In a sweeping briefing, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Dan “Raizin” Caine laid out new details of the U.S. military operation that culminated in the arrest of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia. The mission, carried out without a single American casualty, was described as one of the most complex and tightly coordinated actions undertaken by the U.S. armed forces in recent memory.
President Trump later confirmed that the operation concluded with no loss of U.S. personnel or equipment, despite reports of explosions across Caracas in the hours leading up to the raid, including activity near Fuerte Tiuna, a major military installation believed to include Maduro’s bunker.
Caine emphasized that the effort relied on exhaustive intelligence preparation and interagency cooperation. “We leveraged our unmatched intelligence capabilities and our years of experience in hunting terrorists. We watched, we waited, we prepared.” He noted that analysts from the Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, and National Geospatial Intelligence Agency compiled an unusually detailed profile of Maduro, down to his daily habits, wardrobe, meals, and even the whereabouts of his pets.
According to Caine, the military had been on alert for weeks as conditions aligned. “In early December, our force was set pending a series of aligned events… through Christmas and New Year’s, the men and women of the United States military sat ready, patiently waiting for the right triggers to be met and the president to order us into action.” Timing was selected carefully to limit risk to civilians and detainees alike. As Caine explained, “choosing the right day to minimize the potential for civilian harm and maximize the element of surprise and minimize the harm to the indicted personnel, so, as the President said, they could be brought to justice.”
When the order finally came, it was decisive. “At 10:46 pm Eastern time… the President ordered the United States military to move forward with this mission. He said to us, and we appreciate it, Mr. President, ‘Good luck and Godspeed.’”
The scope of the deployment spanned much of the hemisphere. More than 150 aircraft took off from over 20 bases, involving an array of platforms and personnel. “Bombers, fighters, intelligence, reconnaissance, surveillance, rotary wing were in the air. Our youngest crew member was 20, and our oldest was 49.”
As helicopters carrying the apprehension teams advanced toward Caracas at low altitude, they were shielded by an extensive aerial escort that included F-22s, F-35s, F-18s, B-1 bombers, EA-18s, and remotely piloted drones. The air campaign neutralized Venezuelan air defense systems ahead of the ground insertion to protect the force.
The helicopters reached Maduro’s compound at 2:01 a.m. local time. Upon arrival, the team came under fire and responded. “One of our aircraft was hit, but remained flyable,” Caine confirmed.
Describing the overall effort, Caine said it reflected years of accumulated experience. “This mission was meticulously planned, drawing lessons from decades of missions over the last many years.” He added, “Those in the air over Caracas last night were willing to give their lives for those on the ground and in the helicopters.”
Earlier in his remarks, Caine characterized the operation itself in stark terms. Addressing Operation Absolute Resolve, he said it was “an audacious operation that only the United States could do.” He formally outlined its legal basis at the outset of the briefing: “Last night, on the order of the President of the United States and in support of a request from the Department of Justice… the United States military conducted an apprehension mission in Caracas, Venezuela, to bring to justice [to] two indicted persons, Nicholas and Cilia Maduro.”
The operation was tied directly to federal indictments filed in the Southern District of New York. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced charges against Maduro and his wife that include narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy, and possession of machineguns and destructive devices.
Caine said the action demonstrated the full integration of U.S. military capabilities across domains. “This particular mission required every component of our joint force with soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and guardians, working in unison with our intelligence agency partners and law enforcement teammates.”
Summing up the broader significance, Caine underscored the message sent by the operation. “This was a powerful demonstration of America’s Joint Force. Our jobs are to integrate combat power so when the order comes, we can deliver overwhelming force… against any foe anywhere in the world.”
He concluded with praise for those who carried out the mission and their families. “I am immensely proud today of our joint force and filled with gratitude to represent them here today. There is simply no mission too difficult for these incredible professionals and the families that stand by them. Their courage and tireless commitment to our nation are what makes us strong.”
{Matzav.com}
Immigration attorneys across the country say federal officials are no longer treating marriages to U.S. citizens as a reliable path to legal status, warning that applications tied to spousal relationships are now being examined with far greater suspicion.
Lawyers say the shift accelerated after President Donald Trump directed his administration to confront what it views as widespread abuse of marriage-based visas, particularly arrangements in which migrants allegedly pay Americans to enter short-term or sham marriages.
