Transcript

🚨 Trump Crosses GLOBAL RED LINE as CHAOS GROWS | Mea Culpa

From MeidasTouch · Episode page · Watch on YouTube

· 56 min · 8,818 words · 99 timestamped sections

This is the full, timestamped transcript of "🚨 Trump Crosses GLOBAL RED LINE as CHAOS GROWS | Mea Culpa", an episode of MeidasTouch published January 17, 2026 (56 min, about 8,818 words). It mentions 22 people, works and ideas, including Donald Trump, Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela, Oil, Event.

What this episode is about

The discussion highlights the controversial actions taken by Trump regarding Venezuela, focusing on the authorization of the physical seizure of its leader, Nicholas Maduro, and how this act raises questions about legality and the classification of it as an act of war. The speaker critiques the administration's inconsistent narrative and their failure to adequately justify the decision amidst claims of prior notifications to oil companies yet lack of notification to Congress.

Key takeaways

  • Seizing a foreign leader: America’s bold power move or a slippery slope into chaos?
  • Trump’s Venezuela strategy: war by whim or calculated chess game? Spoiler: it’s murky.
  • Diplomatic immunity for Maduro? The Constitution gets more twisted than a political thriller.
  • America's 'snatch and grab' strategy: international law's worst nightmare or a desperate gamble?
  • When military might meets morality: can the US justify controlling foreign waters while ignoring its own laws?

Who speaks in this episode?

What is discussed, and when

  1. – 5:00: Venezuela, Danny Glover, Lethal Weapon, Donald Trump
  2. – 10:00: Venezuela, Substack, Nicolás Maduro, Alvin K. Hellerstein
  3. – 15:00: Venezuela, Taiwan, Mexico
  4. – 20:00: Venezuela
  5. – 25:00: Donald Trump, Venezuela
  6. – 30:00: Mexico, Venezuela
  7. – 35:00: Venezuela, Taiwan
  8. – 40:00: Venezuela
  9. – 45:00: Donald Trump, Venezuela, Oil
  10. – 55:00: Donald Trump

Notable quotes from "🚨 Trump Crosses GLOBAL RED LINE as CHAOS GROWS | Mea Culpa"

  • You know what I mean? It's this is like it's right up Trump's alley to do something like this and then to declare that he is now the de facto leader of Venezuela as if that's…
    about Venezuela · at
  • I'm trying to figure out how Nicholas Maduro doesn't have diplomatic immunity as the sitting president of another country, the foreign head of state who not only.
    about Nicolás Maduro · at
  • Learned that the fentinel is not coming from Venezuela but rather it comes from China via Mexico. So instead of maybe seizing Maduro, maybe you go after I don't know Xiinping. But let me put that all on to the side for a sec. Historically,.
    about Mexico · at
  • Definitely going to, the crazy thing, too, is that they have Maduro over at MDC. And I actually I wrote in a Substack the other day this entire piece on how it's really the press that gets this wrong and that.
    about Substack · at
  • Helerstein was the judge that had me removed from solitary confinement on a habius corpus petition during the unconstitutional remand of me in 2020.
    about Alvin K. Hellerstein · at
  • I don't know what's going to happen next. we've always heard that China has every intent on taking Taiwan, right? So why can't Xiinping turn around and say that Ching Tay, who's the president of Taiwan,Q is an enemy of the state, that he's.
    about Taiwan · at
  • People and their freedom. He does not care about the American people. It's not about any of that. It's about what's in it for Trump and what's in it for Trump is the oil and…
    about Donald Trump · at
  • Why not? There's 300 billion [ __ ] barrels of oil. Think about that. 300 billion. Even if hypothetically the cost to extract it is.
    about Oil · at

Who and what is mentioned in this episode?

People

  • Donald Trump — Person · Core topic (referenced political actor) · 7 mentions · first at
    Central figure accused of authorizing the seizure of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and using threats/distractions as governance. His motives (oil, spectacle) and authoritarian tendencies are debated throughout.
  • Nicolás Maduro — Person · Core topic (seized head of state) · 1 mention · first at
    His alleged seizure by the U.S. is used to discuss acts of war, diplomatic immunity, international legality, and destabilizing precedent.
  • Alvin K. Hellerstein — Person · Referenced judge · 1 mention · first at
    Identified as the judge in the Maduro hearing and as having previously ruled against actions by Bill Barr and the Trump administration in a habeas matter.
  • William P. Barr — Person · Referenced former official · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned in connection with a judge's finding that Barr and the Trump administration unconstitutionally remanded the speaker (host) to prison.
    That's Alvin K. Helerstein who actually made the determination that Bill Barr and the Trump administration had unconstitutionally remanded me back to prison and enjoin them from further impeding upon my rights. So Helerstein.
  • Jamal Khashoggi — Person · Referenced victim (authoritarian comparison) · 1 mention
    Used as an example of dictator-style 'national security' labeling leading to killing, compared to Trump's rhetoric.
  • Danny Glover — Person · Referenced actor (analogy) · 2 mentions · first at
    Cited in a Lethal Weapon analogy to explain diplomatic immunity and the absurdity of seizing a diplomat/head of state.
    No. Well, that's cuz you're too young, right? It's with Danny Glover and with Mel Gibson. I believe it was Lethal Weapon 2 to be exact. And they had this South African diplomat and they were moving Krugarans and so on. At the end,.
  • Sam Bankman-Fried — Person · Referenced detainee example · 1 mention · first at
    Named as part of a list of high-profile individuals associated with MDC in media narratives.
    They keep saying, they keep showing again and again my face along with others. Sam Blankman Freed, you have Galain Maxwell, Epstein was at MDC, R. Kelly. yeah, you had I mean there was a whole slew of individuals. I was never at.
  • Chislaine Maxwell — Person · Referenced detainee example · 1 mention · first at
    Named as part of a list of high-profile individuals associated with MDC in media narratives.
    Showing again and again my face along with others. Sam Blankman Freed, you have Galain Maxwell, Epstein was at MDC, R. Kelly. yeah, you had I mean there was a whole slew of individuals. I was never at MDC. I never stepped foot in there. I.
  • Robert Kelly — Person · Referenced detainee example · 1 mention · first at
    Named as part of a list of high-profile individuals associated with MDC in media narratives.
    Face along with others. Sam Blankman Freed, you have Galain Maxwell, Epstein was at MDC, R. Kelly. yeah, you had I mean there was a whole slew of individuals. I was never at…
  • Mel Gibson — Person · Referenced actor (analogy) · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as part of the Lethal Weapon analogy used to discuss diplomatic immunity.
    No. Well, that's cuz you're too young, right? It's with Danny Glover and with Mel Gibson. I believe it was Lethal Weapon 2 to be exact. And they had this South African diplomat and they were moving Krugarans and so on. At the end,.
  • Ally — Person · Main guest (named only; full name not provided) · 20 mentions
    Guest provides analysis of legality, morality, and political motives; however, the transcript does not provide a full name, so this entity is omitted per instructions.

