An analyst on Tuesday questioned the mixed messaging among Republicans over President Donald Trump's attack on Venezuela and ousting of Nicolás Maduro.
The Trump administration has called the invasion of Venezuela and capture of Maduro a "law enforcement operation carried out with the support of the U.S. military," and has announced that the U.S. has plans to control the South American country by way of its new vice president, who will be more friendly to oil production and American oil companies, The Bulwark reported.
Yet, that scenario has drawn more questions than answers.
"That’s the administration’s high-level story, at least. But as more context comes out, it gets less clear whether Maduro’s capture was a law enforcement action, a military operation, or some secret third thing," The Bulwark reported.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has framed the actions in Venezuela from the law enforcement standpoint.
"The Department of War plays a very important role here along with the Department of Justice, for example, because they’ve got—they’re the ones that have to go to court," Rubio told NBC’s Meet the Press.
“And I assure you the people left behind in Venezuela now that are in charge of the police and everything else, I assure you they’re going to probably be a lot more compliant than Maduro was as a result of this,” Rubio said.
He also suggested that capturing Maduro would "convince the regime to follow America’s lead going forward without requiring an invading and occupying force."
But that's not quite what Trump said. Trump has signaled that the U.S. could escalate attacks in the country — and others.
“We are ready to stage a second and much larger attack if we need to do so,” Trump said. “So we were prepared to do a second wave if we need to do so.”
“We’re not afraid of boots on the ground,” Trump said.
So far, Republican lawmakers have used the law enforcement action as a means to defend the U.S. decision.
"The Maduro episode has provided yet another occasion for elected Republicans to twist themselves into knots to support the administration’s shifting, contradictory messaging on a high-stakes issue," The Bulwark reported. "If there is a legal case to be made for capturing a foreign leader and installing some kind of advisory board of Americans and oil company executives to preside over the regime’s holdovers, GOP senators did not bother to make that case. Instead, they blithely relinquished more authority to Trump, bending rules and ignoring precedent to avoid any disagreements with the White House."