Former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez freed from prison after Trump pardons drug trafficking conviction

(WASHINGTON) — As of Monday, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his government will be added to the U.S. State Department’s list of the world’s most dangerous terrorist organizations.

Declaring Maduro the head of a foreign terrorist organization — instead of a corrupt dictatorial regime, as the U.S. government has regarded him for years — is an unprecedented move that President Donald Trump insists gives him the authority to strike inside Venezuela, as some outside experts question his rationale.

What happens next is far from clear, in part because Trump hasn’t said what he wants to happen. When asked by a reporter at an Oval Office press conference on Nov. 17 what Maduro could do to placate the U.S., Trump called it a “tricky” question.

But some experts said that forcing Maduro from power without a long-term plan could leave a power vacuum, potentially giving way to violence and chaos.

“Any post-Maduro government will live or die based on the amount of security cooperation the United States is willing to provide,” said Henry Ziemer, an associate fellow with the Americas Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told ABC News.

Here are three things to know about what could happen next:

Trump could use military strikes inside Venezuela and force Maduro to flee.

After weeks of lethal military strikes on suspected drug vessels, the State Department this week told Congress that Maduro wasn’t just a foreign leader but the head of “Cartel de los Soles.”

Experts told ABC News the term, which translates to “Cartel of the Suns,” is a general reference to corrupt Venezuelan officials, including those involved in the drug trade. The Cartel de los Soles has not been listed on the Drug Enforcement Administration’s annual National Drug Threat Assessment or in the United Nation’s World Drug Report.

The designation becomes official on Monday following a seven-day notice period to lawmakers, putting Maduro on the same list as terror networks like al-Qaida and the Houthi rebel group in Yemen. Maduro denies the allegation, instead calling for diplomacy.

Trump suggested the label gives him the authority to launch strikes, although legal experts told ABC News that claim is dubious. According to the Congressional Research Service, the list primarily serves “the purpose of imposing financial sanctions, immigration restrictions, or other penalties in pursuit of law enforcement or national security goals.”

In an interview with the right-wing One America News Network, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth insisted the decision was about giving the president greater military options.

“Nothing’s off the table, but nothing’s automatically on the table,” he said.

Maduro could placate Trump, but there’s no clear path for that.

While labeling Maduro a terrorist leader, Trump also said he’s open to negotiations. But when asked if Maduro could do anything to get Trump to back down, the president wasn’t clear.

“You know, the question’s a little bit tricky,” Trump said Nov. 17 in the Oval Office. “I don’t think it was meant to be tricky. It’s just that, look, he’s done tremendous damage of our country, primarily because of drugs,” and “the release of prisoners into our country has been a disaster.”

Some U.N. officials and regional experts said that Venezuela facilitates and profits off the drug trade, but that drug smuggling routes in the Caribbean are primarily headed for Europe. The majority of drugs coming into the U.S. enter through Mexico and legal ports of entry, they say.

Maduro has denied profiting from the drug trade.

Some independent experts also said Trump’s claim that Venezuela is emptying its prisons and sending people with mental illnesses to the U.S. is not supported by evidence. According to the Migration Policy Institute, some 770,000 Venezuelan immigrants live in the United States — the vast majority arriving after fleeing Maduro’s authoritarian regime and the ongoing economic crisis there.

Trump’s endgame makes more sense when you consider the bigger picture, some conservatives say. The U.S. has long seen Maduro as a source of chaos and instability in the region, but has not been willing to try to force a change.

“I think what we’re doing sends a message to leaders across the hemisphere about the U.S. being very serious about protecting the American people against these narco threats and the weaponization of these illicit activities and criminal activities,” Andres Martinez-Fernandez, senior policy analyst for the Heritage Foundation’s Allison Center for National Security, told ABC News.

“I do think you’re starting to see. … other governments in the region that are more forward-leaning and more aligned with the United States,” he said.

US strikes could trigger chaos inside Venezuela, experts warn.

