Connect with us

News

Nobel Prize winner Machado says Venezuela is in ‘chaos’ under current regime

Published

on

Nobel Prize winner Machado says Venezuela is in ‘chaos’ under current regime

Opposition leader Maria Corina Machado gives a speech during an Anti-government protest on Jan. 9, 2025 in Caracas, Venezuela.

Alfredo Lasry R/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Alfredo Lasry R/Getty Images

Venezuela opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner María Corina Machado said in an interview with NPR’s Weekend Edition Sunday that her country is in chaos and called for the removal of Venezuela’s authoritarian President Nicolás Maduro.

Speaking while still in hiding within Venezuela’s borders, the far-right leader decried Maduro as an illegitimate strongman who had elbowed his way into a third term despite consistent evidence that his administration had rigged the vote.

“I want to be very clear with this: Regime change was already mandated by the Venezuelan people on July 28, 2024,” Machado said during an interview with NPR’s Ayesha Rascoe on Saturday, citing last year’s controversial, closely watched election.

Advertisement

“The narrative of the regime right now is that if Maduro goes, chaos will come to Venezuela. That’s absolutely false,” she said. “Venezuela is in profound, total chaos right now.”

Machado – whom Maduro’s regime had barred from running in the race – had backed opposition candidate Edmundo González in the race to steer Venezuela as it suffers through a political and economic crisis that has forced more than one-fifth of its residents to flee the country.

Machado has been one of the staunchest critics of the powerful United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) since it first came to power in the late 1990s. A former legislator in the Venezuelan National Assembly, Machado has been shot at, targeted by federal prosecutors, banned from running for office, and forced into hiding by the government of Maduro, who succeeded PSUV founder Hugo Chávez in 2013.

“We won by a landslide in the presidential election, and we proved it with over 85% of the original tally sheets. The whole world knows that. Even Maduro’s allies know that he was defeated,” Machado said.

Several Latin American countries, alongside the United States, agree that Maduro manipulated the electoral system in order to maintain his grip on Venezuela’s government. The country has been riddled with corruption and, under Maduro’s leadership, seen the country descend into economic collapse and a crackdown on free speech.

Advertisement

The Trump administration has accused Maduro of leading a drug cartel and has ordered deadly strikes on boats it says were carrying drugs. The U.S. State Department is offering a reward of up to $50 million for information that would lead to Maduro’s arrest.

Machado echoed those claims that Maduro is operating as a cartel head and blamed him for the boat strikes and broader international hostility towards Venezuela.

“[The cartel] are destabilizing, intentionally, the region and undermining the institutions in the United States, because they have turned Venezuela into the safe haven of the enemies of the United States – Iran, China, Russia, Hezbollah, Hamas, and others,” she said.

“So, this is a war that was declared by Maduro, not us.”

When asked if she would support U.S. military invasion of Venezuela to see Maduro deposed, Machado declined to speculate on whether President Trump would authorize such actions, but she called Trump a valuable ally in recognizing the “threat” Maduro presents as a leader.

Advertisement

“You cannot have peace without freedom, and you cannot have freedom without strength,” Machado said.

“When you are facing a criminal structure, they have used violence, all the resources of the Venezuelan people against innocent people. People that are in prison right now that are tortured, persecuted and killed,” she said. “We need to stop this because it is a matter of saving lives and the regime has to understand that impunity is over.”

Machado had dedicated her Nobel Peace Prize to Trump, whom she has supported and called on directly to help steer Venezuela towards democracy.

When asked whether she did so in the hopes that it would inspire Trump to help force Maduro out, Machado said: “I dedicated it to the people of Venezuela and President Trump because I think it’s the correct thing to do.”

“I think it is fair, not only for what he has been doing in the last months to solve long and painful conflicts around the world, but precisely for what he’s doing right now for the Americas,” she said, adding that, if and when Maduro is ousted, she hoped to see the fall of other repressive regimes in Cuba and Nicaragua as well.

