'Iraq 2.0': Democrats Blast Trump's Venezuela Strike

President Trump's overnight move to remove Venezuela's leader has triggered a fresh war-powers brawl in Washington, with Democrats accusing the White House of launching "Iraq 2.0" without Congress on board. Trump announced on Truth Social that US forces had captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, framing it as a decisive blow against a hostile regime. Democrats quickly lined up to question both the legality and the strategy, reports Politico, saying Congress never authorized war with Venezuela and warning of a power vacuum in Caracas. A look:

• Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass.: "Congress did not authorize this war. Venezuela posed no imminent threat to the United States. This is reckless, elective regime change risking American lives (Iraq 2.0) with no plan for the day after. Wars cost more than trophies."
• Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz.: The Iraq veteran called the strike the "Second unjustified war in my life time. This war is illegal, it's embarrassing that we went from the world cop to the world bully in less than one year. There is no reason for us to be at war with Venezuela."
• Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va.: "Where will this go next? Will the President deploy our troops to protect Iranian protesters? To enforce the fragile ceasefire in Gaza? To battle terrorists in Nigeria? To seize Greenland or the Panama Canal? To suppress Americans peacefully assembling to protest his policies? Trump has threatened to do all this and more and sees no need to seek legal authorization from people's elected legislature before putting servicemembers at risk."
• Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn.: "Maduro is an illegitimate ruler. But I have seen no evidence that his presidency poses a threat that would justify military action without Congressional authorization, nor have I heard a strategy for the day after and how we will prevent Venezuela from descending into chaos."
• Sen. Andy Kim, D-NJ: "Secretaries Rubio and Hegseth looked every Senator in the eye a few weeks ago and said this wasn't about regime change. I didn't trust them then and we see now that they blatantly lied to Congress. Trump rejected our Constitutionally required approval process for armed conflict because the Administration knows the American people overwhelmingly reject risks pulling our nation into another war."

And some Republican reaction:

• Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah: Politico notes that Lee at first doubted the legality of the strike, but after speaking with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, said it "likely falls within the president's inherent authority under Article II of the Constitution to protect U.S. personnel from an actual or imminent attack."
• Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC: "To the pathetically weak and hand wringing liberal Democrats who seem to be okay with a perpetual drug caliphate in our backyard, the centerpiece of which is Venezuela. Get a grip."
• President Trump: Democrats "should say, 'Great job,'" he told Fox News ahead of a press conference set for Mar-a-Lago. "They shouldn't say, 'Oh, gee, maybe it's not constitutional.' You know, the same old stuff that we've been hearing for years and years and years."

Public opinion is running cool: a December Quinnipiac poll found only a quarter of Americans backed military intervention in the country, even as some Democrats from Venezuela-heavy districts, such as Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, welcomed Maduro's capture while faulting Trump for cutting Congress out.