Commentary by Stephen Macaulay
On January 4, 2026, while speaking to reporters on Air Force One, Donald Trump said that he had spoken to oil company executives both “before and after” Operation Absolute Resolve.
Why this has not become the headlines on publications across the political spectrum is a mystery.
He didn’t tell Congress before it happened. Trump said at the January 3 press conference at Mar-a-Lago “Congress has a tendency to leak.”
He did tell oil company executives. Presumably they would share the information only among their boards and banks.
How is that an acceptable thing to do?
From the point of view of the right, Trump told reporters the oil companies who go into Venezuela would be underwritten by the US government and then the US would be “reimbursed for everything we spend.”*
In other words, this would, in effect, be a situation where the government is controlling the means of (oil) production. This is an approach that was near and dear to Vladimir Lenin’s heart.
Realize that in a matter of a couple days Operation Absolute Resolve has gone from being about bringing a bad man to court to one predicated on pumping oil.
Mercantilism trumps justice.
Not that this is something new in terms of what the Trump Administration is doing.
It cut a “deal” with NVIDIA that has it that when the chip manufacturer sells an H20 processor to China, it must provide the government with 15% of the revenue.
When NVIDIA sells H200 chips to China — chips that are integral to many AI developments -- essentially this is the Trump administration, which had to provide permission for the export of these chips, leveling the playing field with China, a playing field that had been tilted to the benefit of the US. NVIDIA has to give the government 25%.
Again, the government involves itself with what was once free enterprise.
In order for Nippon Steel to acquire U.S. Steel this past June (for which it paid a non-trivial $14.9 billion), the Trump Administration demanded that it get a “Golden Share.” This means that Trump, or someone he designates, can have veto power over whether plants are to be closed or acquisitions are to be made, or other aspects of doing business.
Consider: If at some point a decision is made to close a plant where there is an election, the Federal Government can come in and deny it so that it can get an electoral edge.
The CHIPS and Science Act designated $5.7 billion for Intel to help this American company advance its technological and production capabilities in the US. It was determined that it is good for the country to have industrial champions like Intel.
But Trump didn’t like the idea of providing something for “free,” so instead an additional $3.2 billion from a Department of Defense account was used to buy a 9.9% equity stake in Intel.
Some people, particularly those of a conservative stripe, used to be wholly opposed to “industrial policy.”
What the Trump Administration is doing is industrial policy on steroids. And it seems that the way things are going — more than 150 aircraft, thousands of warfighters — it is becoming roid rage.
From the point of view of the left, since when is it acceptable to provide inside information to corporations, to say nothing of all of these other acts of extorting money or power from companies?
All of this seems very un-American.
But apparently what is “American” is being redefined by the Trump administration.
//
*While some people might think, “That’s just fine. It will mean prices will go down at the pump,” there are two things to keep in mind. One is that it will take many years for the oil production infrastructure to start pumping, so there will be more outflows from the Treasury before there is any oil wealth back in. Second, realize that “cheap oil” is not in the interest of oil companies. If the price of a barrel gets too low, they’re not going to be making money, which is something they’re not going to facilitate. So don’t count on cheap gas any time soon.
Macaulay is pundit-at-large for The Hustings.