Companies & orgs

  • Substack — Company · Referenced publishing platform · 2 mentions · first at
    Cited as a venue for independent journalism and where the speaker wrote about press errors and MDC misinformation.
  • NPR — Company · Referenced mainstream media outlet · 1 mention
    Cited as part of mainstream press that allegedly repeated incorrect information about MDC.

Concepts & topics

  • Oil — Concept · Core topic (alleged motive) · 1 mention · first at
    Presented as the real driver behind Venezuela actions, outweighing drug enforcement claims; tied to oil companies being notified and extraction profits.
  • Diplomatic Immunity — Concept · Core topic (legal principle) · 1 mention · first at
    Central legal question raised: how a sitting foreign head of state could be seized and tried, and whether immunity applies.
    He actually shoots the diplomat, but he pulls out a white passport and he says, You can't touch me. Diplomatic immunity. And I'm fully aware of that.
  • Artificial Intelligence — Concept · Referenced technology (speculative linkage) · 1 mention
    Briefly mentioned as part of a speculative connection between crude oil, AI, and crypto investments.

Places & events

  • Venezuela — Place · Core topic (target country) · 15 mentions · first at
    Primary geopolitical setting: alleged U.S. operation, oil interests, regime-change implications, and regional destabilization.
  • Event — Event · Core event (alleged seizure operation) · 1 mention
    The episode revolves around an alleged U.S. operation to seize Nicolás Maduro and the subsequent hearing/transfer, used to discuss legality and precedent.
    Start with the facts. Trump didn't indict Nicholas Maduro in absentia. He authorized the physical seizure of a sitting foreign head of state. Under what statute does that not cross the red line?
  • Mexico — Place · Referenced country (drug route / threatened) · 4 mentions · first at
    Mentioned as fentanyl transit route and as one of the countries Trump threatened; tied to border rhetoric.
  • Taiwan — Place · Referenced flashpoint · 3 mentions · first at
    Used as example of how precedent could justify actions against Taiwan's leadership; tied to China’s intentions.

Media & podcasts

  • Lethal Weapon — Media · Referenced film (analogy) · 2 mentions · first at
    Used to illustrate diplomatic immunity via a scene involving a diplomat claiming immunity.
    You remember the movie Lethal Weapon?
  • Austin Powers — Media · Referenced film (rhetorical comparison) · 1 mention · first at
    Used to mock an official's affectation/behavior when discussing controlling waterways.
    Permission to. And I'm sitting there, it's like it's almost like a bad affectation of Mike Meyers in Austin Powers, right? where he's got it's just odd. And the notion to think…

Full transcript with timestamps

Ally, welcome back to Mayor Culpa. Great to have you on. Lots going on. We're going to jump right into it. So, let's start with the facts. Trump didn't indict Nicholas Maduro in absentia. He authorized the physical seizure of a sitting foreign head of state. Under what statute does that not cross the red line?

You know what I mean? It's this is like it's right up Trump's alley to do something like this and then to declare that he is now the de facto leader of Venezuela as if that's how it works. You remove the leader and now you're the leader. That's not how any of this works. Um, and the administration is working overtime to try to convince us that this whole situation was not an act of war and this was planned out meticulously, but they didn't have time to notify Congress, of course, cuz it was in the moment. It was in the moment, but they also had time to notify oil companies ahead of time of what was uh what they were planning on doing. So, none of this makes any sense. They contradict themselves every time they talk about it. Um and in in actuality, this is an act of war. You cannot go in, remove a leader forcefully, um not have any plan for the succession of who's going to be ruling this country or not

ruling, but leading this country. Um and say that's not an act of war, but then at the same time say that these these folks that are smuggling drugs on these rinky dig boats across the Atlantic Ocean are committing an act of war. So make it make sense. You know, I can't because I want to break it down to like the childish the most childish way. You remember the movie Lethal Weapon?

I don't think I've seen it. No. Well, that's cuz you're too young, right? It's with Danny Glover and with Mel Gibson. I believe it was Lethal Weapon 2 to be exact. And they had this um South African diplomat and they were moving Krugarans and so on. At the end, Danny Glover, of course, breaks the law. He actually shoots the diplomat, but he pulls out a white passport and he says, "You can't touch me. Diplomatic immunity." And I'm fully aware of that. When I was in college in DC, many of my friends were the sons of diplomats, and they too had diplomatic immunity.

I'm trying to figure out how Nicholas Maduro doesn't have diplomatic immunity as the sitting president of another country, the foreign head of state who not only wasn't on American soil when he was seized, but is now on American soil because he was seized. I don't I don't I'm I'm lost.

I'm a bit lost as well. I mean, if you think about it, I mean, that kind of negates what we say like what's in the constitution of our own country, which is that sitting presidents cannot be charged or convicted of crimes while they're in office. So, does it not apply to foreign presidents or foreign leaders? Like, I'm a bit confused on the whole thing cuz if if not, I would like to see Donald Trump charged and and tried on multiple different charges that were dropped after he was reelected. So make I I I'm still having a hard time wrapping my mind around all this.