David Smolansky, who is deputy director of international affairs for the Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, told ABC News that the opposition, which is in exile, is ready to “provide Venezuelans an orderly and democratic transition.”

“What we are focused on is to be ready when the transition begins,” he said, citing the 2024 election of Edmundo Gonzalez with 67% of the vote. “We’ve been ready for a while.”

A new Venezuelan government, though, would inherit serious immediate challenges. Analysts said a new government would need security, help in reforming Venezuela’s armed forces and intelligence support from the U.S.

Zeimer said one major challenge would be convincing people throughout the Venezuelan government that they will be safe without Maduro. And part of their calculation will be how successful a new regime could be.

“Maduro is nothing if not wily and adaptable,” Zeimer said. “He’s been able, time after time, to get the United States to negotiate, and use negotiations, basically as a way to release the pressure and commit to things that he has no plans on following through with and hang on to power.”

“I think he is still definitely trying to do that,” he added. “It is telling that he’s yet to flee.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump’s tightening grip over the Justice Department to target his political opponents and lawmakers’ increasing calls for the release of more files from federal investigations into deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein took center stage at a contentious Senate hearing Tuesday for Attorney General Pam Bondi.

The hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee is the first time since July that Bondi has faced questions from lawmakers and follows a tumultuous summer for the department that included deployments of federal law enforcement to Democratic-run cities, a growing number of investigations announced into Trump’s political foes and the controversial indictment of former FBI Director James Comey.

Democratic, Republican leaders differ on hearing focus

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley kicked off the hearing with extensive remarks seeking to highlight instances of what Republicans have labeled “weaponization” of the Justice Department under the Biden Administration, citing selective disclosures by FBI Director Kash Patel of the investigation into President Trump’s attempt to overturn his 2020 election loss.

“These are indefensible acts,” Grassley said. “This was a political phishing expedition to get Trump at all costs.”

Specifically, Grassley singled out a timely disclosure by the FBI on Monday that showed former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigators at one point sought limited phone toll records of several Republican senators around the time of the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

As part of his investigation, Smith extensively investigated Trump and his allies’ pressure campaign on lawmakers to block the certification of former President Joe Biden’s election win — including calls that were made to senators after the Capitol was breached by the pro-Trump mob.

There’s no indication that Republican senators were a target of Smith’s investigation, and the toll records sought by investigators would not include any information about the content of conversations they may have had.

“We’re pointing this all out because we can’t have this repeated in the United States,” Grassley said. “We want to end it right now, whether we have Republican or Democrat administrations.”

Grassley made no mention of recent directives from Trump to have the Justice Department act “now” to carry out prosecutions of his political foes, or other instances of alleged politicization during Bondi’s tenure that have led to scores of departures of longtime career officials who have sounded alarm about the department being used as a tool to enact political retribution.

Ranking Democratic member Dick Durbin said in his opening statement assailed the Trump administration for the conduct in Chicago, a city in which Durbin represents.

“As President Trump turns the full force of the federal government on Chicago and other American cities, the assault on the city I am proud to represent is just one example of how President Trump and Attorney General Bondi shut down justice at the Department of Justice, even before the president’s party controlling the white House, Senate and House of Representatives shut down the government,” Durbin said.

“The attorney general has systematically weaponized our nation’s leading law enforcement agency to protect President Trump and his allies and attack his opponents. And sadly, the American people. You have purged hundreds of senior career officials since you first appeared before us,” he added.

Durbin listed off the greatest hits for critics of Bondi’s Justice Department, the closed investigation into Border Czar Tom Homan, the Eric Adams case being dropped, the hiring of a Jan. 6 defendant who attacked MPD officers, the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, and the case against James Comey.

“What has taken place since Jan. 20, 2025, would make even President Nixon recoil. This is your legacy,” Durbin said.

Senators grill Bondi on closed Homan investigation

Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, also pressed Bondi on Tuesday over whether Bondi personally approved closing the investigation into Trump’s border czar Tom Homan.

“Miss Bondi, did you approve closing the Homan investigation? Bribery investigation?” Hirono said.

