Following the dramatic capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, the United States is now positioned to exert significant influence over the future of the world’s largest oil reserves.

What President Donald Trump does next could reshape Venezuela’s energy industry, alter global oil flows and redefine the balance of influence among major powers long invested in the country’s crude.

Here are three key takeaways:

1. Venezuela holds massive oil reserves, but production remains severely constrained

Venezuela, a country almost twice the size of California, sits atop extraordinary wealth. 

With more than 300 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, Venezuela holds more crude than established energy heavyweights like Saudi Arabia, Iran and Kuwait. The Latin American country’s reserves are nearly quadruple those of the United States.

Once a major oil producer, the country pumped about 3.5 million barrels a day in the late 1990s. Since then, its oil industry has sharply deteriorated, with production falling to roughly 800,000 barrels a day, according to energy analytics firm Kpler.

A key reason: much of Venezuela’s oil is difficult and expensive to extract.

The country’s reserves are dominated by heavy and extra-heavy crude, which is costly to extract and relies on specialized equipment and refining capacity that have deteriorated after years of underinvestment, U.S. sanctions and political instability.

Similar dynamics have unfolded in countries such as Iran and Libya, where turmoil, financial distress and crumbling infrastructure have kept vast reserves locked underground.

As a result, scaling operations back up would require significant time, capital and technical expertise, with any production increase likely to be gradual rather than immediate.

2. Political risk remains a major concern for American energy companies

Decades of political instability, shifting regulations and U.S. sanctions have made Venezuela a high-risk environment for long-term investment. 

That risk dates back to the mid-2000s, when then-President Hugo Chávez reshaped Venezuela’s relationship with international energy companies by tightening state control over the oil industry.

Between 2004 and 2007, Chávez forced foreign companies to renegotiate their contracts with the government. The new terms sharply reduced the role and profits of private firms while strengthening Venezuela’s state-owned oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PDVSA).

The move drove some of the world’s largest oil companies out of the country.

ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips exited Venezuela in 2007 and later filed claims against the government in international arbitration courts. Those courts ultimately ruled in favor of the companies, ordering Venezuela to pay ConocoPhillips more than $10 billion and ExxonMobil more than $1 billion. The cash-strapped country has paid only a fraction of those awards.

That history looms over Trump’s latest proposal.

Trump said on Saturday he would seek to revive the once-prominent commodity by mobilizing investment from major U.S. energy companies.

‘We are going to have our very large United States oil companies go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken oil infrastructure and start making money for the country,’ Trump said during a news conference at Mar-a-Lago. 

It remains unclear whether U.S. energy companies are prepared to do so. American firms have yet to say whether they plan to return to Venezuela to resurrect an oil industry hollowed out by years of neglect.

Chevron, the only U.S. oil titan operating in Venezuela, said in a statement to Fox News Digital that it was following ‘relevant laws and regulations.’

‘Chevron remains focused on the safety and well-being of our employees, as well as the integrity of our assets,’ a Chevron spokesperson added.

ConocoPhillips wrote in a statement to Fox News Digital that it is monitoring the developments in Venezuela as well as the ‘potential implications for global energy supply and stability.’ 

‘It would be premature to speculate on any future business activities or investments,’ a spokesperson for ConocoPhillips added.

ExxonMobil, the largest U.S. oil company, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

3. The push reflects a broader effort to leverage energy for geopolitical influence

As U.S. and European companies withdrew from Venezuela, Russia, China and Iran expanded their footprint in the country’s energy sector, using financing, fuel shipments and technical support to maintain influence.

That shift has also reshaped how Venezuelan oil is traded. Sanctions have fueled the rise of so-called ‘ghost ships,’ nondescript oil tankers that disable tracking systems to quietly move Venezuelan crude to foreign buyers outside traditional markets. The opaque trade has reduced transparency in global oil flows while helping Caracas sustain exports despite financial isolation.

For the Trump administration, the outcome has underscored an uncomfortable trade-off: restricting access to U.S. markets can limit revenue for sanctioned governments, but it can also push them deeper into the orbit of strategic rivals, turning energy policy into a front line of geopolitical competition.

President Donald Trump flipped the script on Democrats’ ‘no one is above the law’ mantra after years of hearing it aimed at him, invoking the phrase after news broke Minnesota Democratic Gov. Tim Walz would not seek re-election as a sweeping fraud scandal rocks his state.

‘Governor Walz has destroyed the State of Minnesota, but others, like Governor Gavin Newscum, JB Pritzker, and Kathy Hochul, have done, in my opinion, an even more dishonest and incompetent job. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW!’ Trump posted to Truth Social Monday afternoon. 