For years, a wedding to a U.S. citizen often gave migrants a major advantage when seeking permanent residency, even though it was never an automatic guarantee of approval. Attorneys now report that those cases are being treated far more cautiously, with officials at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services probing details that previously drew little attention.
Brad Bernstein, an immigration lawyer with Spar & Bernstein, told clients that marriage to an American citizen can no longer be viewed as a near-certain route to a green card, according to reporting by NDTV.
One of the biggest changes, Bernstein says, is a new focus on whether couples actually live together. Under current enforcement priorities, the Trump administration is emphasizing a shared residence between spouses, an issue that had often been secondary in the past.
“Immigration officers do not care why you live apart, and they do not care if it’s for work, school, money, or convenience,” Bernstein said.
“So, if you’re not living in the same house every day, immigration is going to start questioning the marriage. And once they question it, they’re investigating, and once they come knocking on your door, they’re looking to deny you. So, if you want a marriage green card, you live together. Period,” he explained.
Federal officials have also issued broader warnings making clear that marriages must be genuine. USCIS has said it will deny applications where officials conclude the relationship involved “no good faith, intent to live together as spouses and intended to circumvent immigration laws.”
Beyond new applications, the administration has indicated that even existing green card holders could face renewed scrutiny. In November, officials suggested that previously granted statuses may be reopened and reassessed.
That message was made explicit in a Thanksgiving Day announcement by USCIS Director Joseph Edlow, who wrote, “At the direction of @POTUS, I have directed a full scale, rigorous reexamination of every Green Card for every alien from every country of concern.”
“The protection of this country and of the American people remains paramount, and the American people will not bear the cost of the prior administration’s reckless resettlement policies. American safety is non-negotiable,” he continued.
The administration has paired the tougher review of marriage-based cases with other sweeping immigration moves. It ended the diversity visa lottery, which had allowed as many as 55,000 migrants a year to obtain legal entry, following the arrest of Portuguese national Claudio Manuel Neves Valente on charges connected to fatal shootings at Brown University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Valente had received his legal status through the 2017 diversity lottery program.
{Matzav.com}
Federal court records and recent reporting have shed new light on how participants in Minnesota’s sprawling Feeding Our Future fraud case allegedly used stolen pandemic relief funds to bankroll extravagant personal lifestyles instead of feeding low-income children, even as the state faces mounting scrutiny over broader welfare fraud.
According to a report by the New York Post, individuals convicted in the scheme diverted hundreds of millions of dollars from federal COVID-19 nutrition programs into luxury purchases, including high-end real estate, expensive vehicles, and overseas investments.
Court documents cited by the outlet describe purchases ranging from upscale condominiums and exotic rental cars to properties in Kenya. One defendant, 43-year-old Liban Yasin Alishire, pleaded guilty in 2023 to wire fraud and money laundering after prosecutors said he spent approximately $350,000 of the stolen funds on a Kenyan resort where visitors are offered services such as personal chefs.
Prosecutors have said the fraud operation was orchestrated by Aimee Bock, who allegedly used the nonprofit Feeding Our Future as a vehicle to submit false claims for meals that were never served. Authorities also claim Bock financially supported her former boyfriend, Empress Malcolm Watson Jr., through what they described as a sham contract that paid him a $1 million salary.
The New York Post reported that the pair frequently rented Lamborghinis, Rolls-Royces, and other exotic vehicles for roughly $2,000 per day while traveling. Court filings further state that the couple took repeated luxury trips to destinations such as Las Vegas and Graceland, with Watson Jr. posting displays of wealth on social media.
In June 2024, federal prosecutors announced charges against nearly 50 Somali Muslim immigrants in Minnesota, accusing them of stealing approximately $250 million through the Feeding Our Future umbrella of organizations.
More recently, Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Thompson warned that fraud in Minnesota extends far beyond a single case. Speaking publicly, Thompson said an estimated half of $18 billion in welfare spending in the state has been lost to fraudulent activity.
“Minnesota has become a magnet for fraud, so much so that we have developed a fraud tourism industry — people coming to our state purely to exploit and defraud its programs,” Thompson said. “This is a deeply unsettling reality that all Minnesotans should understand.”