Yeah, I'm trying to figure out how they're actually going to bring this case. I don't believe prosecutors have a good case here. I think it's thin. I read the 25page um superseding indictment. And I have to tell you, it's all about cocaine. It's all about machine guns um and m and gun trafficking and narot trafficking. I know initially in the initial indictment it was all about fentinel and I guess somewhere along the line they learned that the fentinel is not coming from Venezuela but rather it comes from China via Mexico. So instead of maybe seizing Maduro, maybe you go after I don't know um Xiinping. But let me let me put that all on to the side for a sec. Historically, the United States has pursued foreign leaders through different things, sanctions, extradition requests, or international tribunals, not snatching grab operations. Question I really want to ask you is what makes this legally or

morally defensible? Now, um I don't think it is. I truly don't think it is. and they're and they're twisting and trying to figure out how to make it it how to make it defensible um in their mind. And the question is not whether is Maduro a good person or whether he's a good leader. It's that is this is this morally or or internationally like legal to do something like this? Can another country come over to the United States, bomb us, and kidnap our president and say that that's not an act of war and that they're going to try our president and keep them captive in their country? Um, and so no, I don't think that we would be okay with that. I don't think that we would think that's not an act,

right? Um, and so I don't think it is, but they don't really operate on on facts or on um moral standards. I mean, you saw Steven Miller, they were questioning him.

Are you are you now the leader? Are are you now leading this country? And if so, what is what are your day-to-day tasks and responsibilities and how are you going to operate the country of Venezuela? And he could not answer at all. He was like,

"No, but his answer was actually asinine." I mean, when he said, "We control the waterways." And he's got this weird affect, you know, affectation, right? We harid this weird uh our military is in the waters and we are patrolling. They cannot effectively do commerce unless we give them permission to. And I'm sitting there, it's like it's almost like a bad affectation of Mike Meyers in Austin Powers, right? You know, where he's got it's just odd. And the notion to think that you could take your navy or your military and put them into the international water and control how Venezuela is going to conduct business.

You know, we have the right to stop the oil from going to China or anywhere else because we are the strongest. I Yeah. You know, there's a difference. Something that I don't think that this administration certainly not people like Steven Miller understand. Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should.

Yeah. Absolutely. Um, but to them, I mean, look, they're already talking about doing this to other countries and warning other countries. Um, Cuba and Colombia and they're

Oh, we're gonna get into that. Oh, we're definitely going to, you know, the crazy thing, too, is that they have Maduro over at MDC. And I actually I wrote in a Substack the other day um this entire piece on how it's really the press that gets this wrong and that it is a massive distraction to the American people to constantly I told you that the hearing of Madura was going to be extremely boring. They walked them in. Mind you, they flew him in from MDC in Brooklyn to Manhattan. Then they drove him through with the armored trucks, the whole bit. He stands in front of the judge who I happen to have some relationship to. Uh Alvin K.

Helerstein was the judge that had me removed from solitary confinement on a habius corpus petition during the unconstitutional remand of me in 2020. That's Alvin K. Helerstein who actually made the determination that Bill Barr and the Trump administration had unconstitutionally remanded me back to prison um and enjoin them from further impeding upon my rights. So Helerstein who by the way happens to be 92 years old now he's not a guy who is shy within which to do what's right. He truly is a judge's judge. But the point I'm trying to make here is that the press gets it all wrong. Like they keep saying, you know, they keep showing again and again and again my face along with others. Sam Blankman Freed, you have Galain Maxwell, uh Epstein was at MDC, R. Kelly. Um yeah, you you had I mean there was a whole slew of uh individuals. I was never at MDC. I never stepped foot in there. I never was processed there. I've never

even been outside the property. I don't know where on the internet got it wrong, but lo and behold, it keeps showing that I was at MDC. I was not. When I was remanded, I was taken to the tombs at 500 Pearl Street and then sent back up to Otisville where they put me in the solitary confinement for another 15 days. So I don't know where it gets but this is the sloppy and the lazy journalism which is why independent journalism like right here Maya Culpo or your Substack or the Midas Touch Network why we are so vital to getting true I can't I can tell ABC NBC NPR you know they all got it wrong and they just keep promoting it. It's truly I've never been to MDC. Call up, if you don't believe me, call up the warden of MDC. He'll tell you I was never there. I never stepped I never stepped foot there. But that's that's yesterday. Let me ask you this then. If the United States is asserting a right to unilaterally seize

heads of state, this goes to your point. What's stopping Putin from claiming the same authority over Zalinski or Xi Ping over Taiwan's leadership? um uh I I forget what his name but uh over the president of Taiwan,

right? No, that's exactly right. I mean, it's a it becomes a very slippery slope where these dictators can now say, "Hey, this I consider this an act of war." They can I mean, even Putin said the other day that um Ukraine was targeting his house and and we don't know that there's any factual truth to that statement, but he can claim something like that and say, "I consider this an act of war. now I'm going to go in and kidnap your president and and I mean of course he's already bombing the entire country and he still has done that. Um but yeah, it opens up like a can of worms in that sense of what is international like what is legally internationally?

