Republican pushback against Trump's Venezuela policy at critical moment

As President Donald Trump nears a decision on intensifying military pressure on Venezuela, members of his own party in Congress are raising concerns. Republican senators questioned the administration on Monday after the White House confirmed a second September strike targeting alleged narcotraffickers who survived an earlier attack. The action has already triggered bipartisan inquiries on Capitol Hill.

Sen. Jim Justice, R-W.Va., criticized the follow-up strike, calling it extreme given the targets were already wounded. While praising Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth as competent and a suitable military leader, Justice said, If he made that decision, I think hes made a bad decision. Justice emphasized that military training prioritizes capturing surrendered individuals rather than targeting them again, noting that a second strike on survivors was unacceptable.

Other Republicans expressed confusion over Trumps pardon of former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernndez, convicted of drug trafficking. The move appears to conflict with Trumps publicly stated anti-drug agenda, which has been a justification for multiple strikes off Venezuelas coast. The situation marks a critical moment for Trumps Latin American foreign policy.

After strengthening US border security, Trump shifted focus to Venezuela, conducting repeated strikes on suspected drug vessels, prompting congressional calls for detailed reporting. Despite some dissent, many Republicans continue to support the president. However, the September 2 double-strike remains a source of tension.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Admiral Frank Bradley, head of US Special Operations Command, oversaw the operation and acted within legal authority. Initial denials from Hegseth and a Pentagon spokesperson about targeting wounded survivors left some senators with lingering questions. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., criticized the conflicting statements, questioning whether they reflected incompetence or dishonesty.

Trump defended Hegseth, expressing full confidence in him. Meanwhile, the administrations decision to pardon Hernndez has complicated its anti-drug message. Trump described Hernndezs conviction as politically motivated, claiming the Honduran public agreed with that view. Leavitt added that Hernndezs legal counsel had only three weeks to prepare for trial.

Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., praised Trumps anti-drug efforts but disagreed with pardoning someone potentially involved in trafficking, citing the ongoing opioid crisis in the US. Cassidy argued that if the Justice Department had valid evidence, Hernndez should have remained incarcerated. Other senators, including Justice, declined further comment.

Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, commented on presidential pardon powers, noting that both parties have used them controversially. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., expressed uncertainty about the rationale behind the Hernndez pardon and the double-strike in Venezuela, highlighting that non-combatants surviving attacks should be treated differently.

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., said the facts of the strike need further review, while the Senate Armed Services Committee confirmed active oversight of the incident. Sen. Tim Sheehy, R-Mont., defended the US militarys right to strike terrorists, emphasizing confidence in Bradley and cautioning against excessive congressional scrutiny of every military action.

The Washington Post reported that Hegseth authorized the September 2 follow-up strike. Trumps advisers planned a Monday evening meeting to discuss Venezuela policy, though outcomes have not yet been disclosed.

Author: Sophia Brooks