The message followed Walz announcing Monday that he was withdrawing his re-election effort to continue serving as governor. Walz was first elected the state’s top leader in 2018 in a political career that also included him campaigning coast-to-coast in 2024 as former Vice President Kamala Harris’ running mate. 

‘As I reflected on this moment with my family and my team over the holidays, I came to the conclusion that I can’t give a political campaign my all,’ Walz wrote in a statement. ‘Every minute I spend defending my own political interests would be a minute I can’t spend defending the people of Minnesota against the criminals who prey on our generosity and the cynics who prey on our differences.’

Minnesota has come under fierce scrutiny in recent weeks as a sprawling fraud scandal that has led to dozens of arrests, mostly from the state’s large Somali community, since 2022 comes to light. Minnesota was allegedly home to a massive COVID-era scheme that allegedly involved money laundering operations related to fraudulent meal and housing programs, daycare centers and Medicaid services, according to investigators. 

The Minnesota fraud is still being tabulated, with local officials speculating it could exceed $1 billion and rise to as high as $9 billion.

Trump’s use of the phrase ‘no one is above the law’ follows years of Democrats employing the same rhetoric against him as he faced a barrage of charges and court cases in between his first and second administrations. 

‘No one is above the law,’ President Joe Biden said after Trump was found guilty on 34 counts of falsified business records in a Manhattan court in May 2024. 

Trump faced four criminal indictments, which resulted in accusations of ‘lawfare’ on the national stage as Trump maintained his innocence and slammed the cases as efforts by the Democratic Party to hurt his political chances for re-election in 2024. 

‘As I’ve said before, no one is above the law, including Donald Trump,’ then-Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said in 2023 after the Biden administration’s Department of Justice announced Trump had been indicted on 37 counts related to his alleged mishandling of classified documents.

Even during Trump’s first administration, Democrats championed the phrase as they combated MAGA Republicans and Trump policies. 

‘Everybody wants the president to be held accountable in the most serious way,’ House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said of Trump in 2019 amid a discussion at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco, underscoring that Democrats believe ‘no one is above the law.’ ‘And everybody believes, now I’m talking on the Democratic side, that no one is above the law, especially the president of the United States.’

‘We must be clear: no one, not even the president, is above the law,’ Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said in a statement in 2019 when introducing articles of impeachment against Trump. 

Upon his victory over the Harris–Walz presidential ticket in 2024, Trump has taken a victory lap for allegedly snuffing out the weaponization of government. 

‘We have ended weaponized government, where, as an example, a sitting president is allowed to viciously prosecute his political opponent, like me. How did that work out?’ he said during his joint address to Congress in 2025. ‘Not too good. Not too good.’ 

Trump added in his Monday Truth Social post that ‘Minnesota’s Corrupt Governor will possibly leave office before his Term is up,’ and that he’s confident the fraud investigations ‘will reveal a seriously unscrupulous, and rich, group of ‘SLIMEBALLS.”

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson added in comment to Fox Digital on Monday afternoon when asked about the Truth Social post: ‘It shouldn’t take an education from the Quality Learing Center for Democrats to understand this: Tim Walz and his Somali friends have been caught ripping off hardworking Minnesota taxpayers and now they will face the consequences. President Trump is right, no one is above the law.’

Walz has taken ownership of correcting the fraud. He said his administration had been taking action to stop some suspected fraudulent payments over the summer and that his office referred some for prosecution. The governor, however, has said that multibillion figures were ‘sensationalized’ by Republicans.

‘This is on my watch, I am accountable for this and, more importantly, I am the one that will fix it,’ Walz told reporters in December. 

Fox Digital reached out to Walz’s office for a response to Trump’s Truth Social but did not immediately receive a reply. 

Fox News Digital’s Amanda Macias contributed to this report. 

Democratic Gov. Tim Walz announced on Monday he is scrapping his re-election campaign for another term amid a massive fraud scandal in the state, but Republican lawmakers in Minnesota are calling the move an empty one. 

‘Don’t mistake Gov. Walz’s retirement for accountability,’ Minnesota state Sen. Mark Koran said in a statement to Fox News Digital after Walz’s Monday announcement. 

‘It’s an attempt to avoid it. Republicans will keep holding ALL elected Democrats accountable for Minnesota’s fraud mess, spending every dollar of the $18 billion surplus, and raising taxes by $10 billion.’

Accountability for Walz, according to several Republican lawmakers, involves him resigning as governor, which many have called for in recent months. 