Advertisement

News

Video: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

Published

on

Video: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

new video loaded: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

transcript

transcript

Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

A man clung to a partially built roof for hours in frigid temperatures during a standoff with immigration agents in Chanhassen, Minn., a suburb of Minneapolis. The confrontation was part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in the state to remove what it calls “vicious criminals.”

“What a [expletive] embarrassment.” “Look at this guy.” “What’s with all the fascists?” “The Lord is with you.” “Where’s the bad hombre? What did this guy do?” “He’s out here working to support his [expletive] family.” “Gestapo agents.” “Oh yeah, shake your head, tough guy.” “This is where you get the worst of the worst right here, hard-working builders.” “Crossing the border is not a crime. Coming illegally to the United States is not a crime, according to you.” “C’mon, get out of here.” “Take him to a different hospital.”

Advertisement
A man clung to a partially built roof for hours in frigid temperatures during a standoff with immigration agents in Chanhassen, Minn., a suburb of Minneapolis. The confrontation was part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in the state to remove what it calls “vicious criminals.”

By Ernesto Londoño, Jackeline Luna and Daniel Fetherston

December 17, 2025

Continue Reading

News

Trump’s BBC lawsuit: A botched report, BritBox, and porn

Published

on

Trump’s BBC lawsuit: A botched report, BritBox, and porn

Journalists report outside BBC Broadcasting House in London. In a new lawsuit, President Trump is seeking $10 billion from the BBC for defamation.

Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP/AP

Not content with an apology and the resignation of two top BBC executives, President Trump filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit Monday against the BBC in his continued strategy to take the press to court.

Beyond the legal attack on yet another media outlet, the litigation represents an audacious move against a national institution of a trusted ally. It hinges on an edit presented in a documentary of the president’s words on a fateful day. Oddly enough, it also hinges on the appeal of a niche streaming service to people in Florida, and the use of a technological innovation embraced by porn devotees.

A sloppy edit

At the heart of Trump’s case stands an episode of the BBC television documentary program Panorama that compresses comments Trump made to his supporters on Jan. 6, 2021, before they laid siege to the U.S. Capitol.

Advertisement

The episode seamlessly links Trump’s call for people to walk up to the Capitol with his exhortation nearly 55 minutes later: “And we fight, we fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell you don’t have a country anymore.”

Trump’s attorneys argue that the presentation gives viewers the impression that the president incited the violence that followed. They said his remarks had been doctored, not edited, and noted the omission of his statement that protesters would be “marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

As NPR and other news organizations have documented, many defendants in the Jan. 6 attack on Congress said they believed they had been explicitly urged by Trump to block the certification of President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.

Trump’s lawsuit calls the documentary “a false, defamatory, deceptive, disparaging, inflammatory, and malicious depiction of President Trump.”

The lawsuit alleges that the depiction was “fabricated” and aired “in a brazen attempt to interfere in and influence the Election to President Trump’s detriment.”

Advertisement

While the BBC has not filed a formal response to the lawsuit, the public broadcaster has reiterated that it will defend itself in court.

A Nov. 13 letter to Trump’s legal team on behalf of the BBC from Charles Tobin, a leading U.S. First Amendment attorney, argued that the broadcaster has demonstrated contrition by apologizing, withdrawing the broadcast, and accepting the executives’ resignations.

Tobin also noted, on behalf of the BBC, that Trump had already been indicted by a grand jury on four criminal counts stemming from his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including his conduct on Jan. 6, 2021, on the Capitol grounds.

The appeal of BritBox

For all the current consternation about the documentary, it didn’t get much attention at the time. The BBC aired the documentary twice on the eve of the 2024 elections — but never broadcast it directly in Florida.

That matters because the lawsuit was filed in Florida, where Trump alleges that the program was intended to discourage voters from voting for him.

Advertisement

Yet Tobin notes, Trump won Florida in 2024 by a “commanding 13-point margin, improving over his 2020 and 2016 performances in the state.”

Trump failed to make the case that Floridians were influenced by the documentary, Tobin wrote. He said the BBC did not broadcast the program in Florida through U.S. channels. (The BBC has distribution deals with PBS and NPR and their member stations for television and radio programs, respectively, but not to air Panorama.)

