Authored by Liam Cosgrove,

Tensions are brewing within the Republican party over the Trump administration's stance on Venezuela - with some populist conservatives like Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) supporting all out regime change in the South American country, while Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has explicitly rejected regime change. 

Most republicans have thus far granted Trump leeway on the strikes which the administration says are strictly targeting cartel boats, however there are rumblings among the party that if regime change or a ground invasion is the goal, congressional approval will be required.

The party is largely split into three camps.

Hardliners: 'Long Overdue' and No Need for Congress

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) said the strikes didn’t require congressional approval, arguing forcefully that the U.S. had waited too long to confront what he described as a drug-trafficking and terror-financing threat.

“These guys are bringing drugs into our country. They’re killing Americans. It’s long overdue,” Burchett told ZeroHedge. “Trump gets that… that’s why he does executive orders, because we [Congress] ain’t got the guts to do anything.”

Asked whether Trump needed authorization from Congress, Burchett said:

“No, heck no… bust their ass.”

Sen. Rick Scott (R-L) sees Maduro not as a head of state, but as a criminal. “He’s the head of drug cartels,” Scott told us. “He lost the election. He’s not the president of Venezuela… He needs to be arrested for selling drugs in this country.”

In agreement with Burchett and Scott, Johnson said he supports Trump acting unilaterally: “We elect presidents to make those kinds of decisions… I don’t see any reason to deny President Trump the same ability to make those tough calls.”

Conditional Support: Limited Strikes OK, War Requires Congress

Other Republicans drew a distinction between narrow operations and a broader conflict.

Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO) told us he believes the president has authority to take “limited action,” but only to a point.

“If we’re going to go into a war with another nation… if we’re gonna be doing some form of regime change… the president should be getting Congress’ buy-in,” he said.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) added that further escalation could trigger the need for congressional action. “At some point, insofar as there’s kinetic action in Venezuela, on Venezuelan soil, it may come to that [a vote in Congress],” Lee told us.

Constitutional Critics: 'Offensive War of Choice'

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) told ZeroHedge he believes the strikes may raise legal and humanitarian issues, noting that U.S. law prohibits targeting incapacitated combatants.

“Once people are incapacitated by a bomb… crawling away, swimming away… our laws say you’re not allowed to bomb them,” Paul said. Further, Paul called for Secretary of War Pete Hegseth to testify under oath about the orders given.

He rejected colleagues’ calls for regime change, saying: “I agree with Donald Trump of 2015… who argued against regime change,” he said. “An offensive war of choice is not my choice.”

Senate Democrats are likewise taking the constitutionality angle in their criticisms of the President. 

“The constitution's very specific. The president is saying we're at war with unknown, unnamed people, and we should be coming before Congress,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) told us. “It's clearly, clearly a violation of our constitution.”