State Department Criticizes Senate Democrats Over Venezuela Oil Deal Briefing

<p>The State Department has accused Senate Democrats of performative "grandstanding" after they demanded a briefing on a Venezuela oil deal and subsequently postponed it, allowing the Senate to leave town early. Four senior Senate Democrats requested documents related to the agreement with North American Blue Energy Partners (NABEP) but rescheduled a congressional briefing originally set for October 1, 2026, to accommodate the Senate's fall recess.</p><p>The lawmakers sought further information regarding the Pentagon's involvement in the agreement, which grants the Department of War a 35% stake in one of Venezuela’s largest oil producers. The State Department stated that the senators had been aware for weeks of the planned briefing and document provision.</p><p>Despite the briefing being canceled, the State Department proceeded to deliver copies of the U.S. government’s strategic partnership agreement with NABEP to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. A senior State Department official indicated that each member received a folder containing the agreement.</p><p>Dylan Johnson, Assistant Secretary for Global Public Affairs, claimed that the Democrats canceled the briefing to leave for vacation. He stated, "This is pure grandstanding," emphasizing that the senators had known about the briefing plans for weeks.</p><p>A congressional source familiar with the situation contested the State Department's claims, asserting that lawmakers were not informed that the written NABEP agreement would be provided prior to their letter and that the briefing was intended to cover broader U.S. policy toward Venezuela, not solely the oil deal.</p><p>Emails reviewed by Fox News Digital indicated that the request to postpone the briefing originated from a Republican staffer on the Foreign Relations Committee, who informed the State Department on October 1 that "the Senate has left town" and requested to move the briefing to November.</p><p>The congressional source noted that Republican leadership had concluded legislative business for the week, with senators from both parties preparing to depart Washington ahead of the upcoming midterm elections.</p><p>The group of Democratic lawmakers is questioning the legality and prudence of the Trump administration’s agreement with NABEP, which would allow the Pentagon to acquire a 35% stake in one of Venezuela’s largest oil producers. Under this arrangement, the Pentagon’s Office of Strategic Capital would gain rights to the stake through penny warrants, while the State Department would have preferential rights to purchase 20% of the company’s production at cost.</p><p>The structure is part of a broader effort by the administration to revive Venezuelan oil production and enhance U.S. economic influence following Nicolás Maduro’s ouster. Democrats have raised concerns that the Pentagon may lack the legal authority to take the stake and have questioned the administration’s vetting of NABEP and its leadership.</p><p>The administration argues that this structure could yield substantial returns for the U.S. without requiring taxpayers to invest upfront. The White House has indicated that the government’s 35% position could ultimately be valued at hundreds of billions of dollars in equity and dividends if NABEP successfully develops the fields.</p><p>Additionally, the deal could provide Washington with a new source of relatively low-cost crude while the administration seeks to increase global supply and lower fuel prices. The State Department would have the right to purchase 20% of NABEP’s production at cost and the right of first refusal on the remaining output, which the administration claims could help replenish the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and meet U.S. military and other sensitive needs.</p><p>The White House has also stated that millions of barrels of additional Venezuelan production could eventually flow through U.S. refineries, utilizing American drilling equipment and infrastructure, which could generate investment and jobs in the United States.</p><p>NABEP currently produces approximately 220,000 barrels of oil per day and has expressed plans to increase production to 500,000 barrels per day by late 2028. The administration is relying on private investment to revitalize fields that have experienced years of underinvestment and mismanagement.</p><p>The agreement is part of a larger U.S. initiative to reshape Venezuela’s economy following the significant removal of Nicolás Maduro earlier this year. On January 3, U.S. forces conducted a military operation in Venezuela to capture Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, and transport them to the United States to face federal charges. The administration has characterized this operation as a law enforcement mission supported by the military and has since prioritized the rebuilding of Venezuela’s oil sector as a key component of its stabilization strategy.</p><p>Interim leader Delcy Rodríguez, Maduro’s former vice president, remains in power while cooperating with Washington, despite ongoing political instability in Venezuela and opposition figures advocating for elections.</p><p>The White House has described the NABEP agreement as part of a three-part strategy involving stabilization, reconstruction, and eventual democratic transition, asserting that restoring oil production is essential for rebuilding Venezuela’s economy and reducing the influence of China, Russia, and other U.S. adversaries in its energy sector.</p><p>Senators Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H.; Jack Reed, D-R.I.; Martin Heinrich, D-N.M.; and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., have raised concerns regarding the legality and prudence of the deal in a letter addressed to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, War Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Energy Secretary Chris Wright. They have questioned whether the Pentagon office involved has the legal authority to acquire an equity position in a foreign oil company and have requested details about the agreement, payment for oil, and the administration’s vetting process for NABEP and its leadership.</p><p>The senators expressed skepticism about the proposed agreement's potential to lower energy costs for Americans and warned that it could undermine the Venezuelan people's transition away from a dictatorship.</p><p>The unusual role of the Pentagon in this deal has attracted scrutiny since its announcement. Instead of immediately purchasing shares with taxpayer funds, the Office of Strategic Capital’s position is structured through penny warrants, granting the government the right to acquire equity at a nominal price. The Democratic senators argue that this structure does not address the underlying legal concerns.</p><p>They contend that the statute establishing the Office of Strategic Capital permits loans and loan guarantees but does not explicitly authorize the Pentagon to acquire equity stakes in foreign private companies. The lawmakers questioned, "It is unclear why the American public should support this attempt to entangle the United States with a relatively unknown foreign oil company that lacks the capacity or credibility to develop oil fields of the magnitude described."</p><p>The senators also raised concerns about NABEP Chairman Alejandro Betancourt, citing past money-laundering investigations involving the Venezuelan businessman. Betancourt has not been charged with any crime, and Rubio has previously stated that he is not under active U.S. investigation.</p><p>This dispute may lead to broader congressional scrutiny of one of the Trump administration’s most unconventional efforts to expand U.S. economic influence in Venezuela.</p>