It was “geographically restricted” to U.K. viewers, Tobin wrote.

Hence the argument in Trump’s lawsuit that American viewers have other ways to watch it. The first is BritBox, a BBC streaming service that draws more on British mysteries set at seaside locales than BBC coverage of American politics.

Back in March, then-BBC Director General Tim Davie testified before the House of Commons that BritBox had more than 4 million subscribers in the U.S. (The BBC did not break down how many subscribers it has in Florida or how often Panorama documentaries are viewed by subscribers in the U.S. or the state, in response to questions posed by NPR for this story.)

Advertisement

“The Panorama Documentary was available to BritBox subscribers in Florida and was in fact viewed by these subscribers through BritBox and other means provided by the BBC,” Trump’s lawsuit states.

NPR searched for Panorama documentaries on the BritBox streaming service through the Amazon Prime platform, one of its primary distributors. The sole available episode dates from 2000. Trump does not mention podcasts. Panorama is streamed on BBC Sounds. Its episodes do not appear to be available in the U.S. on such mainstream podcast distributors in the U.S. such as Apple Podcasts, Spotify or Pocket Casts, according to a review by NPR.

Software that enables anonymous browsing – of porn

Another way Trump’s lawsuit suggests people in the U.S. could watch that particular episode of Panorama, if they were so inclined, is through a Virtual Private Network, or VPN.

Trump’s suit says millions of Florida citizens use VPNs to view content from foreign streamers that would otherwise be restricted. And the BBC iPlayer is among the most popular streaming services accessed by viewers using a VPN, Trump’s lawsuit asserts.

In response to questions from NPR, the BBC declined to break down figures for how many people in the U.S. access the BBC iPlayer through VPNs.

Advertisement

Demand for such software did shoot up in 2024 and early 2025. Yet, according to analysts — and even to materials cited by the president’s team in his own case — the reason appears to have less to do with foreign television shows and more to do with online pornography.

Under a new law, Florida began requiring age verification checks for visitors to pornographic websites, notes Paul Bischoff, editor of Comparitech, a site that reviews personal cybersecurity software.

“People use VPNs to get around those age verification and site blocks,” Bischoff says. “The reason is obvious.”

An article in the Tampa Free Press cited by Trump’s lawsuit to help propel the idea of a sharp growth of interest in the BBC actually undercuts the idea in its very first sentence – by focusing on that law.

“Demand for Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) has skyrocketed in Florida following the implementation of a new law requiring age verification for access to adult websites,” the first paragraph states. “This dramatic increase reflects a widespread effort by Floridians to bypass the restrictions and access adult content.”

Advertisement

Several legal observers anticipate possible settlement

Several First Amendment attorneys tell NPR they believe Trump’s lawsuit will result in a settlement of some kind, in part because there’s new precedent. In the past year, the parent companies of ABC News and CBS News have each paid $16 million to settle cases filed by Trump that many legal observers considered specious.

“The facts benefit Trump and defendants may be concerned about reputational harm,” says Carl Tobias, a professor of law at the University of Richmond who specializes in free speech issues. “The BBC also has admitted it could have done better and essentially apologized.”

Some of Trump’s previous lawsuits against the media have failed. He is currently also suing the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Des Moines Register and its former pollster, and the board of the Pulitzer Prize.

Continue Reading

News

Video: Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

Published

on

Video: Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

new video loaded: Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

transcript

transcript

Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

Los Angeles prosecutors charged Nick Reiner with two counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of his parents, the director Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner.

Our office will be filing charges against Nick Reiner, who is accused of killing his parents, actor-director Rob Reiner and photographer-producer Michele Singer Reiner. These charges will be two counts of first-degree murder, with a special circumstance of multiple murders. He also faces a special allegation that he personally used a dangerous and deadly weapon, that being a knife. These charges carry a maximum sentence of life in prison without the possibility parole or the death penalty. No decision at this point has been made with respect to the death penalty.

Advertisement
Los Angeles prosecutors charged Nick Reiner with two counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of his parents, the director Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner.

By Shawn Paik

December 16, 2025

Continue Reading

Trending