Jeffries Finds No 'Imminent Threat' In Maduro, But Plenty in Trump
Jeffries correctly pointed out Trump offered 'no evidence' Maduro posed an 'imminent threat' to the U.S., despite the previous administration's aggressive posturing, including sanctions and a bizarre bounty. While commendable to demand evidence for such claims, it begs the question: where was this rigorous evidentiary standard for countless other military interventions? The mainstream media, of
course, largely echoes the 'threat' narrative without similar scrutiny when it aligns with Washington's broader foreign policy aims. Perhaps the 'imminent threat' analysis is only applicable when the target isn't a convenient pretext for regime change or when one's own party isn't doing the saber-rattling. It appears some threats are more 'imminent' than others, especially when they involve
oil-rich nations. One might wonder if the concern for due process here is more about scoring political points against Trump than a fundamental shift in foreign policy.