Today's number, 303 billion. That's how

many barrels of oil are sitting in

Venezuela, more than any other nation in

the world. That is $18 trillion worth of

oil at current oil prices, roughly equal

to the GDP of China. However, none of

this has anything to do with what

happened this week.

Welcome to Profy Markets. I'm Edson. It

is January 6th. Let's check in on

yesterday's market vitals. The major

indices climbed with the Dow closing at

a record. The price of oil rose on

President Madura's capture in Venezuela.

More on that later. Meanwhile, Treasury

yields dropped and finally Bitcoin

rallied above $94,000.

Okay, what else is happening?

It is our first daily episode of the

year and even though we took a holiday

break, the market certainly did not. So,

here to help us review what we missed at

the end of the year and also discuss the

outlook for 2026, we're speaking with

Mark Zandandy, chief economist at

Moody's Analytics. Mark, welcome back to

Property Markets and happy new year.

Good to see you.

>> Happy New Year, Ed. Thanks for the

opportunity. It's good to be with you.

>> Absolutely. You are our first guest back

in the new year, which is a huge honor,

as I'm sure you will know.

>> I I'm sure you say that to all the

economists. So, but I'll take it. I'll

take it.

>> So, we Well, first we should want to

start with your scorecard for 2025.

You basically add up all of the your

your predictions from last year and

compare it to what we actually saw. You

pretty much nailed most of it. I'm just

looking at the scorecard now. Uh job

growth, GDP growth, um unemployment rate

was pretty accurate. I mean generally um

pretty accurate across the board I

guess. Which things surprised you in

2025? Which things did you get wrong? Um

what sort of struck you?

>> Well, first thing is that we got that

close there. As you know, Ed, there was

a lot of drama in 2025. Lots of things

going on. Tariffs, immigration, Doge,

you know, just it seemed endless. And uh

despite all of that, the the numbers

came in pretty close to what we thought

they would at the start of the year uh

start of 2025. The thing that I took uh

greatest pleasure in uh was uh jobs. Uh

you know, average monthly job growth in

2025 compared to 2024 was 125,000 on the

nose and our forecast

124,000 per month. Now we got to be

truth in forecasting. You know, we were

overly

uh uh uh pessimistic about uh jobs in

the first half of the year and overly

optimistic in the second half after and

when I really the demarcation point here

was liberation day. That was what when

things kind of changed. That was back in

April of last year. Uh so we didn't get

the entire year right, but on average

through the year we got it right. The

the thing that we missed most was around

asset prices and the increase. I mean

the equity market was up 15% calendar

year 25 over 24. We were we expected 10%

a good year but it was even better than

that. And even house prices and we've

been forecasting house prices and doing

a lot of work there for for decades. Uh

you know they they came in up four 3 4%.

We were expecting closer to 1 2%. So you

know asset prices came in a little bit

more stronger. again, you know, it was a

pretty good year from a forecasting

perspective and it it's not always that

way. So, so I'll take it and uh and I'm

enjoying it. Something that you

undersshot

uh and to be fair, let's let's give you

your credit. I I think I did I mean this

was pretty accurate across the board,

but you did undersshoot on inflation.

Um you forecasted 2.3%. It's it's higher

than that. um which is a whole other

conversation but the thing I kind of

want to focus on right now is the most

recent CPI report which we got while we

were gone so we haven't had a chance to

discuss it on the podcast uh and it

showed that inflation actually slowed

down to 2.7% in November which totally

shocked me and honestly my first

reaction I mean I was kind of checked

out at this point getting ready for for

the holiday but my first reaction was

this is not right. And I usually hate to

be that guy. I hate to be the guy who

just doesn't trust the number because I

think we should always just trust the

numbers. But that was my first instinct.

I haven't really dug into it. But then

actually, you said yourself that that

number is flawed. It went from 3% in

September, then down to 2.7% in

November, which seems crazy to me. You

say that it's flawed. Why is it flawed?

What is your reaction to the CPI that we

saw?

>> Yeah. And it's okay to be that guy every

once in a while when in fact it's right

to be that way. You know, and this goes

back to the government shutdown in the

fact that the survey that the Bureau of

Labor Statistics does wasn't done in the

month of October. We were shut down.

They couldn't do the survey. They

couldn't go back and fix it. So they had

to make the BLS, the keeper of the data,

uh had to make some assumption about

what happened in the month of October.

