Connecticut
Connecticut leaders react to capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro
CONNECTICUT (WTNH) — The United States military carried out “large scale” strike inside Venezuela in the early hours of Saturday morning, capturing Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, according to President Donald Trump.
Leaders in Connecticut are responding to the military action.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) shared the following statement.
“If we’re starting another endless war, with no clear national security strategy or need, count me out. Maduro is a cruel criminal dictator, but President Trump has never sought approval from Congress for war as the Constitution requires – and our military deserves. We’ve seen several Administrations lead us into conflicts without objectives or timelines and with disastrous consequences. President Trump has also articulated no clear end game to prevent further chaos, violence, and bloodshed in Venezuela. The American people deserve—and Congress should demand—facts and clarity.”
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) called the strike the start of an “illegal war” between the U.S. and Venezuela.
“President Trump thinks he is above the law. He steals from taxpayers. He thumbs his nose at the law. And now, he is starting an illegal war with Venezuela that Americans didn’t ask for and has nothing to do with our security. How does going to war in South America help regular Americans who are struggling? How does this do anything about drugs entering the U.S. when Venezuela produces no fentanyl? What is the actual security threat to the United States? And what happens next in Venezuela? He cannot answer these questions – and that’s why there was no briefing to Congress to explain this action, and no briefing scheduled. And Maduro’s illegitimate election does not give the president the power to invade without congressional approval, nor does it create a national security justification. That contention is laughable. This is about satisfying Trump’s vanity, making good on the long standing neocon grudge against Maduro, enriching Trump’s oil industry backers, and distracting voters from Epstein and rising costs.”
Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) said the Trump administration acted without congressional approval.
“Maduro is an illegitimate ruler, but I have seen no evidence that his presidency poses a threat that would justify military action without Congressional authorization, nor have I heard a strategy for the day after and how we will prevent Venezuela from descending into chaos. Secretary Rubio repeatedly denied to Congress that the Administration intended to force regime change in Venezuela. The Administration must immediately brief Congress on its plan to ensure stability in the region and its legal justification for this decision.”
State Senate Republican Leader Stephen Harding (R-Conn.) shared that he hopes Maduro is brought to justice, calling him an “integral culprit” in the “narcotic ring” in the United States.
“President Maduro has been an integral culprit in fostering the narcotic ring in our country which has killed far too many Americans. I hope he is brought to justice and we can continue to address the substance abuse crisis that our state and country continues to face.
The Chairman of the Connecticut Republican Party Ben Proto shared the following statement.
“President Trump promised to stop the flow of drugs into the US that have been killing millions of Americans. Nicolas Maduro, who declared himself President, while getting about 30% of the vote in the last so called free election in Venezuela, was given multiple warnings to stop the flow of drugs from his country into America, was offered help by the Trump administration in stopping the flow, but he continued to, not only allow the flow of drugs, but condone it and profit from it. Presidents have long used their constitutional authority to intervene in other countries when those countries posed a danger to America and Americans. President Trump did just that. Unfortunately Democrats, particularly Jim Himes, Chris Murphy and Dick Blumenthal are more interested in playing politics than in protecting Americans. Nearly 1,000 Connecticut residents died from drug overdoses in 2024 and we have seen an increase in overdoses in 2025. If only Democrats cared as much about Americans as they do about a drug lord running another country who profits from the death of Americans.“
Rep. Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.) demanded that Congress must be briefed before further action.
“As information about U.S military strikes in Venezuela unfold, I have more questions than answers. Nicolas Maduro is a brutal dictator who caused so much harm to his people. However, as Americans we must seriously weigh the consequences of attacking a sovereign nation and committing to “run Venezuela.” Congress must be briefed immediately, before this situation continues to escalate. I will comment further as credible information becomes available to Members of Congress.“
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) shared the following statement, claiming that there could be “severe repercussions for American interests.”
“President Trump’s unilateral decision to attempt a regime change operation in Venezuela by using military force to capture Nicolas Maduro and declaring, ‘we will run the country’, threatens global order and is a fundamental violation of the Constitution, which gives Congress the responsibility of authorizing major military actions that could have severe repercussions for American interests.
