Almost absolute support for Trump: This is how public opinion and the MAGA world reacted to Maduro's capture

The capture of dictator Nicolás Maduro by U.S. forces monopolized national attention and public opinion, where, with nuances, support for President Donald Trump was in the majority and criticism was concentrated in specific sectors.

The editorial boards of the three most influential newspapers in the country — The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post — took positions between January 3 and 4. They were joined by enthusiastic support from the MAGA world, with high-profile political figures and influencers celebrating the Trump administration's operation and determination.

The New York Times: Only condemnation

The New York Times, a media widely questioned for its coverage of the Washington-Caracas conflict, followed its critical line and condemned the operation. In an editorial titled "Trump's Attack on Venezuela Is Illegal and Unwise," the newspaper described the operation as a violation of U.S. and international law and warned of its possible consequences in the short and long term.

In one of the most telling passages, the paper's board spat:

"We will hold out hope that the current crisis will end less badly than we expect. We fear that the result of Mr. Trump’s adventurism is increased suffering for Venezuelans, rising regional instability and lasting damage for America’s interests around the world. We know that Mr. Trump’s warmongering violates the law."

The newspaper also questioned why the White House has not sought congressional authorization and compared the situation to historical foreign policy mistakes, such as Iraq and Libya, insisting that overthrowing regimes, even authoritarian ones, often generates unintended effects or is counterproductive to national interests. However, the NYT was the only media outlet to maintain this position.

The Wall Street Journal: Endorsement with caveats

The Wall Street Journal editorial board published two key editorials, both with a clearly encouraging tone, although with warnings to the White House.

In the first, the newspaper unambiguously defended the military operation and the capture of Maduro, highlighting its execution and the president's geopolitical message from Trump to the rest of the world:

"The stunning nighttime raid is the culmination of a showdown that was building for months as Mr. Trump sent a naval flotilla to the Caribbean. Mr. Maduro resisted U.S. offers to leave peacefully, and Mr. Trump followed through on his threat and ousted the despot. The U.S. President had to act or lose credibility with the world after choosing the face-off. Pulling it off without American casualties is remarkable."

However, in a second editorial titled "Don't settle for Maduro 2.0," the WSJ put the spotlight on the day after the operation and issued an explicit warning to President Trump: do not trust the current leadership of the regime.

The newspaper expressed distrust towards Delcy Rodriguez, Venezuela's de facto leader, and the rest of the Chavista apparatus, and called on Trump not to settle for a mere cosmetic leadership change.

The Washington Post: Total victory

Surprisingly, the Washington Post, a media historically critical of Trump, unhesitatingly praised the operation. In its editorial "Justice in Venezuela," it described the capture of Maduro as a great victory for U.S. interests, highlighting the strategic and symbolic weight of the overthrow of the Chavista tyrant.

"This is a major victory for American interests. Just hours earlier, supportive Chinese officials held a chummy meeting with Maduro, who had also been propped up by Russia, Cuba and Iran. No doubt millions of Venezuelans will remember who backed their oppressor and who effected his removal."

The newspaper also stressed the regional impact of the operation:

"Maduro's removal sends an important message to tin-pot dictators in Latin America and the world: Trump follows through. President Joe Biden offered sanctions relief to Venezuela, and Maduro responded to that show of weakness by stealing an election."

In addition, the WaPo agreed with the WSJ and was explicit about what the ideal political scenario for the country should be:

"The ideal outcome would be for María Corina Machado, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and leader of the Venezuelan opposition, to take power. Her Freedom Manifesto — influenced heavily by America’s Constitution — is the best outline for Venezuela’s future. The details would be tricky, but she would easily win a free and fair election."

The MAGA world: Full support

Outside the major newspapers, the reaction from the MAGA world was unequivocally favorable. Influencers, commentators and conservative leaders celebrated the capture of Maduro as a demonstration of Trump's strength, leadership and strategic coherence.

One of the most prominent messages came from conservative commentator Matt Walsh, of the Daily Wire, who defended the operation in realistic terms.

Although he defined himself as "reflexively non-interventionist," Walsh called what happened in Venezuela "a resounding victory and one of the most brilliant military operations in American history."

In the same vein, the America First Policy Institute, an influential think tank aligned with Trumpism, released a statement celebrating the capture and future trial of Maduro as "another victory for America First." The institute held the Venezuelan dictator directly responsible for hyperinflation, social collapse, the expansion of organized crime and mass migration to the United States, and argued that these consequences ended up being paid for by U.S. taxpayers.

This endorsement was amplified on social media by influential figures in the MAGA ecosystem. Personalities such as Alex Jones, Jack Posobiec and Elon Musk, along with numerous Republican leaders, commentators and right-wing activists on X, praised Trump for restoring U.S. deterrence in the Western Hemisphere.