Author	: Bill Kochman
Publish	: Jan. 12, 2026
Update	: Jan. 12, 2026
Parts	: 09

Synopsis:



Continuing our discuss from part three, as we have seen, Mr. Trump has made no secret of his personal desire to use the US military to destroy the Mexican drug cartels. The president has likewise described President Sheinbaum as being afraid of the cartels in her country.

Two weeks prior to US President Trump making the previous comments, NBC News reported on November 3, 2025, that based on information it had received from a number of unnamed US officials, the Trump administration had begun formulating plans for a mission to send American troops and intelligence officers into Mexico to target the drug cartels. The early stages of training for the potential mission -- which would include ground operations inside Mexico -- had already begun they reported. According to the plan, U.S. troops in Mexico would mainly use drone strikes to hit drug labs and cartel members and leaders. However, some of the drones that would be used would require that the operators be on the ground in order to use them effectively and safely.

The unnamed officials also added that deployment to Mexico was not imminent, and that discussions regarding the scope of the mission were still ongoing. They concluded by saying that a final decision had not been made yet. However, if the mission were to be given the final green light, it is rather doubtful that any of us would even know about it, being as the Trump administration plans to maintain secrecy around it and not publicize actions associated with it, as it has been doing with the alleged drug boat strikes. In fact, we know that Trump's team used this very same level of secrecy with regard to the attack on Maduro's compound in Caracas just a week ago. It was sudden, unexpected, swift and deadly.

So is it possible that Trump's secret mission in Mexico has already been launched, and we just have not heard about it? Apparently not yet. The reason why I suggest this is because on the very same Saturday morning that the attack was made on Maduro's compound in Caracas, President Trump stated the following in an interview with Fox News:

----- Begin Quote -----

"Something's going to have to be done with Mexico. She [meaning President Claudia Sheinbaum] is very frightened of the cartels. They're running Mexico."

----- End Quote -----

President Trump said the above nine days ago at the time of this writing; so it seems to me that the attack against the Mexican drug cartels has not occurred yet. Whatever the case may be, from the time that Mexican President Sheinbaum learned about U.S. intentions to conduct military strikes against drug cartels in Mexico, she was NOT happy about it whatsoever. For example, on August 8, 2025, she stated the following to the New York Times:

----- Begin Quote -----

"The United States is not going to come to Mexico with the military. We co-operate, we collaborate, but there is not going to be an invasion. That is ruled out, absolutely ruled out. It is not part of any agreement, far from it. When it has been brought up, we have always said 'No'."

----- End Quote -----

Even earlier than that, on February 3, 2025, after President Trump had first designated six of Mexico's biggest organized crime groups as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, during her daily morning press conference at the National Palace in Mexico City, President Sheinbaum stated the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

"This designation should not be used by the United States as an opportunity to invade our sovereignty."

----- End Quote -----

After stating that Mexico is committed to working with the United States to stop the flow of fentanyl into the USA, she reiterated that her country will not tolerate any American interference. Furthermore, President Sheinbaum then sent a proposed constitutional amendment to Mexico's Congress which explicitly states that the people of Mexico reject foreign interventions. One of her proposed constitutional changes states the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

"The people of Mexico will under no circumstance accept foreign interventions . . . like coup d'états or interferences in our elections or the violation of the Mexican territory be it by land, sea or air,"

----- End Quote -----

More recently, being as President Trump has continued to drop some hints that he is interested in bombing the Mexican drug cartels, just two days after the surprising American attack against President Nicolás Maduro's heavily fortified compound in Caracas, and during her daily press conference on January 5, 2026, President Claudia Sheinbaum likewise clarified her country's position when she stated the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

"We categorically reject intervention in the internal matters of other countries. It is necessary to reaffirm that in Mexico the people rule, and that we are a free and sovereign country -- Cooperation, yes; subordination and intervention, no.

I don't believe in an invasion. I don't even think it's something they're taking very seriously. On several occasions, he [President Trump] has insisted that the U.S. Army be allowed to enter Mexico. We have said no very firmly; first because we defend our sovereignty, and second; because it is not necessary."