What is legal internationally? Um and and where does it stop? And so I think there's so many problems with the way that the the Trump administration has conducted themselves here and has um tried to excuse the method of which they've done this um which is not legal and which is not um getting the authorization of Congress like they're supposed to. So I I think yeah we we've opened up a can of worms in a sense that I don't know what's going to happen next. I mean, we've always heard that China has every intent on taking Taiwan, right? So why can't Xiinping turn around and say that Ching Tay, who's the president of Taiwan,Q uh is an enemy of the state, that he's violated whatever whatever laws, call him, I don't know, call him a uh a threat to national security, right? I mean, it's the same thing of what is what Trump just did with Maduro. he's a threat to our national security. They're killing hundreds of thousands of people

with cocaine uh and so on because as we all know and they learned very late that fentinel is not coming in through Venezuela. In fact, one of the boats that they blew up I think had marijuana on it. Um, you know, fentinel, by the way, to the administration that constantly listens to this program, fentinel comes from China. All right? 95% of all fentinel manufactured in the world comes from China. And the bulk of it is getting into the United States through Mexico. So, why Venezuela? We all know the answer,

right? It's about the oil. Exactly. It's not about the drugs. He doesn't care about the the Venezuelan people and their freedom. He does not care about the American people. It's not about any of that. It's about what's in it for Trump and what's in it for Trump is the oil and the promises that he made to the oil industry. Um which is why he literally said that we are going to go in and get the oil. And this is very different than um how it was in Afghanistan and Iraq. So he doesn't hide what his intentions are. He says them out loud.

Um and that is what this is about. And so, yeah, this is not this is not a a win. I mean, I'm sure the Venezuelan people are thrilled that the US has intervened into their country. Um, and they have high hopes for the future and their leadership moving forward, but that's not what any of this is about at the end of the day,

right? Because to me, and I wonder if you feel the same, isn't the most dangerous part of this that Trump just normalized hostage style geopolitics at the presidential level?

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, middle of the night like capturing and and attempt to regime change. I mean, this is like some mafia. like this is not this is not how the US how the United States of America conducts uh foreign affairs. So no. Yeah, there's there's so many problems with this.

I mean, they went in, they knocked down the door. It was almost like a midnight per walk

and they claimed no one was killed in the process and and there were people killed in the process.

Yeah, fortunately there were Fortunately there were no American casualties. There was some injuries, but no casualties. On the other side, I I heard as much as 80 people were either killed or injured. And we're talking about civilians as well, not just those that were around uh Maduro trying to protect him as the Secret Service protects our president. Um they took him out,

right? Yeah. Exactly. So there was bloodshed um and destruction. And so I think that, you know, that also is a big issue cuz that that to me is a war crime if you go in and you kill civilians in the process of your middle of the night takeover. I mean, can you imagine that happening happening in America? No, we would not stand for that for one second. So,

no, we would not. Meanwhile, Trump justified the seizure by labeling Maduro a criminal threat. But he also, by the way, used the same language against migrants,

journalists, political opponents, critics, protesters, protesters. How elastic has that definition become? I mean for him anybody he can he declares anybody that doesn't like him or or support him as a threat to the country as a enemy of the country. He said that since day one. the media, um, you know, Democrats, whatever um immigrants LGBTQ people, everybody is an enemy of the country to him. And in reality, it means an enemy to him. So, they can declare all they want. That doesn't make it true. They can say we're in a war um because Venezuela's sending 16 people in a boat uh with one motor over with marijuana and that doesn't make it true. Um but that's that's how they operate. They say things and then they think that that makes them true and that's just not not the case. I mean, how different is that labeling than what, for example, Vladimir Putin does or did I should say to the journalist

Nalli or others? Isn't it the same thing that he is a threat to the na, you know, to the motherland to the national security of Russia and therefore jailed him? By the way, isn't it the same thing that got um Jamal Kosigible killed by Muhammad bin Salman? He was declared by the supreme leader, the king, uh you know, the monarch, the ruler, whatever you want to call these folks. They were deemed to be threats to the national security of their country. These folks were jailed and killed.

Yeah. Yeah. It's the likes of how a dictator operates um as long as you declare someone an enemy and then also to have the backing of the party um and and the MAGA movement behind them who are like yeah that that makes sense. These people are enemies of the state. Like that makes sense. These people are the root of all my problems. I mean that's been his playbook from day one is like these people are the cause of all your problems and as soon as we get rid of them everything will be better. And that's just not the case and not has not never been the case, right?

Um but that's how he makes the us versus them mentality. Um and he gets blind support from people because they think whatever actions that he he deems necessary to do something are now justified um because of the way that he speaks about groups people. And I mean, you see it even with just like the Somalian targeting in Minnesota. Um, you know, and so he or the um

or the Haitians eating the dogs thinking of Yeah. It's like he takes a group of people and makes them the others, makes us versus them, and then he gets all the support.

Um, and and these people will support him doing anything by any means necessary.

Can we be can we be clear about something? Because MAGA is not the Republican party, right? MAGA is a subset of the Republican party. And you're 100% correct. Under no circumstances will 95 out of 100 MAGAs side against him. We've seen a few. We've seen Marjorie Taylor Green, right? We've seen even Lauren Boowbert um going up against their Supreme Leader. But, you know, I I just want to be clear that the Republican party is not 100% MAGA. The 100% of MAGA are Republicans.

Yes. Yeah. No, that's fair and true. Um, and there are a lot of Republicans. I just don't know how at this point you can still call yourself a Republican, I guess, um, if you don't believe in MAGA because to me it feels like that is the ideology that they've adopted. So, I'm like,

yeah, I I'm just like, you got to find something. I feel like you have to find a new party or a new way to describe your beliefs because it's just simply not the Republican party anymore.

Well, come on over to the Democratic Party. We're we're welcome we're welcoming people today. from from an international law perspective, how destabilizing is it when I don't know the country that once was the beacon on the top of the hill that enforced sovereignty openly, they go ahead and then they abandon it.

Yeah. I mean that is that is the Republican party. I mean, from day one, not day one, because they've had a lot of experience in the past trying to force regime changes and things of that nature, but um from day one of of the MAGA movement of Donald Trump, they've said that it's America first, right? Um and we're not going to get involved in foreign affairs. We're not going to even support our allies. We're not going to fund Ukraine. We're not going to stand up to Israel. are not going to do anything to support anybody that's not America except when it's in their best interest, when it's in Donald Trump's best interest, that goes out the window.

