For those on FB look up Michael Campbell (one of my faves). This is a comment on the post and was well wriitten.

For those who think this arrest was something new, here's some info that I just found out: The US has removed foreign leaders or criminals without prior congressional approval under both Democratic and Republican presidents for decades. Canada has accepted, supported, or quietly moved on from nearly all of them, except when Donald Trump is involved.
This outrage isn’t about law, oil, or sovereignty. It’s about politics, vibes, and anti-Trump or anti-America identity.
1. Manuel Noriega, Panama (1989) U.S. President: George H. W. Bush (Republican)
The U.S. invaded Panama. Noriega (who was the sitting leader) was captured, he was taken to the U.S. and was tried and imprisoned on drug trafficking charges. Congress was notified after the invasion had already begun, there was no prior authorization.
Canada’s response at the time was mild concern about sovereignty. No sanctions on the U.S, no hysteria, or no talk of cutting diplomatic ties. Canada quietly accepted U.S. justification (drug trafficking and regional instability.) This is one of the closest historical parallels to what people are screaming about now, and Canada did not lose its mind.
2. Saddam Hussein, Iraq (2003)U.S. President: George W. Bush (Republican)
There was a U.S. led invasion. Saddam was removed from power, captured, tried by Iraqi court, and was executed. Congress authorized force against Iraq, BUT not a specific capture/execution process. Legal framework was heavily disputed internationally.
Canada officially opposed the invasion under Jean Chrétien, but did NOT sever relations, and continued military, intelligence, and trade cooperation with the U.S. After Saddam’s capture and execution, Canada then accepted the outcome. Canada opposed the war, yet never portrayed Saddam as a victim or the U.S. as a criminal dictatorship.
3. Muammar Gaddafi, Libya (2011) U.S. President: Barack Obama (Democrat)
There was NATO intervention, Gaddafi was then overthrown and executed. Obama bypassed Congress, citing NATO and humanitarian grounds.
Canada fully supported the intervention. Canadian jets participated, and the government praised the removal of Gaddafi. Media framed it as liberation, not imperialism.
(Same act, leader removal. Different president. Different Canadian reaction.)
4. Osama bin Laden, Pakistan (2011) U.S. President: Barack Obama (Democrat)
There was a U.S. military operation inside Pakistan, with no Pakistani approval. Bin Laden was killed. There was no congressional authorization for a strike inside Pakistan.
Canada responded with public praise, no outrage about sovereignty, no claims of “illegal aggression” or no emergency rallies (there are planned rallies in Canada that have been announced, for context). This occurred inside a sovereign country without consent, exactly what critics claim is “unprecedented” today. It wasn’t.
The U.S. president can conduct targeted military or covert actions against foreign leaders without Congress, usually citing Commander-in-Chief powers (Article II of the Constitution), protection of U.S. citizens or assets, or national security interests.
This is historically common, not unprecedented, so a Trump operation against Maduro fits into a long precedent of U.S. presidents acting independently, especially for removing criminal or hostile leaders.