Thompson contrasted the alleged conduct with more typical benefit fraud schemes, explaining that “traditional Medicare and Medicaid fraud is that people overbill,” but that the Minnesota cases often involve no services at all. Instead, he said, perpetrators create shell organizations and submit entirely fabricated claims for reimbursement.
The renewed attention to the Feeding Our Future case comes amid additional allegations raised by independent journalists, including Nick Shirley, whose reporting has focused on suspected fraud tied to daycare and healthcare operations linked to Minnesota’s Somali community.
{Matzav.com}
Secretary of State Marco Rubio argued Sunday that the administration was unable to brief lawmakers in advance of the Venezuela mission, citing the risk of leaks and the unpredictable conditions surrounding the operation. He said the circumstances were too fluid to permit prior notification, stressing that secrecy was essential.
“You can’t congressionally notify something like this for two reasons. Number one, it will leak. It’s as simple as that. And number two, it’s an exigent circumstance. It’s an emergent thing. You don’t even know if you’re going to be able to do it,” Rubio said, adding, “We didn’t know if all of the things that had to line up were going to line up at the same time in the right conditions.”
“It had to be at the right place at the right time with the right weather, and all things like that. So those are very difficult to notify, but the number one reason is operational security.”
Rubio made the remarks during an appearance on ABC News’s This Week, where he rejected claims that the United States violated the law by acting without congressional authorization.
“It wasn’t necessary because this is not an invasion. We didn’t occupy a country,” Rubio said in response to questions from host George Stephanopoulos.
He emphasized that the mission should be viewed as a criminal arrest rather than a military campaign. “This was an arrest operation. This was a law enforcement operation. He was arrested on the ground in Venezuela by FBI agents, read his rights and removed from the country,” Rubio said.
U.S. forces carried out a covert overnight action into Saturday to seize Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, transporting them to New York to face charges tied to drug trafficking, terrorism, and firearms offenses. Maduro is now being held at the Metropolitan Detention Center.
According to Rubio, the planning for the mission began months ago, following a series of threats and maritime strikes aimed at what U.S. officials described as “narco-terrorists.” He said the arrest could not have been carried out without military support.
“Obviously, this was not a friendly territory,” Rubio said, explaining why the Pentagon was involved.
“So in order to arrest him we had to ask the Department of War to become involved in the operation. The Department of War went in. They hit anything that was a threat to the agents that were going in to arrest him, and they hit anything that was a threat on the way out,” he said.
WATCH:
{Matzav.com}
[Video below.] House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said the administration must face limits on its actions in Venezuela, calling on lawmakers to reassert their authority once Congress reconvenes. He argued that any additional steps involving the South American nation should not move forward without lawmakers’ clear consent.
Speaking Sunday, Jeffries contended that the White House has failed to demonstrate that the dramatic operation against Venezuela was necessary to protect Americans. Appearing on NBC’s Meet the Press, he said, “There’s been no evidence that the administration has presented to justify the actions that were taken in terms of there being an imminent threat to the health, the safety, the well-being, the national security of the American people.”
The Democratic leader also criticized the decision-making behind the raid that resulted in Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, being taken into custody and flown to a federal detention facility in Brooklyn. Jeffries described the move as “an act of war.”
President Donald Trump defended the operation a day earlier, telling reporters that detaining Maduro was required to curb the flow of narcotics and criminal networks into the United States and to halt shipments of Venezuelan oil sold in violation of sanctions. He also said Maduro had undermined regional stability through ties with China, Russia, and Iran.
Trump further stated that Washington would temporarily take charge of Venezuela, saying the United States would “run [Venezuela] until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.” He added that American energy firms would “fix” the country’s oil sector, pointing to Venezuela’s vast petroleum reserves.
Jeffries questioned whether that approach would actually improve conditions for Venezuelans, arguing that Trump’s leadership record suggests otherwise. “It remains to be seen whether the people of Venezuela are going to be better off,” he said.
“He’s done a terrible job running the United States of America,” Jeffries added. “Life hasn’t gotten better for the American people over the last year; life has gotten worse.”
The capture of Maduro drew applause from Republican lawmakers, while many Democrats objected to the lack of advance notice to Congress. Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio countered that alerting lawmakers beforehand would have risked the success of the mission.