----- End Quote -----

Thus, we clearly see that from the time that President Trump first approached President Claudia Sheinbaum with the idea of using the US military to take on the Mexican drug cartels in April or May of 2025, she has consistently informed Trump that insofar as the US military entering Mexico is concerned, it is hands off! But will President Trump listen? Based on the surprise incursion into Venezuela, I seriously doubt it. In fact, despite President Sheinbaum supposedly sending some 10,000 National Guard soldiers to immediately reinforce the Mexican side of the Tex-Mex border in an effort to crack down on the cartels' drug trafficking, after Trump threatened to impose 25% tariffs on Mexican goods -- which he eventually did anyway in March of 2025 -- President Trump was still not pleased. Thus, while he told Sheinbaum that she was tough, on July 11, 2025, Mr. Trump posted a letter to Sheinbaum on his Truth Social platform in which he partially stated:

----- Begin Quote -----

"Despite our strong relationship, you will recall, the United States imposed Tariffs on Mexico to deal with our Nation's Fentanyl crisis, which is caused, in part, by Mexico's failure to stop the Cartels, who are made up of the most despicable people who ever walked the Earth, from pouring these drugs into our country. Mexico has been helping me secure the border, BUT, what Mexico has done, is not enough. Mexico still has not stopped the Cartels who are trying to turn all of North America into a Narco-Trafficking Playground. Obviously, I cannot let that happen!"

----- End Quote -----

Despite President Claudia Sheinbaum's best attempts to try to appease President Trump, it is evident that Mr. Trump has not abandoned his rather aggressive posture towards Mexico and the Mexican drug cartels. Furthermore, it's become quite evident that at some point, he still intends to send the US military into Mexico. For example, on October 22, 2025 while in an Oval Office meeting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, President Trump reaffirmed his plans to launch such a strike into Mexico, even if he doesn't have the US Congress' approval. At that time, the President stated the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

"We will hit them very hard when they come in by land. And they haven't experienced that yet. But now we're totally prepared to do that."

----- End Quote -----

The fact that US military forces attacked Caracas, and then captured and imprisoned Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro, is proof enough that President Donald Trump may very well indeed -- and perhaps very soon -- make a similar incursion into our southern neighbor in order to deal with the Mexican drug cartels. If anything, Trump's success with the attack on Caracas only nine days ago has more than likely caused him to become even emboldened with regard to attacking the Mexican drug cartels. If that actually happens, how will Ms. Sheinbaum and Mexico respond?

On a related note, since the beginning of the U.S. bombing campaign, President Sheinbaum has been strongly opposed to the alleged drug boat strikes being conducted by the U.S. military. For example, during her morning news conference on October 23, 2025, she stated the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

"Obviously, we do not agree. There are international laws on how to operate when dealing with the alleged illegal transport of drugs or guns on international waters, and we have expressed this to the government of the United States and publicly."

----- End Quote -----

So as you can plainly see, President Sheinbaum and Mexico have clearly drawn a line in the sand with regard to American military intervention in Mexico, in pursuit of the powerful drug cartels. If President Trump should try to test Sheinbaum -- which is quite possible given his brash, impetuous nature -- it could result in some serious problems erupting between Mexico and the United States. Before leaving behind President Sheinbaum and Mexico, I wanted to share some extra info with you regarding this woman, which I uncovered while writing this series, some of which you might find interesting.

Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo was born on June 24, 1962 in Mexico City, D.F. She is the sixty-sixth president of Mexico, and she assumed office on October 1, 2024. Prior to that, Claudia served as the head of government -- "jefa de gobierno" -- of Mexico City for almost five years. Before that, she served as the mayor of Tlalpan for a little more than two years. She is the first female president of Mexico, and she is a scientist by profession.

But what I found most interesting is her last name. Being as I lived in Mexico for six years, and then three more years on the Texas-Mexico border, I quickly realized that Sheinbaum is most definitely not a Mexican -- or even Spanish -- last name. In fact, some of you might recognize that it is a Jewish name, and most likely an Ashkenazi Jewish name. The name is Yiddish, and actually means "beautiful tree", or shein + baum. The name originated in Eastern Europe.