‘The Governor is taking the easy way out, but it’s not good enough,’ state Sen. Michael Holmstrom said in a statement. ‘Minnesotans deserve and demand an IMMEDIATE resignation.’

‘Governor Walz couldn’t take the FRAUD heat so he’s getting out of the kitchen, but I’m going to keep holding ALL Democrats accountable for Minnesota’s fraud mess, blowing through the entire $18 billion surplus, raising taxes by $10 billion, and making life less affordable for all Minnesotans while rejecting Republican efforts to stop fraud. I’ll keep exposing these failures and holding Democrats accountable for what they’ve done to Minnesotans.’

Walz launched his bid for a third four-year term as Minnesota governor in September, but in recent weeks has been facing a barrage of incoming political fire from President Donald Trump and Republicans, and some Democrats, over the large-scale theft in a state that has long prided itself on good governance.

More than 90 people — most from Minnesota’s large Somali community — have been charged since 2022 in what has been described as the nation’s largest COVID-era scheme. How much money has been stolen through alleged money laundering operations involving fraudulent meal and housing programs, daycare centers, and Medicaid services is still being tabulated. But the U.S. attorney in Minnesota said the scope of the fraud could exceed $1 billion and rise to as high as $9 billion.

GOP state Sen. Rich Draheim accused Walz in a statement of simply ‘passing the buck’ with his ‘retirement’ announcement while ‘blaming Republicans for his failures.’

Minnesota Republican Sen. Andrew Lang echoed the messaging from his state party in a statement concluding that ‘retirement isn’t accountability.’

‘It’s him trying to wipe his hands clean of the fraud mess. But ALL elected Democrats own this. They fought Republican efforts to stop the fraud, failed to hold Walz’s agencies accountable, and let Minnesotans’ tax dollars get siphoned off by fraudsters.’

Walz met Sunday with Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota to discuss his decision to drop his re-election bid, a source familiar confirmed to Fox News’ Alexis McAdams.

Word of their meeting comes amid speculation that Klobuchar, a former Hennepin County attorney who’s been elected and re-elected four times to the U.S. Senate, may now run to succeed Walz.

‘Make no mistake, I don’t want Tim Walz to be our governor,’ Minnesota Republican state Sen. Andrew Mathews said in a statement to Fox News Digital. ‘But rather than swapping Democrat governor candidates, I want to FIX the damage Gov. Walz has done: Blew through an $18 billion surplus, Raised taxes by $10 billion, Oversaw one of the largest fraud scandals in the country, Left Minnesota for months chasing a failed VP bid, Now decides to leave office.’

‘This isn’t accountability. It’s avoiding it.’

Fox News Digital’s Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.

Lawyers for the Trump administration asked a federal judge for additional time this week to detail its plans to provide due process for nearly 150 Venezuelan migrants that it deported to the Salvadoran CECOT prison in March, citing the removal of Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan leader who was captured by U.S. troops during a surprise raid in Caracas. 

In the motion for an extension, submitted to U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, lawyers for the Justice Department cited the ‘substantial changes on the ground in Venezuela’ and the ‘fluid nature of the unfolding situation’ in the wake of the U.S. capture of Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.

They requested an additional seven days to comply with the court’s order.

Boasberg, in response, told the Justice Department in a minute order that it had not complied with a local court rule requiring defendants in a civil case to first notify opposing counsel before asking the court for a delay – leaving the matter temporarily unresolved.

The update comes after months of tension-filled status hearings between lawyers for the Trump administration and lawyers for the 252 Venezuelan migrants who were deported to El Salvador’s CECOT prison in March under the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 immigration law, despite an emergency court order that sought to block the administration from immediately using the law to quickly remove certain migrants. 

The status of the migrants, who were removed again to Venezuela from CECOT in July as part of a prisoner exchange, further complicated the case. 

The exchange and U.S. involvement appeared to indicate at least some level of constructive custody of the migrants, as the court observed, prompting additional status hearings in the case. It also made it more difficult for lawyers representing the plaintiffs to track down all 252 CECOT migrants, some of whom had fled Venezuela due to persecution in their home country, and who have since remained in hiding.

The Trump administration proceeded with the deportation flights, kicking off a complex legal fight over the status of the migrants, the U.S. ability to facilitate their return – or at least to provide the migrants with due process protections – and an ability to challenge their alleged gang member status. 

Trump officials had argued that the people deported to CECOT were members of the violent Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang, though the evidence they used to justify their designations has been disputed in many cases, and in many cases determined to be lacking. 

Since March, Boasberg has attempted to determine the status of the hundreds of CECOT plaintiffs, what ability the U.S. has to facilitate their return, or to provide the class of migrants with due process and habeas protections, including the ability to challenge their alleged gang status.