And the assumption they used is one that

they they always use when they have

something missing. And that is no

change. They assume no change in prices

in the month of October. And for for the

missing data that they had some data

that they they wasn't based on their

survey that they could use, but anything

based on their survey, and that was the

bulk of the data. 90% of the goods and

services come from the survey. They just

assumed effectively no change. And you

know, if it's one or two products that

you don't have data for and you make

that assumption, no big deal. But when

it's 90% of the the products that you're

surveying, that's a big deal. And so I

that makes no sense, right? And and and

it's not just me saying that. Everyone

says that makes no sense. It does not

make any sense in the context of trying

to understand inflation. And so what I

did is went back and I said, "Okay, I

can collect even more data on different

prices for goods and services. Let's use

that." And then for those things that I

can't get other data for, I'm going to

use my forecast because we've done a lot

of work over the years modeling, you

know, these different prices for

different components, goods and

services. And if you do that, then it

shows that inflation, it did not

decelerate. it it remains on consumer

price inflation, CPI inflation at 3%

year-over-year. And just for context,

you know, the uh the Fed would say in an

ideal world, I would want CPI inflation,

you know, 22 23, something like that,

and we're at three and we're still at

three. So that you were dead on to say

something doesn't feel right because it

wasn't right. And it, you know,

something to consider. One last point,

then I'll stop. This problem with the

data is going to continue on a

year-over-year basis until next October

when we actually get some data. So that

means we're going to be in this awkward

position of trying to, you know, quote

unquote correct the data to make it more

reflective of actual reality over the

next year until we get to the other we

do a round trip here around on the data.

>> I hadn't even considered that. We are

going to be arguing about which numbers

are real and which are fake for another

year. the the ramifications are large.

Um let's just look at your 2026

forecast. Some interesting numbers here.

We had 2.1% GDP growth in 2025. You

project 2.5%

GD GDP growth. So you believe that the

economy is actually going to grow faster

in 2026. Break down that number for us.

That's because we're going to get a lot

of uh juice from monetary, but

particularly fiscal policy. So, in 2025,

we got a little bit of support from the

Fed. The Fed cut interest rates a little

bit. But on the fiscal policy side,

that's government spending and taxes.

That was actually a bit of a restraint

on growth because of Doge. Remember

Doge? The the widespread job cuts that

really hammered the economy earlier.

Yeah. Hard to forget. Hard to forget.

complete, you know, utter failure, but

you know, in terms of its objectives,

but, you know, it did do a lot of damage

to it.

>> It was fun while it lost it.

>> Yeah.

>> Um, but in 2026, because of the one big

beautiful bill act, the OBBA that was

passed under reconciliation back in uh

uh last summer, that is going to lift

growth by just about the difference in

GDP in 26 compared to 2025, about four

or five ten of a percent. And that's tax

cuts, deficit finance. These are deficit

finance tax. You don't get the juice.

You don't get the e economic growth

unless it's borrowing the money to to

finance it. And it's both on the

corporate side. There's the, you know,

expensing of uh investment and that

juices up uh uh investment by

businesses. And we're already starting

to see that in some of the data. And of

course, the tax cuts to individuals uh

that's going to start affecting the

economy pretty quickly because

households are going to see big re uh

refund checks this year because the tax

rates went already lowered, but people's

withholding didn't change. So, they're

going to get when they file their taxes,

they're going to get a bigger refund

check and it's almost hundred billion

dollars in additional money and that's

real money to, you know, folks uh that

are going to go out and spend it and

that's going to juice things up. So,

that's 4 510. That's the difference

between 2026 compared to 2025. It's it's

going to be an okay year. Uh a stronger

growth, but that that all goes to the

the temporary boost that you get from

the stimulus. And obviously all by

design, right? This is an election year.

We've got the election come November.

The idea here is to, you know, juice up

the economy uh as you get into the

election process, which is going to be

in full gear sometime this summer. And

that's when the stimulus the fiscal

stimulus will be at its peak. Uh about

this about that time.

>> Yes. Which would also explain the

federal budget deficit which you say

will grow to $2.1 trillion. It is so

funny that you know part of the idea

that Trump campaigned on was balancing

the budget. And here we are. You're

telling us the economy is going to grow

because we're just going to spend so

much that it must grow. Um there are

there are a few other numbers here just

want to get your quick reactions to. You

say the unemployment rate will rise to

4.6%. You say inflation will rise to

3.1%

which is not great. That's possibly the

the bad side, the dark side of what

we'll see in 2026. Um just let's get

your reactions to to those numbers. Um

why have you gone with those numbers? Um

what are you predicting in terms of the

job market and inflation? Yeah. And

pretty much what I'm saying there, if if

it's 4.6% for the calendar year 2026,

I'm basically saying unemployment is

going to level, it's already at 46 going

into the year. So, it's basically flat.