The surname Sheinbaum was brought to Mexico by Jews who fled from persecution in Europe. Sheinbaum's paternal Ashkenazi grandparents emigrated from Lithuania to Mexico City in the 1920s, while her maternal Sephardic grandparents emigrated there from Plovdiv, Bulgaria in the early 1940s to escape the Holocaust. Thus was a significant Jewish presence established in Mexico. And so, not only is Sheinbaum the first woman to hold the office of president in Mexico, she is also the first Jewess to do so as well.

However, while she is Jewish by birth, in her own words, she is NOT religiously affiliated. Ms. Sheinbaum identifies as a woman of faith but was raised without religion in a secular, science-driven household. Both of her parents were academics and political activists who chose to raise her in a secular environment. As a result, Sheinbaum has publicly stated, "I grew up without religion". While President Sheinbaum does not observe Jewish religious practices, she does identify with Jewish culture and history, including the celebration of Jewish holidays with her grandparents. She also takes pride in her origins.

While I have spoken a lot about the attack on Venezuela, the capture of Nicolás Maduro and the real reason behind it, and the high possibility of eventual US attacks on Mexico's drug cartels, you also need to understand that President Trump's full agenda does NOT stop there. For quite some time now, he has also had his eyes focused on the South American nation of Colombia. In fact, during the third week of October 2025, as he was discussing Colombia, Mr. Trump negatively described the nation, insisting that it's "a drug den, and it has been for a long time." He also made serious accusations against Colombian president Gustavo Petro, and described the man as a "thug", a "bad guy" and a "drug trafficking leader". To add injury to insult, during the same press conference in the Oval Office following the aforementioned meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on October 22, 2025, President Trump issued a warning to Gustavo Petro in which he stated the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

"They're doing very poorly, Colombia. They make cocaine. Today we suspended all payments to Colombia. He better watch it, or we'll take very serious action against him and his country."

----- End Quote -----

My friends, as I am sure you realize by now, that is NOT just an idle threat. President Trump means business. Once again, the January 3rd attack on Caracas is clear proof of that. So when Trump says "very serious action", he is very obviously referring to MILITARY action against Gustavo Petro. President Trump has very huge goals, and I am sure that he will try his best to get away with it and achieve all of them, unless the US Congress manages to stop him via the War Powers Resolution which is currently making its way through Congress. At this point, let us return to our discussion regarding the events which occurred in Venezuela just nine days ago, and what may possibly happen next.

In part one of this series, I mentioned Nicolás Maduro's predecessor, Hugo Chávez. Well, as it turns out, it was in January 1976 that Venezuela nationalized foreign-owned oil operations, which gave birth to Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. Then, in 2007, Hugo Chávez renegotiated all oil production contracts with the foreign oil companies which operated in Venezuela, including ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and Chevron. Aside from Chevron -- which happens to be the second-largest US oil company -- all the other big American oil companies refused to accept the new terms which Chávez offered them, by which they would become part joint venture partners, or minority partners.

Seeing as they would lose considerable money if they were to accept Hugo Chávez's new terms -- they would earn less money than their contracts actually called for -- they chose to go into arbitration and leave Venezuela instead. Their departure left Chevron as the last major US oil company still operating in Venezuela. According to Ali Moshiri, who oversaw Chevron's operations in Venezuela during that time, the reason why they chose to remain was because they saw an advantage in doing so. More specifically, Chevron realized that their profits could increase if oil prices rose in the future. Today, eighteen years later, Chevron finds itself in a rather advantageous position. After all, if the political climate in Venezuela significantly improves now that Maduro is out of the picture -- that remains to be seen -- being as Chevron still remains in Venezuela, it will be able to quickly expand its current operations. In contrast, the other major U.S. oil companies will have to move back into the nation and set up shop again before they can get their operations into full swing.

Of course, as we saw earlier in this series, this is exactly what President Trump wants to happen. He wants all of the big American oil companies back in Venezuela, so that they can revitalize the nation's oil industry, and begin pumping out more of the "black gold", thus making Trump and his wealthy buddies a lot richer. Exactly why has revitalization become necessary? While figures may vary somewhat depending on which sources one refers to, when Hugo Chávez rose to power in 1999, Venezuela was producing around 3.5 million barrels of oil a day. This level of output made it one of the top ten crude oil producers in the world at that particular time.