Last month, Boasberg ordered the Trump administration to submit to the court in writing its plans to provide due process to a class of Venezuelan migrants deported to El Salvador. 

He said the Justice Department must submit to the court by Jan. 5 its plan to provide due process protections to the CECOT class – which he said the Trump administration could do by either returning the migrants to the U.S. to have their cases heard in person – or to otherwise facilitate hearings abroad with members of the class that ‘satisfy the requirements of due process.’

‘On the merits, the Court concludes that this class was denied their due-process rights and will thus require the Government to facilitate their ability to obtain such a hearing,’ Boasberg said at the time. ‘Our law requires no less.’

The Justice Department’s request for a seven-day extension did not challenge the underlying merits of the order. Instead, they cited only the changing circumstances on the ground in Venezuela, which they said necessitate the additional time.

‘Over the weekend, the United States apprehended Nicolás Maduro,’ lawyers for the Justice Department said in their request for additional time. ‘As a result, the situation on the ground in Venezuela has changed dramatically. Defendants thus need additional time to determine the feasibility of various proposals,’ they added. 

‘Defendants therefore request a 7-day extension to evaluate and determine what remedies are possible.’

Boasberg responded in a terse minute order, noting only that the Justice Department’s request ‘fails to comply’ with the local rule in question, which requires parties to first confer with opposing counsel. He ordered the DOJ to file the relevant notice to opposing counsel by the end of the day. 

The update further stalls an ongoing court inquiry that has been on ice for months as the result of appeals court rulings, efforts to shield certain information from the court for national security purposes, and a separate, but related, contempt inquiry.

The CECOT migrants were again moved in July from the Salvadoran prison to Venezuela, as part of a broader prisoner exchange that involved the return of at least 10 Americans detained in Venezuela. 

Their role in the prisoner exchange further complicated efforts to ascertain the status of the CECOT class plaintiffs, including some migrants who had fled Venezuela in the first place due to fears of persecution, including from gangs.

That has made it difficult to contact the migrants from the CECOT class and determine how many of them still wished to proceed with their due process cases, as ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, the lawyer representing the plaintiffs, previously told Boasberg in court. 

Some of them remain in hiding, Gelernt said, further complicating efforts to make contact.

The ACLU lawyers told the court in December that, of the 252 Venezuelan migrants that were deported in March to CECOT, 137 still wish to move forward with their due process cases.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., wants Congress to take a more active role as a check on the Trump administration’s use of military force following the surprise weekend operation in Venezuela, and he plans to force a vote on legislation that would halt further military action in the country without lawmakers’ approval.

Kaine joined a chorus of congressional Democrats who were frustrated at President Donald Trump’s decision to strike Venezuela’s capital of Caracas, and subsequent capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife without oversight or approval from Congress.

Congressional Democrats have long been frustrated at Congress’ diminished role in decision-making since Trump took office last year, particularly over continued strikes in the Caribbean ahead of Operation Absolute Resolve on Saturday.

Kaine argued on a call with reporters that Congress has the constitutional authority to weigh in on military action and was frustrated throughout Trump’s second term that the check and balance was being bowled over.

‘It’s time for Congress to get its a– off the couch and do what the Constitution mandates that we do — the Constitution we take an oath to,’ Kaine said over the weekend. ‘We have to put this before the American people, not just in private settings, but in public hearings by the key oversight committees, Intelligence, Armed Services, Foreign Relations in both houses, and explore whether the United States should enter into yet another war with unforeseen consequences.’

Kaine again plans to bring a war powers resolution for a vote in the Senate, which is expected to come to the floor this week.

It’s not the first time he has tried to reassert Congress’ authority when it comes to the administration’s use of military action. Kaine earlier this year forced a vote on a war powers resolution following Trump’s strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. That resolution failed on a largely party-line vote, save for Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who joined all Senate Democrats in support.

The Virginia Democrat’s latest effort would prevent further military action in Venezuela without congressional approval.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who is a co-sponsor on the latest war powers resolution along with Kaine and Paul, said he would ensure the measure would get ‘adequate floor time so we could debate and discuss this.’

Schumer is also pushing for hearings to investigate the strikes and capture of Maduro and noted that he spoke with top Democrats on several committees who contended their Republican colleagues ‘have expressed a lot of troublesome comments about what Trump is doing and the way he is doing it.’

‘We’re going to be pushing our Republican colleagues to stand up for the American people, to get this done,’ Schumer said. ‘Congress should not be sidelined as the Trump administration gets sucked into another nation-building quagmire, and we’re going to hold them accountable, protect American lives, to protect America’s interests.’

