.
The Dictatorship
The country I love doesn’t look like Trump’s America
“We Love America” is one of CBS News’ “five simple principles” under new editor-in-chief Bari Weiss. In apparent defiance of a powerful, unseen enemy that demands they not love this country, the network added on social media, “And we make no apologies for saying so. Our foundational values of liberty, equality and the rule of law make us the last best hope on Earth.”
The strangeness of a straight news outlet — whose job ostensibly is to be skeptical of the powerful, especially the government — feeling the need to distinguish itself by proclaiming “love” for America aside, it’s a reductive, Manichean sentiment. Its opponent is a strawman, and it carries the implication that there’s only one way to love America: their way.
America showed its distaste for the Blame America First crowd and voted for Donald Trump even after he attempted a self-coup, among other national disgraces.
Now, I’m not oblivious to the point CBS News is trying to make. There’s a subset of far-left Americans, particularly in academia and activism, that considers the United States to be inherently illegitimate because of its history of slavery and ethnic cleansing. Some others in left-wing spaces believe capitalism is the root of all evil, that people should be judged by their immutable characteristics in the name of “anti-racism,” that political violence is justifiable (as long as it’s from the left) and that any deviation from their radical values is problematic. I’ve been critical of some of the more prominent figures in this area, whose work I’ve found ranged from the vacuous to the merely unhelpful if justice and equality are the goals.
In 2024, America showed its distaste for the Blame America First crowd and voted for Donald Trump even after he attempted a self-coup, among other national disgraces.
But America’s backlash against far-left activists far exceeds their actual influence in government, business and culture. They did, however, make for great bogeymen in GOP campaign ads — and were often their own worst enemies. As the progressive comedian Marc Maron asked his audience in a recent special, “You do realize we annoyed the average American into fascism, right?”
Still, there are plenty of people, myself includedwho “love America” and don’t subscribe to a childish — and frankly, dangerous — “my country, right or wrong” binary.

The America I love is a representative democracy where the ruling party doesn’t try to stay in power after losing an election or permanently brain-poison its followers with lies about voter fraud. The America I love respects civil liberties and due process under the law and doesn’t make exceptions in the name of meeting mass deportation quotas.
The America I love stubbornly defends freedom of speech. Its government doesn’t try to forbid the use of certain words to describe political opponents or harass news outlets with bogus litigation or ideologically-motivated regulatory threats. The America I love doesn’t deport people for their legitimate political activism.
The America I love is strong and reflective enough to grapple with even the worst of its own history. It doesn’t ban the teaching of slavery in public schools as a “divisive concept” on the grounds that it will make the children of right-wingers feel bad about their country. That’s what has happened in many Republican-led states and localities in recent years, but, if anything, the decades we’ve spent confronting America’s racist sins — and expanding the scope of civil rights — demonstrate that the country we love so dearly has the capacity to evolve for the better.
But, as the second Trump administration keeps reminding us, America also has the ability to devolve for the worse.
I don’t love that Trump’s America has renormalized gutter racismhelped in large part by the president, the vice president and many of their most influential supportersincluding the richest man in the world (who was also the biggest donor to their campaign).
As the second Trump administration keeps reminding us, America also has the ability to devolve for the worse.
Just this week, Elon Musk posted a “100” emoji to promote an X post that declared, “If White men become a minority, we will be slaughtered. … White solidarity is the only way to survive.” As of Friday, it had been viewed over 42 million times. Also this week, Vice President JD Vance, who last month touted that in America you no longer have to apologize for being white, said America has a “Somali problem,” a kind of phrasing that wouldn’t have sounded out of place in early 1930s Germany.
I don’t love that Trump’s America allowed Musk’s ludicrously destructive Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to destroy America’s moral and strategic advantage in “soft power,” killing USAID, which cost a pittance of our annual GDP to save millions of lives in poor countries from preventable diseases, and keep warlords and despots from filling the power vacuums.
I don’t love that in Trump’s America the executive branch ignores the Constitution, invades a sovereign country without congressional consultation and deposes its tyrannical leader with no apparent legal justificationwhile deputy White House chief of staff Stephen Miller touts the virtues of neo-colonialism. And I don’t love that Trump is threatening to seize Greenland from Denmark, our NATO ally, an ambition that seems hellbent on pointlessly destroying the rules-based international order that has made the United States a superpower since the end of World War II.
And I don’t love the fact that Musk and Vance have been enthusiastic boosters of Germany’s ascendant Nazi-sympathizing partythe Alternative for Deutschland (AfD). Nor am I proud of the fact that on Friday a DHS post on Instagram featured a recording of, “By God We’ll Have Our Home Again,” a chilling marching song known to be popular among the Proud Boys and white ethno-nationalist separatists. (I asked DHS for comment on the use of the song, but have not received a response.)
I don’t love that during Trump’s second term, it has become completely normal for masked, secret law enforcement agents to violently accost and arrest people without due process, including American citizens. As I warned in September when Trump’s campaign of extralegal killings of alleged drug traffickers in the Caribbean kicked into high gear: “President Donald Trump — whether intentionally or not — is laying the groundwork to normalize the concept of the U.S. military’s killing Americans without due process.”

ICE agent Jonathan Ross killing Renee Good in Minneapolis this week shows my fears were not unfounded. The celebratory bloodlust on the right that followed Good’s death tells me the worst is yet to come.
“We Love America” isn’t a journalistic principle, it’s barely a bumper sticker. True patriotism does not mean ignoring your country’s faults or dismissing its critics as haters or disloyal. Loving your country means taking the good with the bad. It means being proud and being embarrassed — or even appalled — when necessary.
You can love America, and also apologize for it. But if loving America means caping for the powerful, whitewashing the racists and believing that military might-makes-right, you don’t love America.
You just love saying you do.
Anthony L. Fisher is a senior editor and opinion columnist for MS NOW.
-
The Dictatorship11 months agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
The Dictatorship4 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
Politics11 months agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
Politics11 months agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Politics11 months agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship11 months agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics9 months agoDemocrat challenging Joni Ernst: I want to ‘tear down’ party, ‘build it back up’