However, as the narrative goes, due to poor infrastructure, neglect, under-investment and serious corruption, Venezuela's oil industry and economy have eroded to such a degree, that at this current time, Venezuela's output is barely one million barrels a day, which is not even a third of its former output a quarter of a century ago. By comparison, the United States now produces about thirteen million barrels of crude oil per day. So this is why President Trump has been encouraging all of the big US oil companies to return to Venezuela. However, until the political dust settles in Venezuela, and it becomes more clear who is in power, and what kind of environment they have to look forward to, the other big US oil companies seem to be taking a cautious wait-and-see attitude, and have been non-committal, despite President Trump's entreaties.

Of course, Mr. Trump and his cronies are all publicly stating that their primary goal is NOT just to enrich America. It is likewise to enrich Venezuelans as well. Now personally, while certain people may accuse me of being a skeptic, I prefer to take these kinds of flowery statements with a grain of salt. When I hear about a flourishing Venezuela where all citizens are happy, are being treated fairly, and are earning enough money to live reasonably comfortable lives, then I will start to believe in Trump's vision for Venezuela. As I mentioned in part one of this series, to my knowledge, US intervention in a foreign land -- particularly military intervention -- has never left one single country in the world as a blossoming democracy where the citizens are free to express their views without fear of reprisal, where they are happy, and where they live decent lives. This type of narrative coming from any US administration is simply fiction at best.

Quite frankly, at this current time, can we even be certain concerning what kind of new government the Venezuelans may soon have thrust upon themselves? As I questioned in part two of this series, why does Venezuela even need a new government when both its government and military forces are both still quite intact? Yes, the government is in a transitional state with an interim president until the next regular election can take place, but it is nevertheless still intact.

Let me tell you something important which I first stated many years ago, and which I have continued to say since then. When it comes to American hegemony, the United States doesn't care what kinds of governments rule in foreign lands. History in fact proves that America is willing to work with any kind of government, regardless of whether it is one which oppresses its people, or one which treats all of its people fairly. The US government's MAIN criteria when choosing its partners, is simply whether or not that country supports US interests. It is for this reason that the United States has a long history of working with some very questionable national leaders.

Aside from supporting US interests, another thing which the United States uses to determine its friends, partners and allies, is whether or not there is something America can get out of that country. In other words, my friends, is there a particular natural resource, or perhaps something else -- such as a good location to place American missile batteries -- which America really wants and which that country has? If so, then regardless of whether that country happens to be run by communists, by a ruthless dictator who oppresses his people, or even by a former Muslim terrorist, America will still engage with that country and do business with it, so that it can get what it wants.

If you doubt that this is so, then please consider the fact that Communist China and Communist-run Vietnam are trading partners with the United States. As I have mentioned before, in the case of the latter, approximately 55,000 American soldiers died during the awful Vietnam War. Yet today, that does not matter anymore, because money and profit are more important than the needless loss of so many American lives, right? Excuse my sarcasm. Concerning dictators, the USA has dealt with and supported many of them over the decades. If the truth be told, most of the dynastic families which rule the Middle East are in actuality dictators, and their people have limited rights.

The United States even pays some dictators millions or even billions of dollars over the long term. For example, take Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, the supposed president of Egypt. He is a retired military officer who became the 6th president of Egypt in 2014. As some of you may recall, as a result of the Arab Spring which began in Tunisia in December of 2010, Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak -- who was also a dictator -- fell from power in February of 2011. With his downfall, Muhammad Hussein Tantawi -- who was commander-in-chief of the Egyptian Armed Forces and also chairman of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces -- became the de facto head of state until Mohamed Morsi was inaugurated as Egypt's 5th president in June of 2012. Morsi, who was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, barely lasted a year when he was kicked out of office in a coup d'état that was led by Abdel Fattah el-Sisi in early July of 2013. With Morsi's ouster, Adly Mansour became the interim president of Egypt until Abdel Fattah el-Sisi was sworn in as the 6th president of Egypt in June of 2014.