“America’s unprecedented global strength and prosperity was built on this principle of restraining military force through democratic bodies like Congress. President Trump has shredded this principle, and along with it has destroyed American credibility and emboldened our adversaries to act with similar aggression. This new foreign policy that President Trump and his advisors have used to justify this act of war, including invoking the 200-year-old Monroe Doctrine as a justification for America to do whatever it pleases in the Western Hemisphere, is the exact same reasoning that China would use to justify invading Taiwan, and which Russia has used to assault Ukraine.
“President Trump has also now threatened Cuba with similar language, and is preparing a giant corrupt giveaway to oil companies by claiming that the United States will acquire Venezuela’s oil. This is corruption of the highest order. Maduro was an authoritarian who stayed in power despite the will of the people, but that does not justify the United States in starting a war to benefit some of the world’s wealthiest corporations.
“President Trump did all of this without the consent of Congress, and without providing any details or day-after plans. The full consequences of this act of war will not be known for some time, and they may require putting American boots on the ground in Venezuela, as the President has said he was prepared to do. The American people do not want to be dragged into another endless conflict distracting from the rising cost of living and the affordability crisis. Whatever happens next, the responsibility will be squarely with President Trump and his contempt for the Constitution and for Congress.”
Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) echoed the statements of his fellow Democrats.
“This is yet another authoritarian power grab by Donald Trump. As he indicated in his address, it’s clear it’s about the oil!!! And securing that oil!!! And securing it with the use of our brave men and women in the United States military!!! The Constitution entrusts Congress, not the President, with the power to declare war for a reason. It’s Congress’s responsibility to decide whether the nation goes to war or not! That’s why I’m joining with others in calling on the President to immediately brief Congress—and for Congress to assert its authority under the Constitution and the War Powers Act—to let this President know he does not have the authority to unilaterally commit our country to yet another endless war.“
This is a developing story. Stay with News 8 for updates.
The costs of climate change are being borne by those who did the least to cause it. This Earth Day, we should expect more than symbolic gestures. We need our elected officials to stand up to harmful industry influence and deliver policies that hold major polluters accountable.
The effects of climate change have been inescapable across the world, especially in Connecticut. Just last month in March there was persistent unseasonable heat that was so intense that the continental United States registered its most abnormally hot month in 132 years of records, according to federal weather data. And the next year looks to turn the dial up on global warmth even more.
Connecticut residents are now more than ever facing the harmful and costly effects of climate change disasters. These costly disasters and effects have no limits on who is impacted.
A newly published DEEP report showed that climate change had already adversely affected Connecticut residents, businesses, and infrastructure over decades. Extreme weather has cost the state and private sector billions of dollars since 2010. This will continue, according to recent data on climate change.
Between 1880 and 2020, Connecticut experienced climate change impacts, including eight to nine inches of sea level rise; increased coastal erosion, warming of Long Island Sound; warmer hottest and coldest days of the year; increasing annual rainfall; decreasing annual snowfall; and increased rainstorms and flash flooding. In just 2023 and 2024 Connecticut faced multiple extreme weather events from deadly flooding in Southbury, deadly brush fires in Berlin, and millions of dollars of damage to farms from drought.
Let’s be clear, Connecticut taxpayers and residents are paying for 100% of these climate costs, costs that are falling on those least responsible.
Since the 2016 Paris Agreement, just 57 companies are directly linked to 80 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Carbon Majors Database. These companies include fossil fuel giants like Chevron, Shell, and BP, who raked in record profits in the last quarter of 2023.
Why shouldn’t those most responsible pay their fair share?
Fossil fuel companies are spending hundreds of millions of dollars every year to influence lawmakers and block climate action, because they know real accountability would cost them far more. Instead of paying for the damage their pollution has caused, they’re investing heavily in lobbying and political influence to avoid “polluter pays” policies and shift those costs onto taxpayers.
