Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen said Sunday that President Donald Trump’s authorization of strikes against Venezuelan drug vessels could amount to a war crime, responding to questions about a report concerning a second strike on a targeted boat.
Van Hollen made the comments during an appearance on NBC’s This Week with host Jonathan Karl, who asked about a Washington Post report alleging that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth ordered a second strike on a vessel after an initial strike left two survivors.
Karl began the exchange by asking Van Hollen for his assessment of the report.
Karl said, “So let me ask you about that Washington Post report on the — on the attack on that Venezuelan alleged drug boat. What do you make of what happened there? Do you think there was a war crime committed?”
Van Hollen said the possibility existed. “I think it’s very possible there was a war crime committed. Of course, for it to be a war crime, you have to accept the Trump administration’s whole construct here,” he said.
Karl clarified the point. “That we’re at war.”
Van Hollen responded, “Which is we’re in armed conflict, at war with this particular — with the drug gangs. Of course, they’ve never presented the public with the information they’ve got here. But it could be worse than that. Right? If that theory is wrong, then it’s plain murder.”
This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year
Karl then asked whether the first strike would be considered murder if the administration’s view of armed conflict did not apply. “The first strike is murder in that case?”
Van Hollen said, “That’s correct.”
Karl continued, “You’re alleging.”
Van Hollen replied, “That’s correct. Well, I’m saying that it’s either murder from the first strike, if their whole theory is wrong, and I think, you know, the weight of the legal opinion here is that they have concocted this ridiculous legal theory. But even if you accept their theory than it is a war crime, and so I do believe that the secretary of Defense should be held accountable for giving those kind of orders.”
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), who repeatedly committed treason by promoting MS-13, is now defending Venezuelan drug traffickers who’ve been trying to invade the US.
How long until Van Hollen has margaritas with Maduro?pic.twitter.com/P5nm1wAGaw
— Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) November 30, 2025
The remarks came as discussions continued about President Trump’s posture toward Venezuela and the Maduro regime.
The debate follows recent reporting and public statements that have fueled questions about potential U.S. military actions in the region.
On Saturday, Venezuelan airspace went silent after President Trump announced that it would be closed.
To all Airlines, Pilots, Drug Dealers, and Human Traffickers, please consider THE AIRSPACE ABOVE AND SURROUNDING VENEZUELA TO BE CLOSED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Thank you for your attention to this matter! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 29, 2025
No further details were provided about the duration or scope of the closure, and officials have not issued additional statements on the matter.
Various reports have circulated claiming that Nicolás Maduro may have fled the country due to concerns about a possible U.S. operation.
Those reports have not been confirmed by U.S. officials or Venezuelan authorities. Information about Maduro’s whereabouts remained unverified as of the weekend, and there were no official announcements from Caracas addressing the claims.
The Washington Post report referenced by Karl has prompted questions about the chain of command and the legal framework governing U.S. actions in international waters.
The allegation that a second strike may have been ordered after survivors were identified has led to calls for additional scrutiny of the decision-making process within the Department of War.
Van Hollen’s comments represent one of the strongest public reactions from a sitting senator regarding the legality of the strike.
His remarks centered on whether the administration’s stated justification qualifies as an armed conflict under applicable legal standards, and whether actions taken under that justification comply with established rules governing the use of force.
Secretary Pete Hegseth had already issued a detailed public response to the claims raised in the Washington Post report.
As usual, the fake news is delivering more fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland.
As we’ve said from the beginning, and in every statement, these highly effective strikes are specifically…
— Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (@SecWar) November 28, 2025