So how is it that el-Sisi still remains in power after more than eleven years? Simple. He is a dictator. But if you want the details, el-Sisi faced minimal opposition during the 2018 and 2023 presidential elections. That is because all of the other candidates were either barred from running altogether, or else they boycotted the election due to repression. Is it any wonder then that most independent observers view him as a dictator? In fact, according to Human Rights Watch, el-Sisi "relies on naked coercion and the military and security services as his main vehicles of control". Some people even describe his presidency as being even worse than that of Hosni Mubarak.

So, now that we have clearly established that el-Sisi is a bona fide dictator, just like his predecessors, allow me to make my main point. As I have mentioned before, ever since US President Jimmy Carter brokered the 1978 Camp David Accords, which a year later led to the Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty which normalized relations between Egypt and Israel, the dictators of Egypt have received billions of dollars in US foreign aid, making Egypt the second-largest recipient of US foreign aid after Israel. So exactly how much money are we talking about?

Egypt has consistently received $1.3 billion in annual grants since 1987. This money is used to fund Egypt's purchases of U.S. military equipment. Being as they are grants, Egypt does NOT have to pay back this money. By 2020, these grants came to a total of around $51 billion. If we go back as far as 1946, Egypt has received a total of $87 billion in combined military aid and economic aid. While the economic aid portion of the package originally began at over one billion dollars annually, it has since slowed down to about $200-250 million per year in recent years. But think about that, my friends. $87 billion has been freely given to a country which is run by outright oppressive dictators. Yet at the same time, the Democrats and liberals complain because President Trump wants five billion dollars to build the southern border wall. SMH!

Well, I have told you about US foreign aid to Egypt. So what about to Israel? Not surprisingly, the state of Israel gets at least three times as much aid as does Egypt. In fact, as I mentioned earlier, it is the largest cumulative recipient of US foreign aid. Exactly how much has it received? Well, as of February of 2022, the United States had provided Israel with $150 billion -- non-inflation-adjusted -- in assistance. The United States' first free trade agreement with Israel was in 1985. In 1999, the US government signed a commitment by which it would provide Israel with a minimum of $2.7 billion in US military aid on an annual basis for a period of ten years. In 2009, the amount was raised to $3 billion. Lastly, in 2019 it was raised yet again to a minimum amount of $3.8 billion per year. That means that to date, at the very least, Israel has received $160 billion in US foreign aid, if we add three more years from 2022.

As I mentioned earlier, the US government will even negotiate with and assist outright terrorists, if doing so is beneficial to US interests. If you read my article "Donald Trump's Huge Al-Sharaa Mistake", you will discover that the new president of Syria -- Ahmed Hussein al-Sharaa -- is a violent thug and a murderer. Before putting on a coat and tie and becoming the president of Syria, al-Sharaa was a part of the opposition forces in Syria who opposed Bashar al-Assad. In fact, even before that, al-Sharaa joined al-Qaeda in Iraq and fought in the Iraqi insurgency against US forces in Iraq. Later, when he returned to Syria after being imprisoned by US forces in Iraq at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison, he began a branch of al-Qaeda called the al-Nusra Front.

Yet despite his extremely violent past, lo and behold, after the surprising and sudden downfall of Bashar al-Assad, this former violent terrorist and thug has now risen to the top and become the new president of Syria. When I saw him in a video at the White House shaking hands with a smiling Donald Trump, that is when I decided that I had to write my article entitled "Donald Trump's Huge Al-Sharaa Mistake". It might interest you to know that immediately after the downfall of Bashar al-Assad, the first thing that Ahmed al-Sharaa and his Islamists did was to murder some of the opposition -- meaning the Alawites and the Christians -- in southern Syria. Think about that!

So why did US President Trump receive this terrorist at the White House? Well, Trump believes that al-Sharaa deserves a chance to prove himself and to demonstrate that he is capable of being a good leader and president. However, I suspect that this is not the only reason why Trump met the man. It doesn't escape me that the United States is very keen on achieving a strong foothold in Syria, now that Russia has been weakened by Bashar al-Assad's departure. For more details regarding this issue, please consider reading the aforementioned article called "Donald Trump's Huge Al-Sharaa Mistake", which you'll find listed at the end of this same series.

Please go to part five for the continuation of this series.

⇒ Go To The Next Part . . .

---

---

Please avail yourself of other areas of the Bill's Bible Basics website. There are many treasures for you to discover.