And so it's like they truly do not stand for anything. Um or maybe they do, but Donald Trump doesn't. So, um supporting him as the president of the United States means you don't have any firm values. you don't have any firm um uh like things that are guiding you as your principles that you operate on whether you're a lawmaker or just a voter. Um whatever it is is what he decides that is in his best interest. And so it becomes very fluid and and there really is no set of guiding principles that they're operating on anymore. And and that's why you see so much chaos in the house because you see Speaker Johnson who's trying to appease Donald Trump while at the same time trying to the MAGA base. Um and Marjorie Taylor Green even said herself, she said, "We don't have a speaker. We have someone who is literally like an extension of the president.

He's a puppet." You know what I don't understand? How does this actually benefit Trump? You know, I listen to Trump speaking all the time and when he starts talking about, for example, the oil companies, uh again unlike what Vladimir Putin has done, unless that's what Trump is actually trying to emulate, Putin owns 25% of every single company in Russia. So you turn around, you take all the oil companies, he owns 25%. But that's not how it works here in America. Texico, Penso, um you know, Exxon Mobile, uh these two or three companies, these US companies that actually have the capability of turning Venezuela's dirty oil, which is referred to as sludge, uh into usable petroleum products as well as gasoline. Yeah, we do have that technology, but Trump doesn't own it.

These are publicly traded companies. How is this even benefiting the fact that let's say Exxon Mobile makes another billion dollar a quarter or two billion? You know, they make like four, five billion a quarter every 3 months. So, what if they go from 5 to 7 billion or 8 billion? How does that benefit you or me or the American people? How does that benefit us at all?

Well, it doesn't. Um, and that's the million-dollar question I think in regards to f you need to follow the money and figure out how Trump is benefiting from this. Um, how the Trump family is benefiting from this. How because that's what it comes. It's not even about how does the White House benefit from this. It's how does the Trump family benefit benefit from this. Um, and so I mean I've been doing a deep dive research into his um his cry crypto investments and how foreign back nations have been pouring money into his schemes um into his family's company into um his memecoin. And so I think there's probably some connection there with the crude oil and the rise of AI and crypto and and things of that nature. So, it's always about following the money. Where, you know,

interesting. Yeah. Where is he profiting from this um as an individual and his family?

Yeah. Well, you know, I want to get back to the topic that you brought up, the other countries, because during a speech, Trump explicitly threatened countries literally all in one breath. He explicitly threatened Cuba, Mexico, Greenland, Colombia, to name just four four countries with entirely different relationships to the United States. That's foreign policy or you think it's intimidation theater? Rhetorical question.

Um, I think it's both. I think it's intimidation tactics for sure. Um, and it's also his way of negotiating and and deal making and and saying, "Hey, by the way, this could be you next." It's is what, you know, it's like, "Hey, it'd be a shame if something happens here. Nice little country over there." Um, so I do think a part of it is just fear. He's just invoking fear in the leaders of these countries. Um, but I also don't think that I would put anything past him. And so I think we need to be eyes wide open in the fact that clearly they are operating as like a rogue uh government at this point, not getting approval and not notifying people of their plans even if they're made months in advance. And so I think we shouldn't be we shouldn't be uh assuming things won't happen or assuming that American boots are not going to be put on the ground in some of these countries because I truly think that they will.

Yeah, you and me both. So what do you think of the inherent risks that are created when you have a president who actually publicly puts targets on multiple countries without the congressional authorization or any stated strategic objective? You know, that's the part that really confused me the most, right? What's the strategic objective? Um, okay, Colombia, we also know cocaine. Um, but Cuba, what is it that they're sending rum? I mean, at what point in time, you know, do we turn out Mexico? Okay. Okay. I get it. You know, Mexico, the problem in Trump's eyes that people are coming across our southern border, you know, by the millions and millions and they're all drug addicts, murderers, extortionists, rapists, you know, gang members, and so on. Um, not my words, his words. Uh, I'm just trying to figure out what's the objective here.

Well, I don't know that they even know the objective to be honest. I don't think that they have a a long-term vision. Um, cuz when you ask them, they have no idea what the long-term vision is in terms of um, you know, creating a democracy in Venezuela and how they're going to go about doing that and and whom they would like to be the next leader of Venezuela. like there is no it's all about the short term like how can we flex our muscles and and make this a big optical event. Um and so I don't think that they know and I think the inherent risks are that it creates a lot of destabilization in these regions um when they don't know what the future is of their own countries and then they also don't know if they can trust America um and and they don't know you know what is the extent of America's involvement going to be in the country moving forward. So, I think it just creates a lot of chaos, a lot of confusion um and

a lot of unrest and you're going to see a lot of civil unrest um across the number of countries that they mentioned, Cuba, Colombia, etc.

You know, I like the fact that you use the term flexing our muscles, right? and how it doesn't make sense. And in init immediately something silly popped into my mind cuz I think silly but it's appropriate. So imagine a professional bodybuilder, right? Like a Mr. Mr. Universe, Mr. Olympia literally standing in a supermarket posing. You're like, "What the fuck?" Right? I mean, I didn't come here for a um you know, for a um a muscle show, right? Uh you know, a bodybuilding show. I came here to pick up, I don't know, some avocados, some tomatoes, make a guacamole, some chips, right? Whatever.

It's one thing if actually you went to go see the Mr. Olympia uh bodybuilding competition and the standing on a stage, that's appropriate. But here, like in a bus stop or in a supermarket, right? And you and you're buying a term that none of us have ever heard, something called it's called groceries. Groceries. It's not a term people really use, right? But no, no, it it it actually is. But your point is so well taken, right? It's like what are we doing? We're literally flexing our military might

against [ __ ] Venezuela. really when you have right now why don't you flex that might and we're going to talk about that against Russia and stop the war and the killing in Ukraine cuz he always says he's concerned about all the death that's happening. Why not stop China once and for all from the ongoing continuous talks of taking over Taiwan or the fact that you want to really use your might? How about stop China from stealing everybody's intellectual property rights? I mean, there's so much that we could flex our muscles with, but here we are going into Venezuela.

