Jinnistan wrote:

My guess:

Probably won't end well.

Some have said that Trump has a refreshing transparency, a clarity to his corrupt intent, which, while no less frustrating or depressing to anyone halfway concerned about the future of the planet, does provide some amusement in watching the slightly more discreet defenders of Trump trying to fake their own credulity.

Here's a hilarius/frightening exchange between Marco Rubio (such a fool they named him twice) and George Stephanopoulos, where Steph asks a pretty simple question: "[Trump] said the United States was going to run Venezuela. Under what legal authority?"  Then Rubes goes into extended breath about "leverage" and "national interests".  Stephanopoulos doesn't openly accuse Marco of dodging, and instead simply says "Let me ask the question again.  What is the legal authority for the United States to be running Venezuela?"  Rubio grows "tense".  "Well, I explained to you what our goals are and how we’re going to use the leverage to make it happen....."  Right.  "Goals" and "leverage" do not constitute legal authority.  Finally Rubio falls back on sanctions authority: "We have court orders. These are sanctioned boats and we get orders from courts to go after and seize these sanctions. So…I don’t know, is a court not a legal authority?"  So you have court orders to seize oil tankers?  Great.  Where do you have a court order which allows you to seize the entire oil reserves and production/refinement industry of a foreign nation?  To not only seize the publicly-owned Petroleos de Venezuela corporation itself but to dismantle its operations and redistribute them among private American petrocorporations?  Not to mention hijacking the entire government of a foreign