So, if we grow 2 and a half% GDP, we're

going to get enough jobs uh to absorb uh

the growth in the labor force and we're

going to get stable unemployment, you

know, somewhere. It's probably going to

rise a little bit here over the next few

months and then come in towards once you

get all that fiscal stimulus and all

that juice you're going to that you'll

start to come in a little bit but you'll

end the year on average 46 very similar

to what it is today 46. Same with

inflation as we just discussed CPI

consumer price inflation coming into

2026 is about 3%. It's going to go a

little higher here uh in the next few

months because there's still more par

tariff pass through that's going to

occur but it's going to moderate towards

the end of the year and on average

through the year it's going to be about

3%. So that's going to be uncomfortable,

right? I mean 46 it's it is above full

employment unemployment uh the full

employment unemployment rate which you

know most people and I would put around

four. So that's a little it's not bad

but it's a little uncomfortable and 3%

inflation is you know not again not bad

but it's also uncomfortable that's above

the Fed's target. So it's going to feel

the year is going to feel okay just but

not quite right. And then then of course

uh you know you were left with those

bigger budget deficits to deal with down

the road.

>> Okay. Mark Zandandy, chief economist at

Moody's Analytics. Mark, thank you very

much. Always good to see you.

>> Well, now I got a track record, right?

So a year you're going to play play this

back.

>> We'll check back a year from now.

Exactly. No idea. Thanks for the

opportunity. Appreciate it.

>> We'll be right back. And if you're

enjoying the show so far, be sure to

like and subscribe to the Profod YouTube

channel at the link below.

Support for the show comes from Vanta.

Customer trust can make or break your

business. And the more your business

grows, the more complex your security

and compliance tools get. It can turn

into chaos. And chaos isn't a security

strategy. That's where Vanta comes in.

Think of Vanta as your always AI powered

security expert who scales with you.

Vanta automates compliance, continuously

monitors your controls, and gives you a

single source of truth for compliance

and risk. So whether you're a fast

growing startup like Curser or an

enterprise like Snowflake, Vanta fits

easily into your existing workflow so

you can keep growing a company your

customers can trust. Get started at

vanta.com/markets.

That's venta.com/markets.

vanta.com/markets.

>> We're back with Profty Markets. The US

captured Venezuela's President Nicholas

Maduro in a high-risk raid over the

weekend. and the Trump administration

says it plans to quote run the country

until a transition is complete. As for

the markets, this is really an oil

story. While Venezuela only produces

roughly 1% of global oil today, it also

has the largest proven oil reserves in

the world. Shares of oil giants Chevron

and Exxon Mobile surged on expectations

that US firms will get first access to

the market. However, analysts say that

getting production back to prior levels

could take years and over $100 billion.

So, the big questions are still

unanswered. Who controls the oil? Who

gets access? And how does this all hit

the global supplies? Here to discuss

what this shakeup means for the energy

sector. We are speaking with Rapidan

Energy Group founder and president Bob

McN. Bob, thank you for joining us on

Profy Markets.

>> Great to be with you. Thanks for having

me uh on today.

>> Absolutely. So, the US has captured

Maduro.

Uh, pretty unbelievable series of events

here. It looks as if the administration

is going to run Venezuela, at least for

the foreseeable future. Let's just start

with your initial reactions to what

happened here. Were you surprised? Uh,

what do you make of all of this?

>> Well, we weren't surprised and our

clients weren't surprised. I can show

you the proof. We uh told clients on

December 15th we raised our odds of

president removing Maduro from 60 to

70%. We didn't know the precise timing

but we were very sure the president um

had decided to remove the Maduro. He's

been negotiating with him. So it was a

question of whether Maduro lives uh

rather would leave on a Gulfream 3 and

go to an apartment in Madrid or be taken

out in a jumpsuit. I mean there's

different options and then went that

way. So, we weren't surprised at all.

Uh, and we're not surprised that the oil

markets have taken it sort of in a blasé

way so far cuz really Venezuela is not

that important in terms of near-term oil

supply and price formation. You know,

when I step back and look at it though,

um, I have to compare it to I was in the

White House and the National Security

Council in the beginning of Iraq, right?

And so, 2002, 2003 and how very

different uh, that started relative to

this. So in that case um we uh we had a

a decisive removal of the regime. I mean

the military it was he was gone and uh

we had then implemented an elaborate

plan for the post-war and it wasn't

about oil. We did not hand out all the

contracts to US companies. Chinese

companies, Russian companies went into

Iraq. So now we can argue that that

turned out a little rough. So I'm not

going to say it was a smashing success.