“Senator Hirono, as I stated earlier, the Department of Justice and the FBI conducted a thorough review, and they found no credible evidence of any wrongdoing,” Bondi responded.

Hirono then pressed Bondi over the department’s removal of dozens of prosecutors who worked on investigations involving President Trump and the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

Bondi shot back, “I’m not going to discuss personnel matters with you.”

Hirono concluded her questioning by accusing Bondi of deliberately politicizing the department, turning it from the Department of Justice into the “Department of revenge and corruption.”

In another heated exchanges at the hearing, Bondi reacted with outrage as she accused Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt., of suggesting she was lying as she evaded questions about the investigation into Homan.

“First of all, is there a tape that has audio and video of the transfer the $50,000?” Welch asked.

“You would have to talk to Director Patel about that,” Bondi replied.

“No, I’m talking to you,” Welch said.

“I don’t know the answer –” Bondi said before Welch interjected, “You do know the answer.”

“Don’t call me a liar!” Bondi shot back. “I didn’t call you a liar,” Welch responded.

Bondi pushes back against Democrats

Bondi pushed back against her critics and Democrats during the hearing. In her opening statement, she framed her tenure as the “end” of weaponization of law enforcement, while reinforcing her extensive efforts to enact President Trump’s agenda.

“We will work to earn that back every single day. We are returning to our core mission of fighting real crime. While there is more work to do, I believe in eight short months we have made tremendous progress towards those ends,” she said.

She also railed against judges who have ruled against the administration in the months since Trump took office, while highlighting the Justice Department’s string of victories at the Supreme Court.

“My attorneys have done incredible work advancing President Trump’s agenda and protecting the Executive Branch from judicial overreach,” she said.

Bondi continued to hit back at Durbin, who questioned her about the federal deployment to Illinois.

The attorney general taunted the senator about Chicago’s crime rate. Bondi said that Patel and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche were on their way to the city.

“Chairman, as you shut down the government, you voted to shut down the government and you’re sitting here as law enforcement officers aren’t being paid. They’re out there working to protect you. I wish you love Chicago as much as you hate President Trump,” she said.

Durbin was taken aback by Bondi’s responses.

“Madam attorney general, it’s my job to grill you. Investigation of your agency is part of my responsibility. And this – this committee, you mean. I’d like the experience, but others have weathered the storm and answered questions in a respectful manner,” he said.

Bondi in the hot seat over Epstein files

Bondi faced heavy scrutiny over conflicting statements out of the administration on the Epstein files, after the Justice Department and FBI said in a July letter that no further releases were warranted and that there was no evidence suggesting others participated or enabled Epstein’s abuse of minor girls.

Democrats have accused the administration of seeking to cover up any mentions of Trump or high-profile appointees who had past associations with Epstein, which the administration has denied.

Trump and Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of trafficking young girls and women, were friends in the 1990s but the president said the relationship soured after Epstein poached some employees from Trump’s Florida club after he explicitly warned him not to do so.

When asked on Fox News about the alleged Epstein client list, the attorney general told Fox News in February, “It’s sitting on my desk right now to review.”

She refused to elaborate about those past comments or the growing calls for the Epstein files while testifying.

Bondi responded to individual Democrats who sought more details by surfacing donations they allegedly may have received from Reid Hoffman — an entrepreneur and founder of LinkedIn who is known to have past associations with Epstein.

She again surfaced Hoffman’s alleged donations in an exchange with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, in which she again refused to answer his direct questions about the Epstein files.

Political targeting questioned

Trump has recently ordered the department to ramp up investigations into so-called “radical left” organizations that he and other senior White House officials have alleged, without providing evidence, as helping to fund perpetrators who have attacked federal law enforcement officials dispatched around the country.

Just days after Trump’s comments, a senior official in the Justice Department ordered several U.S. Attorney’s offices around the country to prepare to open sweeping criminal investigations in to the Open Society Foundations founded by billionaire George Soros, naming criminal statutes ranging from robbery, material support for terrorism and racketeering, ABC News previously confirmed.