{Matzav.com}
As debate over Chareidi conscription intensifies, Shas has made clear it will not back the 2026 state budget unless the coalition first advances legislation formalizing exemptions and regulation for Chareidi enlistment. Party spokesman Asher Medina issued the warning on Sunday, signaling a move that could topple Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu’s government if carried through.
With the March 31 deadline for passing the budget looming, the 11 Knesset seats held by Shas are pivotal. Failure to approve the budget on time would automatically dissolve the Knesset and send the country to early elections, giving the party significant leverage in coalition negotiations.
Speaking to Radio Kol Barama, Medina framed the proposed law as a defining issue for the Chareidi public. “From the perspective of the Chareidi public, the draft law is as far-reaching as one could possibly imagine. With God’s help, we will support the law because it is the only thing that will save the world of Torah,” he said. He added pointedly that “the only thing that will stop the arrests is not demonstrations, but legislation.”
For roughly a year and a half, Chareidi leaders have pressed for a statutory arrangement keeping full-time yeshiva students out of the Israel Defense Forces, following a High Court ruling that invalidated the longstanding blanket exemptions granted to them. The ruling upended decades of policy and placed immediate pressure on both the government and the Chareidi community.
Estimates suggest that around 80,000 Chareidi men between the ages of 18 and 24 are currently eligible for military service but have not enlisted. At the same time, the IDF has stated that it needs some 12,000 additional recruits urgently, citing the heavy burden on standing and reserve forces amid the war with Hamas in Gaza and other security demands.
Shas lawmakers have consistently backed the proposed legislation, which would preserve exemptions for full-time yeshiva students while ostensibly encouraging greater enlistment among graduates of Chareidi educational frameworks. In recent weeks, they have even voiced support for the bill during visits to Chareidi draft evaders held in military prison.
In a separate Kol Barama interview on Sunday, Shas MK Michael Malkieli stressed that his party is acting in full coordination with United Torah Judaism, despite a very public dispute between the two factions over control of Yerushalayim’s religious council.
Medina’s remarks followed closely on comments from a senior Degel HaTorah figure, part of the UTJ alliance, who told Ynet that “if there is no progress” on the enlistment bill, “we will not vote in favor of the budget…and if that means the government falls, then let the government fall.”
Both Shas and UTJ have previously rejected claims that they were explicitly threatening to bring down the government over the issue. Nonetheless, the pressure campaign appears to have resonated at the top of the coalition.
Addressing a meeting focused on funding for Chareidi education on Sunday, Netanyahu urged lawmakers to move far more quickly on the contentious bill. “We need to accelerate the completion of the conscription law legislation — everything depends on it,” Ynet quoted him as saying.
Under the proposed framework, yeshiva students who ignored draft orders over the past year would effectively have their status reset. Yeshivos would also immediately regain half of the funding that was cut following the High Court’s 2024 decision, a step meant to ease both financial strain and legal exposure within the community.
Those granted deferments would face travel-related sanctions, though critics argue these measures are largely symbolic and would expire once individuals reach age 26. More substantial penalties affecting subsidies would only be imposed if enlistment targets are missed.
The legislation has drawn sharp criticism from the Attorney General’s Office, the IDF, and the Finance Ministry, all of which contend that it is unlikely to produce a meaningful rise in Chareidi enlistment.
In a legal opinion circulated to lawmakers over the weekend, Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee legal adviser Miri Frenkel Shor faulted the bill’s gradual, multi-year approach to sanctions and urged a reconsideration of the clause that ends penalties at age 26, when repeated deferments become a permanent exemption.
Echoing that concern, a Finance Ministry representative told the committee on Sunday that “setting an expiration date for the sanctions empties most of them of their substance.”
Opposition lawmakers also assailed the sanctions structure, questioning why the bill calls for an exceptions committee that would include a representative from the Yeshiva Committee — an organization that a Times of Israel investigation found actively advises yeshiva students on how to evade the draft.
Also on Sunday, UTJ chairman Yitzhak Goldknopf took an uncompromising stance, arguing that instead of penalizing those who choose Torah study over military service, “all sanctions should be abolished.” He told the committee, “I implore the committee: If there are those who study Torah, exempt them from everything. They should not be tied to quotas or targets,” and accused supporters of sanctions of promoting a “yellow star” for Torah scholars.