For what? For what? Makes no sense to me. Yeah, exactly. Why not kidnap Putin while we're at it and try him for his crimes in the United States and and end the war there? I mean, if we really want to flex our muscles, but he knows he can't do that. Um, and that would lead to probably a nuclear war. So, I think he knows that. I mean, I think he he sees Venezuela or saw Venezuela as someone he could pick on and like

Sure. Yeah. Do you find yourself being sluggish throughout the day and you just need something quick and convenient without the use of nicotine? That's why I started using ultra pouches. And truth, I'm obsessed. Ultra pouches are completely nicotine free, caffeine-free, and packed with neotropics that are designed for mental clarity and enhanced focus. Ultra pouches provide the same kick as a nicotine patch without the side effects. You know, the buzz, the addiction, the crash, the jitters, the vaso constriction, or the gun rot. I mean, most pouches elevate cortisol, raise blood pressure, and they keep your body in a constant stressed state. Ultra pouches let you keep your pouches but with a cleaner kick. Ultra pouches give you the great pouch experience that I actually like but without again the nicotine, the flavor, the burn, the kick, the habit without feeling wired at night. 90% of users saw significant

improvement in their overall focus levels. They were calm, steady flow state, focus with enhanced memory, smooth energy, mood balance, all of it. Remember, with zero nicotine and natural neutropics, these are also trusted by top athletes, entrepreneurs, and engineers around the world. Ultra, it's the ultimate guilt-free pouch, delivering instant focus and mental clarity, again, without nicotine or caffeine. And new customers, you can use code Cohen to get 15% off at take ultra.com. That's take ultra t- a kelt r.com for 15% off using code cohen. And after you purchase, they're going to ask you where you heard about them. So please support the show and tell them that we sent you. Well, since we're picking on people, let's talk about Greenland because Trump has once again revived his obsession with acquiring it despite Denmark's flat rejection years ago and then pared even yesterday.

Is this truly about Arctic strategy? or you see Trump treating sovereign nations like I don't know some distressed real estate deal.

Yeah. I mean, first of all, it's just kind of laughable, right? Like he's been saying for years he's going to make Canada the 51st state. Um and they're like, "We have no interest in being acquired by the United States." So the same goes for Greenland and Denmark, and that's just not going to happen. But I think ideally he would turn it all into real estate investments just like he wanted to do to the Gaza Strip. So, um, yeah, I think they've made very clear that they're not interested in in being acquired and

but the bulk of Greenland isn't really habitable, right? I mean, I do know that many people have talked about Greenland as an Arctic strategy, but again, again, back to your flexing of the muscles in now the supermarket. We have a deal right now. The United States has a negotiated deal that has been around for a long time that the United States if they want to increase say the size of our, you know, military base in Greenland, you have the absolute ultimate right to do it. Just tell us what property that you want and we'll give it to you. So why do you have to acquire them? Right? It's almost like if I let you go onto my used car lot and take any car you want on any given day.

Yeah. Why do you why would you ever buy the car? Why would you even want to? You have access to whatever you want, whenever you want, how you want it. Nobody's stopping there. But why do you have to say, "Nope, I'm buying that one. I'm buying that one." It just doesn't make any sense to me. I mean, I think like it is about just him trying to gain some sort of negotiating power. I don't I'm not totally sure why he has to pick on all of our allies. Um, and it's also it's also just a big distraction from real issues that we have. I think that's one of the biggest motivators for him is like if I can talk about uh seizing Greenland or I can talk about seizing Canada or whatever, um we're not talking about actual real issues that are happening in the United States like healthcare or the Epstein files or things like that, things that actually impact American citizens. Um, and so even with the whole Venezuela thing, I

mean, we it's just dominated the news cycle and completely kicked off the Epstein file release.

Well, like I said to you before, I mean, they need to keep Maduro's name in Venezuela at the top of every single news. Everything so far in the last god knows how many days has been Madura, Madura, Madura to the point of showing him being dragged out and the helicopters all the way to them using another helicopter to fly him from MDC to then even creating this stupid photograph of a whole bunch of people, myself included, who are, you know, former uh, you know, detainees there at what is considered to be one of the worst [ __ ] jails you know, where judges won't even let people go there. But you know what makes this one a little bit different? Like for example, with Greenland this time, you know, the first time the EU said nothing. They were like, "All right, no problem. Denmark said no. Leave it at that." But with Trump's revival of this, the EU right now is refusing to brush this off. In fact, they actually moved

and really quickly to reaffirm Greenland's status and to warrant against unilateral action by the United States. Question I want to ask you is what does it say that Europe now feels compelled to restrain the United States publicly?

Yeah, I think it says a lot actually. I think it says that they do do not trust the United States. Um, and that they felt like they needed to do that and they felt like they were compelled to speak out because I mean when someone makes so many threats to you and to your allies and to and you're seeing some of it play out in real time, I think they need to protect themselves. Um, and they don't trust I mean they know that this this government that we have currently, this administration is extremely volatile and unpredictable. Um, and so I'm glad that they did that, but it is a sad indictment of where we are as a country for sure

because I see it as damaging, really damaging when America shifts from being a stabilizing force in the world

100%. To a wild card that even our closest allies have to hedge against. Yeah. I mean, that's what you do with countries that have unstable governments or they have unstable dictators. Um, you know, and not people that have duly elected presidents and very stable democracies. I mean, that's just that's that's an indictment of where we are as a country is that this administration is so unpredictable and so unstable and so uh bipolar that they truly don't know what's going to happen next. They truly don't know what they're bluffing on and what they're being serious about. And we don't know. Like I feel like Americans don't know. Um, and so we're all operating kind of holding our breath like what are they capable of doing? Um, at the end of the day, we don't know. We don't have adults who are qualified individuals running these government agencies. We don't have a sane person running the Department of

Defense. In fact, he changed it to the Department of War, which is still just such a joke to be, you know, advocating for peace and for stability and saying, "We're not going to be involving ourselves in these foreign wars." And then to change your name to the Department of War and be conducting hostile takeovers of nations. So, very clearly they don't believe what they've even said. Um, they're not following their own, you know, their own guidance or uh their actions don't match their words. And so we can't trust them and that's unfortunate.