Another issue that many congressional Democrats have is that lawmakers weren’t notified of the strikes until after the fact. Secretary of State Marco Rubio argued over the weekend that it would have been risky to notify lawmakers in advance given the sensitive nature of the operation. Trump charged that Congress was kept in the dark because lawmakers leak. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., who didn’t receive notification of the operation until afterward, said that he was ‘comfortable’ with the timing. 

‘They didn’t tell me ahead of time,’ Thune said. ‘But I think there’s a reason why, like I said, before notification of Congress in advance of really critical and hypersensitive missions, to me, seems ill-advised anyway.’

A Florida Republican is arguing that Democrats’ largely negative response to the U.S. government’s operation in Venezuela is the ‘definition of Trump Derangement Syndrome.’

Rep. Mike Haridopolos, R-Fla., represents a part of Florida that includes a significant chunk of the state’s central coastline.

‘It doesn’t take much research to find speech after speech of Democrat House members and Senate members who said that this guy is a bad guy, he should be taken out of power,’ Haridopolos told Fox News Digital.

‘Sometimes in politics, you’ve just got to say to the other side, politically, ‘Hey, we’re all Americans. This is in the best interest, clearly, of the United States.’ But they’re in a position where they’re so afraid of a Democrat primary that they will say anything to avoid having the extreme left attack them.’

He pointed out that it was the previous Democratic commander-in-chief, President Joe Biden, who raised the federal government’s bounty for Maduro’s capture to $25 million.

‘What did they expect was then going to happen? You think this guy was just going to voluntarily give up? He clearly was not. He was getting into bed with the Cubans, the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, even Hezbollah, as I understand. I mean, this guy was trying to create a group of enemies in an oil-rich state at our footstep,’ Haridopolos said.

Democrats and Republicans have been largely divided in their responses to the strikes in Venezuela.

Lawmakers on the left have mostly criticized the president and his officials, accusing them of illegal actions that ran afoul of the U.S. Constitution. Some progressives have even said Trump could be guilty of impeachable offenses.

The majority of GOP lawmakers praised Trump’s move as a necessary law enforcement action to get rid of a hostile actor threatening both the U.S. and the region writ large.

Haridopolos is no different, pointing out that the operation was carried out with no U.S. fatalities and relatively few among Maduro supporters in Venezuela.

He said his district is home to a number of Venezuelan refugees who were elated by President Donald Trump’s decision to strike Caracas and capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

‘I have a large population of Venezuelans within my community, and they are absolutely overjoyed,’ the congressman said. ‘They were in essence kicked out of their own country or fled through fear … because they lost their ability to make a living, or they were being terrorized by the government because they were anti-Maduro.’

Following the U.S. strikes, Maduro and his wife were both taken to New York City, where they will be prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York.

Maduro pleaded not guilty during his first court appearance on Monday.

Former President Joe Biden could be pulling in a hefty, taxpayer-funded pension — stemming from his expansive career as a federal employee, according to a new report. 

The National Taxpayer Union Foundation estimates that Biden could be collecting up to a $417,000 pension — more than he was making a year as president, and more than previous presidents — as a result of collecting pensions from several retirement programs he qualifies for after starting his career in Washington in the 1970s. 

‘It’s pretty unusual, historically unusual, to have such a large pension amount,’ National Taxpayer Union Foundation President Demian Brady told the New York Post. 

The estimate comes from Biden’s long-term career in politics, meaning he has the capability to receive benefits under the Former President’s Act of 1958, and retirement benefits from the Civil Service Retirement System for his time as a senator and vice president.

The Former President’s Act of 1958 stipulates that presidential pensions are equal to the salaries Cabinet secretaries receive, which is currently set at $250,600. Additionally, Biden could be eligible for up to $166,374 for his time as a senator and vice president under the Civil Service Retirement System, Brady told the Post. 

Still, it’s unclear if Biden will actually cash in on all of those benefits. A spokesperson for Biden did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital.

Biden launched his career as a U.S. senator in 1972, and served as former President Barack Obama’s vice president for eight years starting in 2009. He earned $400,000 a year annually while president. 

The National Taxpayer Union Foundation did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

Meanwhile, efforts are underway in Congress to curb how much former presidents can rake in once they leave office. For example, Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, reintroduced the Presidential Allowance Modernization Act in 2025, whichwould cap presidential pensions at $200,000The legislation was referred to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. 

Past initiatives to rein in presidential pensions have failed. Obama ultimately vetoed a similar piece of legislation that Congress backed in 2016 just before he was set to leave the White House.