In a statement, the Open Society Foundations called the accusations “politically motivated attacks on civil society, meant to silence speech the administration disagrees with and undermine the First Amendment right to free speech.”

Bondi sought to brush off pointed questions from Democrats by repeatedly deflecting to crimes committed by undocumented immigrants in their states and districts that were among the briefing materials she brought with her to the hearings.

She has also dismissed any characterization of the Justice Department appearing to work in lockstep with the White House as “politicization” of law enforcement. Bondi and other senior DOJ officials have instead argued that the two federal cases brought against Trump by a special counsel under the Biden Administration represented a far more egregious example of weaponization, echoing grievances leveled at the department by Trump.

DOJ under scrutiny amid growing controversies

As ABC News first reported, the move to seek Comey’s indictment came over the objections of career prosecutors and followed Trump’s removal of his appointee to lead the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia, Erik Siebert, who expressed reservations about pursuing charges against Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, sources told ABC News.

Trump eventually installed a White House aide and former personal attorney Lindsey Halligan to lead the office and move forward with the case against Comey, and a grand jury narrowly voted to indict him on two counts of making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional investigation — while declining to indict on a third false statements charge. Comey has denied wrongdoing and is set to appear Thursday in federal court for his arraignment.

While sources told ABC News that leadership at the DOJ expressed reservations about pursuing the case, Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel went on to publicly cheer news of Comey’s indictment in news interviews and social media posts.

The next week, the administration moved to fire a top national security prosecutor in the office, Michael Ben’Ary, over a misleading social media post that falsely suggested he was among the prosecutors who resisted charging Comey.

Ben’Ary was leading a major case against one of the alleged plotters of the Abbey Gate bombing during the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. In a scathing departure letter, Ben’Ary set his sights squarely on the Justice Department’s leadership and labeled his removal as just one in a series of recent moves taken to root out career officials for political reasons at the expense of the nation’s security.

“This example highlights the most troubling aspect of the current operations of the Department of Justice: the leadership is more concerned with punishing the President’s perceived enemies than they are with protecting our national security,” Ben’Ary wrote. “Justice for Americans killed and injured by our enemies should not be contingent on what someone in the Department of Justice sees in their social media feed that day.”

The DOJ declined to comment when asked about Ben’Ary’s letter.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal pressed Bondi repeatedly on Tuesday over instances of pressure on the department by Trump and what conversations she may have had with him in the days leading up to the indictment of Comey.

“I’d like to know from you what conversations you had with President Trump about the indictment of James Comey,” Blumenthal said.

“Senator, I am not going to discuss any conversations I have or have not had with the President of the United States. You’re an attorney, you have a law degree, and you know that I’m not going to do that,” Bondi said on Tuesday.

Those actions have caused unprecedented turmoil at the Eastern District, which oversees some of the nation’s most sensitive national security, terrorism and espionage investigations.

Current and former officials say that turmoil has reverberated further across the Justice Department’s workforce around the country, with attorneys concerned they’ll face professional repercussions if they resist taking part in politicized investigations or prosecutions.

On Monday, nearly 300 DOJ employees who left the department since Trump’s inauguration released a letter on the eve of Bondi’s hearing describing her leadership as “appalling” in its treatment of the career workforce and the elimination of longstanding norms of independence from the White House.

“We call on Congress to exercise its oversight responsibilities far more vigorously,” the former employees said. “Members in both chambers and on both sides of the aisle must provide a meaningful check on the abuses we’re witnessing. And we call on all Americans — whose safety, prosperity, and rights depend on a strong DOJ — to speak out against its destruction.”

The DOJ declined to comment on the letter.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Thursday marks the 30th day of the federal government shutdown and the American public has grown more concerned about the shutdown throughout the month and more disapprove of how President Donald Trump is handling the federal government, according to an ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll conducted using Ipsos’ KnowledgePanel.

More Americans blame Trump and the Republicans in Congress than the Democrats for the shutdown, the poll finds.