In light of Climate Superfund laws being introduced in over a dozen states including here in Connecticut, fossil fuel companies are actively shaping climate legislation to shield themselves from accountability. With more than 30 lawsuits filed by states and cities across the U.S., the industry is pushing for legal immunity to avoid paying for climate-related damages. These efforts are aimed at blocking “polluter pays” policies, like climate superfund laws, that would require them to cover the billions of dollars in costs tied to environmental harm, infrastructure impacts, and years of misleading the public.
This Earth Day, we need to flip the script. For too long, fossil fuel companies have pushed the idea that climate change is the result of individual choices, telling us to turn off the lights, take shorter showers, and shrink our personal footprint. Those actions matter, but they’re not the whole story.
The truth is, a small number of corporations are responsible for a massive share of global emissions. While they promote small lifestyle changes, they continue expanding fossil fuel production and investing millions to block meaningful climate policy.
We won’t see real progress until we name what’s actually happening. Accountability must be at the core of climate action, shifting the burden off everyday people and onto the biggest polluters. That means strong policies, real enforcement, and a firm commitment to a “polluter pays” approach. The Connecticut Legislature must act and pass a Climate Superfund bill to move costs off taxpayers and require fossil fuel companies to finally pay their fair share.
Julianna LaRue is an organizer for the Connecticut Chapter of the Sierra Club.
Amtrak says it will not close any railroad bridges along Connecticut’s shoreline during the 2026 World Cup, backing away from a potential proposal that had sparked concerns from boaters, harbor officials, and marine businesses.
In an email Tuesday to NBC Connecticut, Amtrak spokesperson Jason Abrams said: “At this time, in coordination with the Coast Guard, we will not be closing any bridges on the Connecticut Coast Line during the tournament.”
The statement is a shift from a plan previously circulating among members of the boating community. That proposal outlined possible hourslong closures of several movable railroad bridges on the Connecticut shoreline on dates tied to World Cup matches in Foxborough, Massachusetts.
The affected bridges would have included the spans over the Connecticut River, Niantic River, Shaw’s Cove, Thames River and Mystic River.
The proposal had raised alarms among charter boat operators, harbor masters and marine industry leaders, who warned the closures could disrupt navigation during the height of the summer season, create safety risks on crowded waterways and hurt businesses that depend on fishing and recreational boating.
Amtrak also said is “exploring all options to move travelers safely and reliably during the World Cup with minimal interruption and inconvenience to local communities, visitors, and other stakeholders and travelers.”
Fans are expected to use rail service along the Northeast Corridor to travel to matches in the Northeast, including in the Boston area, where passengers would use connecting service to reach the stadium in Foxborough.
Earlier Tuesday, the U.S. Coast Guard told NBC Connecticut it was reviewing Amtrak’s request related to the bridge proposal.
“The Coast Guard has received Amtrak’s request for the bridge closures and are reviewing it to reach a final decision. When that decision is made, the Coast Guard will work with Amtrak. We are also aware of the mariners and boating communities concerns regarding this,” the Coast Guard had said.
It was not immediately clear whether Amtrak had formally withdrawn that request or whether the rail operator’s latest statement means the bridge closures are no longer under consideration.
NBC Connecticut reached out to the Coast Guard to request additional information.
-
Sports7 minutes agoSun Valley Poly High’s Fabian Bravo shows flashes of Koufax dominance
-
World19 minutes agoMoldovan oligarch sentenced to 19 years in prison over $1bn fraud
-
New York2 hours agoTrump’s Immigration Crackdown Pervades Long Island Suburbs
-
Detroit, MI3 hours agoChris Simms projects Detroit Lions first-round NFL draft pick
-
San Francisco, CA3 hours agoSan Francisco sets $3.4B price tag for public takeover of PG&E
-
Dallas, TX3 hours agoGame Day Guide: Stars at Wild | Dallas Stars
-
Miami, FL3 hours agoMay a steadying presence as Cards hold off Marlins in Miami
-
Boston, MA3 hours agoTyrese Maxey, VJ Edgecombe flex in Boston: Takeaways from Celtics-76ers Game 2