Trump may have just crossed 'huge red line' with new strike: attorney

President Donald Trump approved another military strike in international waters, just two weeks after ordering his first strike, killing what he said were 11 narcoterrorists carrying drugs into the United States.

However, one keen observer noticed Trump may have revealed the second strike while speaking on Sunday.

A Bluesky account called "Trump Watch" posted a video of Trump speaking to the press in which he said, "Since the first strike and then to a lesser extent, the second, we don't see any, I mean, we almost see no boats out there, which is fine as far as I'm concerned."

The interview took place on Sunday. On Monday, Trump said, "This morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a SECOND Kinetic Strike against positively identified, extraordinarily violent drug trafficking cartels and narcoterrorists..."

"His post today says this was the second strike, which contradicts what he said yesterday, that there had already been two strikes," the account noted.

It was just one of several questions from those who fear Trump is breaking the law.

Journalist Mark Chadbourn posted to Bluesky, "Trump says the US has blown up another Venezuelan small boat, killing three. All those warships off the coast and the cartels are still trying to sneak drugs through? Not convinced."

Washington Post reporter John Hudson commented on X, "New: Trump announces that he ordered another military strike on alleged drug smugglers on a boat coming from Venezuela, killing "3 male terrorists." This is Trump's latest step in transforming a law enforcement function into a televised military assassination program."

Influencer and political commentator Ed Krassenstein had some concerns with the announcement.

"While drug trafficking is a serious problem, there are urgent questions here: These were civilians, not enemy combatants — what due process rights were denied? Can the president unilaterally order military action against alleged traffickers without Congressional authorization? What precedent does this set for the U.S. military conducting lethal strikes on non-state actors outside of a declared war? Every American should be concerned: combating drugs must not mean bypassing courts, international law, and the Constitution," he asked.

"US military has done plenty of bad things, but I can't think of a case where an order came down straight from POTUS, proudly and publicly, to do outright mask-off no-plausible-defense murders. It's a huge red line for unlawful orders and they know full well they're moving the outer boundary on that," added elections lawyer Andy Craig on BlueSky.