Yeah. So meanwhile, while all this craziness, you talk about distractions, Russia continues daily missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities, on their power grids, on their water systems, on civilian infrastructure.

What does it say that this administration barely mentions Ukraine anymore? In fact, let me even add to the question. It's not just the administration that barely mentions Ukraine anymore. It's our press as well. They are so fixated on this fire hose of chaos that comes out daily. And the chaos now is Maduro, the operation and so on. Barely mentioned Ukraine. Literally again the other day more like 180 strikes in Kiev and in the outskirt area knocking out more civilian infant more people dying more civilians dying.

What does it say? Yeah, I think it says well first of all the strongest worded statement that Donald Trump can even mutter about Vladimir Putin is I'm not too happy with him right now. And that's pretty much the extent of it. he can't really, you know, condemn him or come down hard on him or he doesn't want to fracture that relationship he has with him because I do think he admires him. Um, and feels that he is the one in control in the situation even though he's been manipulated by Vladimir Putin time and time again. Uh, so it's just it's it's really sad that that's the the strongest worded statement he can even make about Vladimir Putin at this point. Um, but yeah, we're ignoring real atrocities going on throughout the world still to this day. Um, same with Israel and Gaza.

I mean, the peace plan is very like non-existent. Yeah. It's very fragile and it's been broken. Um, and so that's where our focus should be lying if we're going to be creating peace and stability throughout the Europe and the Middle East is working on that. if we're going to be involving ourselves in foreign affairs, it should be that to stop the the mass genocide that's occurring in both countries. Um, and it shouldn't be worrying about Venezuela and and trying to run Venezuela. Um, de facto as

how try to run this country first before you decide to take on a second, right? It's almost like if you're a real estate, if you're in the real estate business, the first thing you do is, let's say you buy a multif family, 20 units, rent those 20 units, stabilize, get your business in order before you go and you buy another building. I mean, that's really the way that it is. Cuz I see the real danger here

as it relates to Ukraine. The danger I see is that Ukraine will become collateral damage to Trump's obsession with spectacle over strategy.

Mhm. I think it already has for sure. Um yeah, I think I mean what scares me the most about this administration now is that Donald Trump doesn't have a re-election to run for. He doesn't actually truly care about Americans and and things that are happening domestically um or the economy. He doesn't really care about saving people's lives. He cares about posturing himself um and being a dictator. In his mind, that's what he would like to be. And so you have you have foreign wars that are still occurring, still happening. um that he's made very clear that he does not stand with our allies on and and fought against funding these wars in the name of America first, but then at the end of the day, he would like to control other countries and be and be a leader of them essentially. So, it's like you can see where his priorities are lying and it's not with America and it's not with our allies.

It's with himself and what can he do to better posture himself uh throughout the world. And that's it's it is scary because it's he's not even really concerned with doing things that are beneficial for America

um or for our economy or for um our allies at all cuz he doesn't need so somewhere along the line he thinks that he actually is that the seizure of the oil which by the way it's impossible. I mean, I know that he spoke, for example, to several different oil companies and they said, "Sure, if it's the region is stabilized and they can go there and invest money and, you know, put up new rigs and pull out the sludge and so on." Yeah, they'd be interested. Why not? There's 300 billion [ __ ] barrels of oil. Think about that. 300 billion. Even if hypothetically the cost to extract it is $50 a barrel, that's the cost to extract it. Yeah. I I don't even know how many trillions of dollars of profit that exist there. Sure. But here's the problem. These companies know damn well that they're targets. Their wells are targets. there that you know anything any money that they put in is most probably going to get blown up by some

Maduro sympathizer. You know this is the whole problem cuz we have all from Trump first administration to now we've seen this pattern before where Trump will flood the zone internationally while our domestic crises go completely ignored.

Mhm. You think that this is um convenience in terms of timing? Oh, 100%. I mean, everything that he's talking about, I mean, he talks about the war in in Russia and Ukraine still being Joe Biden's war and how if he were president at that time, he never would have that that war never would have happened. He's still so focused on grievances, revenge, and what's in it for him. And he's not he's not even thinking about like major issues that are afflicting Americans like house price. Like he's not thinking about that stuff. He's not thinking about childare.

He's not thinking about healthcare. He just literally doesn't care about that stuff.

So Trump isn't talking about those things. The press right now isn't talking about the only people that are talking about it again. People like yourself, myself, minus independent journalists. We're the ones talking about it. food prices remain elevated.

He will blame that on Joe Biden until he is out of office. Except the problem is Joe Biden for one year now hasn't been in office. And as much as Trump wants to turn around talk about the stock market, either it is or it's not your economy because as I said before, food prices are elevated. Yes. And they talk about how egg prices are down. Okay. Okay, that's true. What about everything else? Rents are still crushing families. Health care costs are out of control and their desire their their fervent desire to destroy the ACA.

Why why are affordability issues in your opinion disappearing from the national conversation right now?

Because we have a president and administration that does not care about them in the slightest. And like I mentioned before, like he's not running for re-election. He's already a lame duck president. Um assuming he won't try to illegally stay in power at the end of this term. So he's not worried about how Americans perceive him. Um he's worried about himself. He's worried about his own waning power um that is coming in 3 years. And the more we're talking,

I think his power I think his power goes into a full um decline in 300 days from now, which is when you have the midterm elections, he will become

it is with almost 90% certainty that Democrats will take the House and there's like a 50/50 shot Democrats will take the Senate, too. Now, certainly not enough for impeachment. And by the way, if the Democrats start again with this [ __ ] articles of impeachment against Trump, knowing that the Senate will never go for it unless they already have the votes in hand. Let me be clear. They start with another a third impeachment on him, you're going to start hearing from me, too. I'm going to [ __ ] walk right onto the floor and I'm going to start screaming at every single one of them from our worthless, you know, Chuck Schumer to that schmuck and a half, Hakeim Jeff. I mean, you know, they're all grandstanding, too. And we've all had enough because Yeah. affordability is killing us. Healthc care, you know, the crisis taking place here in America out of control.