Three-quarters of Americans say they are concerned about the government shutdown, up from two-thirds who said the same on the first day of the shutdown in a Washington Post poll. Now, 43% of Americans say that they are “very” concerned about the shutdown, up from 25% on Oct. 1.

Nearly half of Americans, 45%, say Trump and congressional Republicans are responsible for the shutdown, while 33% say congressional Democrats are responsible and another 22% are not sure. That is barely a shift from the Post’s poll on Oct. 1 when 47% blamed Trump and Republicans, 30% blamed Democrats and 23% were unsure at the onset of the shutdown.

Democrats are more united, saying that Trump and Republicans are to blame for the shutdown (81%) than Republicans saying Democrats are to blame (72%). Twice as many independents say Trump and Republicans are responsible (46%) than Democrats (23%).

Majorities across partisan lines say they are concerned about the shutdown: Nearly nine in 10 Democrats along with over seven in 10 independents and over six in 10 Republicans are concerned about the shutdown, but more Democrats say they are “very” concerned (62%) than independents (43%) or Republicans (26%).

Concern over the shutdown is higher among women, with 81% voicing concern, compared with 68% of men.

And a growing share of Americans disapprove of how Trump is managing the federal government. In all, 63% disapprove today, up from 57% in April and 54% in February. Just over a third (36%) approve in the most recent poll.

The ABC/Post/Ipsos poll asked Americans to explain why they think either Trump and Republicans or Democrats are to blame for the federal government shutting down. Here are some of their written responses:

“They won’t budge on the concerns of healthcare premiums skyrocketing for all Americans. He is not for all Americans, only his interests matter,” said a 65-year-old Democratic woman in Wisconsin.

“They seem more interested in keeping power than working for the country’s benefit,” said a 78-year-old Republican-leaning independent man in Oregon.

“They control all of the portions of the federal government,” said a 45-year-old Democratic man in Tennessee.

“Trump is the president and the Republicans hold the majority. Not only that, Speaker Johnson let out the House on vacation, and Trump/Republicans won’t even try to work with Democrats on the loss of healthcare funding that is going to hurt millions of people,” said a 34-year-old Democratic woman in Minnesota.

“Trump said it himself a few years ago that it’s the President’s job to bring the 2 sides together,” said a 59-year-old Democratic-leaning independent woman in Pennsylvania.

“President Trump and the Maga GOP are refusing to negotiate over the Affordable Care Act expiration regardless of the negative impact on many of their supporters and they have no alternative plans for keeping the cost of healthcare from rising,” said a 69-year-old Democratic woman in Virginia.

“The Republicans control Congress. They won’t negotiate. Of course they’re responsible. We cannot take healthcare away from millions of Americans,” said a 40-year-old Democratic woman in Iowa.

“They refuse to negotiate in good faith,” said a 78-year-old Democratic-leaning independent man in Ohio.

Among those blaming Democrats:

“They want healthcare for illegal immigrants to be paid for out of my pocket. Not right,” said a 78-year-old Republican woman in Oregon.

“Because they will not budge,” said a 37-year-old Republican-leaning independent woman in Arizona.

“They want to negotiate subsidies on health care, but they do not want to conduct the negotiation within the relevant House and Senate committees. They are holding all of the government hostage over one issue,” said a 78-year-old Republican man in South Carolina.

“They voted down the continuation resolutions multiple times,” said a 56-year-old Republican-leaning independent man in Nebraska.

“The Democrats are the ones who will not budge on coming to an agreement,” said a 43-year-old independent woman in Texas.

“The Democrats have supported the items in the continuing resolution and are demanding things that continue to build the debt,” said a 69-year-old Republican-leaning independent man in California.

“Republicans offered and passed a clean bill with no Republican additions and Democrats continually vote no,” said a 76-year-old Republican man in Texas.

Methodology: This ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll was conducted online via the probability-based Ipsos KnowledgePanel® Oct. 24-28, 2025, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 2,725 U.S. adults and has a margin of error of plus or minus 1.9 percentage points, including the design effect. Error margins are larger for subgroups. 

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.