That remark drew immediate and fierce backlash. Opposition Leader Yair Lapid responded by invoking his own family history, saying, “My father wore a yellow star in the Budapest ghetto simply because there was no Jewish army to protect his life. My grandfather wore a yellow star when he was murdered in a concentration camp,” and labeling Goldknopf’s comparison “the dream of every antisemite.”
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich also condemned Goldknopf, saying there was “no place in our coalition” for individuals “who don’t stop harming the people of Israel, IDF fighters and Torah scholars.” In a post on X, he added, “Our heroic fighters are the ones battling the Nazis of every generation and preventing them from carrying out the Final Solution conceived by the one who devised the yellow star.”
Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee chairman Boaz Bismuth sought to strike a measured tone, saying, “The members of the committee know the immense respect I have for Torah scholars and, in general, for the Chareidi world, but a yellow patch is not here — we need to set a limit.”
UTJ MK Meir Porush went even further than Goldknopf, warning that cutting daycare subsidies to families of draft evaders would lead to “starvation” among Chareidim and could violate Israel’s obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Unlike Degel HaTorah and Shas, the Agudas Yisrael faction led by Goldknopf and Porush has openly opposed the bill, with Goldknopf saying he cannot support any legislation that includes sanctions at all.
Defending the draft, Bismuth, a Likud MK and the author of the revised version, dismissed the criticism as detached from reality. Addressing Yisrael Beytenu MK Sharon Nir, he argued that following her approach would mean “there will be not be 17,000 [Chareidi] soldiers, there will be 17,000 prisoners and 5,000 soldiers forced to guard them.”
As the political battle played out in the Knesset, tensions spilled into the streets. Chareidi protesters attempted to block recruits at the Yerushalayim enlistment office and at the Bakum induction base in central Israel, prompting clashes with police who used water cannons to disperse the crowds.
Deputy Attorney General Gil Limon also weighed in on Sunday, accusing the government of defying a High Court directive by failing to implement tougher sanctions against draft evaders, a lapse he described as a “constitutional crisis.” “The High Court required the formulation of the policy by today. This constitutes a violation of the ruling,” Ynet quoted him as telling a weekly cabinet meeting after a court-imposed deadline expired.
In mid-November, the High Court had granted the government 45 days to craft effective enforcement tools, including criminal proceedings, against Chareidi yeshiva students who refused to comply with conscription orders.
In a unanimous ruling, the justices charged that the government and state authorities had almost “totally shirked” their duty to enforce the law against Chareidi draft dodgers, calling it a case of selective enforcement and a breach of the state’s obligation to uphold its own laws.
The court instructed the government to promptly initiate criminal proceedings against those already deemed draft evaders and to present, by January 4, civil and economic enforcement measures with a strong likelihood of success against all who ignore enlistment orders.
According to reports, Cabinet Secretary Yossi Fuchs responded to Limon by saying that “the government’s policy is to approve the conscription law.”
{Matzav.com}
Speaking before the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, a senior IDF officer reported that a significant number of Chareidi men had entered military service earlier today, marking what could become the largest enlistment of its kind in recent years. Brig. Gen. Shay Tayeb, who heads the Planning and Personnel Management Division within the IDF Personnel Directorate, told lawmakers that by the afternoon hours, “there were over 210 fighters and over 140 combat support troops and it is likely that in 10 days this will end with the largest enlistment in recent times.”
The recruits, most of whom were slated for combat or combat-support roles, were assigned to frameworks geared toward the Chareidi public, including the Netzach Yehuda battalion, the Chashmonaim brigade, and additional tracks designed to accommodate a Chareidi lifestyle within the army.
The enlistment took place despite efforts by Chareidi demonstrators to block the process. Protests were reported both at the Yerushalayim enlistment office and at the Bakum induction base in central Israel, where clashes erupted between demonstrators and police. Law enforcement ultimately used water cannons to disperse the crowds.
According to Ynet, protesters shouted warnings that the recruits would abandon their religious way of life in the army and hurled harsh accusations at them, calling the enlistees “sinners” and “murderers.”
{Matzav.com}