Yeah. I don't think that would be a wise use of time, honestly. Um, because we all know that's not going to happen. Actually, I would start with if you were going to introduce articles of impeachment of impeachment, I would start with Pam Bondi. I would start with RFK Jr. with um members of the

Patel. Yeah, exactly. You might have Pete Hath there some bipartisan support. Yeah, Pete Hexth um who have committed real crimes or Pam Bondi who has violated real laws um and needs to be at least at the very least uh questioned at a hearing. you know, I'm like, I don't even know what's going on in that sense of um the Epste files and I know that they floated um inherent contempt charges or or uh filing articles of impeachment. So, I'm like, let's start there if we're going to do that. But either way, I do think at the end of the day, it's like let's focus on getting [ __ ] done if we can. I mean, it's going to be tough no matter what because we still have Donald Trump as a president Phoenix. even if we win the House and we win the Senate, we still have him as a president for the next two years. Um, but I just Yeah, I don't think that would be I don't think that would be a wise use of their time. I would feel the

same way as you. Yeah. So, Ally, final question here. When distraction becomes doctrine

and spectacle replaces policy, how close is a democracy to losing control of its guard rails alto together? I think we're close. I mean, I don't think this administration respects the rule of law. I don't think that they respect democracy. I think that they are unhinged um in a lot of senses. I think they are declaring war both figuratively and literally um on different countries and on domestic issues like vaccines and things like that. And so I think we're in a really really bad place right now where a lot of people feel that they just can't trust the government. Um and so when I go to the doctor and they tell me that the vaccine schedule has changed um under CDC guidance, I'm not listening to them. I'm saying whatever it was before is what I'll do, you know, or whatever you think is the best is what I'll do. Um and that's a sad place to be in where you cannot trust the information that's coming out of your

own government. So, I think we're just in a really really rocky place right now. Um, and we're going to have to just get through the next hopeful hopefully we'll get through them uh the next three years together.

I mean, for God's sakes, our country, our government, the richest country in the history of the world telling its own citizens that we're not going to ensure that you have food on your table. We're not going to ensure that you have some form of health care when they have, you know, to them the concept of affordability is basically predicated on two items, eggs and oil, right? Eggs and gasoline. And you hear every Republican parrot the same stupid talking point. Egg prices are down. Not because of anything Trump of this administration did. There was a [ __ ] bird flu for God's sakes. And they had to they had to destroy like 30 million or 20 million chickens, egg producing chickens. So the chickens had to, you know, reproduce so that now that they're back to, you know, um, a large enough number that the price of eggs, it's all supply and demand. And oil, I grant him that. I grant him he reduced

it costs and so on with uh EPA and uh guidelines and so the price came down. It's not a $1.99 a gallon as he likes to say. It's like 50 or 60 cents cheaper per gallon. Now, that's still money, don't get me wrong, but we're not talking about

you get to you get to flash a a Trump gas card cuz that'll be next and you'll get, you know, 20 gallons of free gas a week.

Meanwhile, while he's shouting about gas, um, which I don't know when the last time he pumped his own gas was, um, and egg prices, which again are just one subset of a very large market. Um he's hosting parties at his country club with ice sculptures and caviar and dancers and so it feels very much like a let them eat cake scenario and if he shouts well prices are down then everyone's going to feel much better.

Yeah you're great because electricity prices are up four times. Exactly. I mean my biggest concern right now honestly is healthcare. The the costs are just absolutely astronomical. And that's one of the biggest afflictions we're facing. But he doesn't he does not concern himself with any of that. I'm pretty sure he's like living at Mara Lago at this point and authorizing war strikes from Mara Lago. I'm like I don't even know what is going on. But um he's certainly not concerning himself with the actual everyday lived struggles of Americans. Um, and yeah, it's

that's just why we have to all stay united, stay vocal, stay strong, stay angry, and make sure that in about 300 days when those midterms come, you bring everybody that you know to the, you know, to the voting booth. Make sure that make sure that you vote because the better that we do in these midterms across the board and I always say the blue tsunami to literally wipe the red off the map. By doing that, we send a very clear a crystal crystal clear message to everyone Republican, Democrat, and independent alike. Voters see you.

We're now grading you. And if your grade doesn't meet par, you're gone. Mhm. And they should be worried. I hope they're worried and I I hope that they see the writing on the wall because it's coming. Well,

Ally, thank you so much for joining me. Appreciate you. Thank you for having me having me back.

Yeah. You know, and I'll be having you back again. Okay. Thanks, Al. Thanks.

Questions about this episode

Who speaks in "🚨 Trump Crosses GLOBAL RED LINE as CHAOS GROWS | Mea Culpa"?

Michael Cohen (Host), Ally (Guest).

What is "🚨 Trump Crosses GLOBAL RED LINE as CHAOS GROWS | Mea Culpa" about?

The discussion highlights the controversial actions taken by Trump regarding Venezuela, focusing on the authorization of the physical seizure of its leader, Nicholas Maduro, and how this act raises questions about legality and the classification of it as an act of war. The speaker critiques the administration's inconsistent narrative and their failure to adequately justify the decision amidst…

What is mentioned in this MeidasTouch episode?

22 people, works and ideas are mentioned, including Donald Trump, Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela, Oil, Event, Diplomatic Immunity. Each one on this page links to its own page with every episode that mentions it.

How long is "🚨 Trump Crosses GLOBAL RED LINE as CHAOS GROWS | Mea Culpa"?

The episode runs 56 min; the transcript is about 8,818 words in 99 timestamped sections.

More from MeidasTouch

About this transcript: the episode's spoken words as captioned on YouTube, split into timestamped sections. Reclip.Me locates every person, work and idea in the text, keeps the time it is first named, and quotes the words around it verbatim. Last updated January 24, 2026.