Trump made a recent grifting message with a certain history painting as a backdrop at his Bedminster golf club. We know he’s all about the props for his media pitches.
Assuming that he actually understood iconology, he perhaps was suggesting that one of the documents he stole from the NARA was an unexecuted plan for the invasion of Venezuela in 2017 that echoed a subsequent, failed mercenary attempt in 2020.
It does seem like Trump loved to keep souvenirs, especially the ones he could brag about, even if they were never-executed plans. Perhaps that was one of the items he took with him to Mar-a-Lago.
As speculation intensified ahead of the Justice Department’s notification of the indictment, Mr. Trump’s team pre-taped a video of the former president reacting to the expected charges in a speech direct to the camera — and standing in front of what appeared to be a version of a painting of President Theodore Roosevelt and Kaiser Wilhelm II, Germany’s leader during World War I.
Half an hour after he announced his indictment, he posted the video on his social media website. In it, he bashes Democrats, portrays the indictment as evidence of “a nation in decline” and calls himself “an innocent man.”
The Venezuelan crisis of 1902–1903[a] was a naval blockade imposed against Venezuela by Great Britain, Germany, and Italy from December 1902 to February 1903, after President Cipriano Castro refused to pay foreign debts and damages suffered by European citizens in recent Venezuelan civil wars. Castro assumed that the American Monroe Doctrine would see Washington intervene to prevent European military intervention. However, at the time, United States president Theodore Roosevelt and his Department of State saw the doctrine as applying only to European seizure of territory, rather than intervention per se. With prior promises that no such seizure would occur, the U.S. was officially neutral and allowed the action to go ahead without objection. The blockade saw Venezuela's small navy quickly disabled, but Castro refused to give in, and instead agreed in principle to submit some of the claims to international arbitration, which he had previously rejected. Germany initially objected to this, arguing that some claims should be accepted by Venezuela without arbitration.
President Roosevelt years later claimed he forced the Germans to back down by sending his own larger fleet under and threatening war if the Germans landed. However he made no preparations for war against a major power, nor did he alert officials at the State Department, War Department, Navy Department or the Senate.[1]
[...]
As a result, the crisis produced the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine,[29] described in Roosevelt's 1904 message to Congress.[7] The Corollary asserted a right of the United States to intervene to "stabilize" the economic affairs of small states in the Caribbean and Central America if they were unable to pay their international debts, in order to preclude European intervention to do so. The Venezuela crisis, and in particular the arbitral award, were key in the development of the Corollary.[29]
en.wikipedia.org/...
(2018)
BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — As a meeting last August (2017) in the Oval Office to discuss sanctions on Venezuela was concluding, President Donald Trump turned to his top aides and asked an unsettling question: With a fast unraveling Venezuela threatening regional security, why can’t the U.S. just simply invade the troubled country?
The suggestion stunned those present at the meeting, including U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and national security adviser H.R. McMaster, both of whom have since left the administration. This account of the previously undisclosed conversation comes from a senior administration official familiar with what was said.
In an exchange that lasted around five minutes, McMaster and others took turns explaining to Trump how military action could backfire and risk losing hard-won support among Latin American governments to punish President Nicolas Maduro for taking Venezuela down the path of dictatorship, according to the official. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the discussions.
But Trump pushed back. Although he gave no indication he was about to order up military plans, he pointed to what he considered past cases of successful gunboat diplomacy in the region, according to the official, like the invasions of Panama and Grenada in the 1980s.
The idea, despite his aides’ best attempts to shoot it down, would nonetheless persist in the president’s head.
apnews.com/...
Another actual attempt was made before the 2020 election, called Operation Gideon (2020).
Through connections within the private security community, Silvercorp founder Jordan Goudreau was acquainted with Keith Schiller, the longtime director of security for Donald Trump.[9] Schiller brought Goudreau to a March 2019 fundraising event focused on security in Venezuela, which took place at the University Club of Washington, DC.[9][15] Lester Toledo [es], the director of humanitarian aid for Guaidó's government, was also in attendance.[9]
Goudreau would later say that the Trump administration had knowledge of the operation before starting and even that the plotters held meetings in the Trump Doral west of Miami. Goudreau sued J. J. Rendón in October in a $1.4 million breach-of-contract lawsuit.[92]
In May 2021, three Venezuelans were sentenced in Colombia to six years in prison for their relation to the operation.[93]
en.wikipedia.org/...
Can Trump run for president or be elected after indictments?
Indictments, and even potential convictions, do not legally disqualify Trump from running for president in 2024 or from serving if elected, said Chris Edelson, an assistant professor at American University who specializes in presidential power.
- "The clearest path to disqualifying Donald Trump running for office would have been if the Senate had convicted him in one or both of the impeachments," Edelson said.
Context: The Senate acquitted Trump in both of his impeachment trials in 2020 for abuse of power and 2021 for incitement of insurrection, respectively.
Between the lines: The Civil War-era 14th Amendment has a clause that bans anyone who "engaged in insurrection" against the U.S. from holding elected office without the approval of two-thirds of the House and Senate.
- After the Jan. 6 insurrection, Democrats accused Trump of engaging in "insurrection or rebellion" against the U.S. as defined in the 14th Amendment, which would prohibit any such person from "holding any office" if the Senate had convicted him.
- Lawmakers also floated using the 25th Amendment to remove him from office at the time, which like impeachment didn't bar him from future office.
Reality check: Beyond impeachment and the 14th Amendment, the only other barrier to the presidency is the two-term limit. Trump is one of nearly two dozen U.S. presidents who have served one term.
Yes, but: Trump is also being investigated over efforts to subvert the 2020 election by special counsel Jack Smith, who was appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to oversee both federal probes on Trump.
- In a third and separate probe out of Atlanta on his efforts to subvert the 2020 election, a charging decision is expected this summer.
- Experts, including Edelson, still expect him to be able to run.
How does all of this affect Trump's campaign?
The indictment could bolster further support from Trump's voter base, which holds the belief that he has been unfairly persecuted, said Heidi Kitrosser, a professor of law at Northwestern University. It is not yet clear how this will affect his campaign moving forward.