But the beginning it featured that right

decisive change of regime. We had a plan

and it wasn't about US oil companies.

This is very different in every respect.

There is no decisive change. All we know

for sure is that Nicolas Maduro and his

wife are in New York and were arraigned

today. That's about it. Uh the regime is

still there. Uh there's a pressure and

coercion that's going on. uh there

doesn't appear to be any kind of a a

plan for the the day after the Maduro

regime and so uh and finally it is not

all about oil it's about many things but

the president has made very clear uh

that getting US oil companies back into

Venezuela and getting its production

back up with US companies is one of the

main objectives of of this. So in in

every respect very different than how uh

the liberation of Iraq uh took place. So

that that strikes me, but we're still in

this fluid area where we're not quite

sure what the end state's going to be in

terms of a regime in in Caracus.

>> Just looking at the the oil market in

Venezuela, you mentioned there that it's

not that important in the short term.

However, they also have the largest oil

reserves of any nation in the world.

give us like a detailed or semi-detailed

understanding of what actually is going

on with the oil in Venezuela. What are

their capabilities? How important is it?

Um and and why is it that it's not that

relevant in the short term?

>> Okay, so the world consumes about 105

million barrels a day of we call it

liquids mostly crude oil. There other

things in there, some petrochemical feed

stops, some biofuels, refinery gain, but

just to keep it simple, 100 or so, 105

million barrels a day. Venezuela

provides a little less than a million

barrels a day. So, less than a percent

of total world supply. 25 years ago,

Venezuela was up at 3%. It was about 3

million barrels a day. Um, even a little

more of production. So, its production

has fallen from three to about to less

than a million barrels a day. Now,

Venezuela does have the world's largest

proved reserves, a little over 300

billion barrels. However, not all

reserves are the same. Not all oil is.

This is very important concept for folks

to get as we talk about how quickly will

they come back and so forth. Oil ranges

in quality. You've got champagne quality

oil, light, low sulfur, beautiful. US

shale is like that. And then you've got

coffee grounds on the other end of the

range. Gunky, sulfurous, heavy, full of

metals. Okay, champagne to coffee

grounds. Venezuela is the coffee ground

variety. And to turn that those coffee

grounds into the gasoline that you and I

drive with or your gas oil or jet fuel,

etc., you need a lot of work and

blending and upgrading or in Canada uh

SAGD, you need a lot of industrial

processes to turn this heavy oil. So

it's whereas the champagne kind of oil

is almost ready to go. It it requires

less costly easy refining. So this is an

important feature about Venezuela. Its

reserves are enormous world world's

biggest but extremely

costly to produce at scale. Now the good

news is Venezuela used to have a

worldclass uh state oil company Pedesa

and in the 1990s they opened up to

western companies and uh they invited

them in. The big US companies went in,

other year other companies went in and

working with Pavvesa, really talented

engineers,

relatively low corruption, efficient

production. They really boosted

Venezuelan production. It was exporting

more to the United States than even

Canada was. But then unfortunately,

Chavez happened. Hugo Chavez comes in,

communist populist uh dictatorship,

kicks the US companies out, except for

Chevron, which has a small license uh

and runs the place into the ground. So

you've seen this in other countries

where uh governments come in um they uh

uh they chase away all the talented

engineers that they had. Venezuelans all

left for Canada, the United States,

Middle East, they all went and the

engineers went to produce oil there.

They underinvested. They let the

equipment run down. So all the all that

expensive equipment that the American

companies had invested in to produce

that heavy oil at scale was left to go

to rot basically. And and it declined

and here we are. Venezuela is poor. It's

in production is falling and getting it

back up and running is going to be a

mammoth undertaking measured in years to

decades and tens of billions of dollars.

But look, I think a real important

context of sort of what does Venezuela

really mean and why does it matter is

like do we need Venezuelans? Right? Up

until a few months ago, if you and I

were having this conversation a year

ago, I mean, the dominant narrative was,

well, oil demand is going to peak pretty

soon. Look at those EVs coming. Look at

climate change policies. Most people

believed that oil demand was going to

stop growing about 2030 in a few years

and then either plateau or fall. If you

believe that we don't need another

Venezuela, you may not need major oil

new projects at all, including the IEA

was saying, look, it's not clear if

we're going to get to net zero, we

shouldn't even be permitting new new

fields. We should we can, you know, we

don't need we don't need these new big

projects. But what's in uh fortunate for

Venezuela and for oil companies is I

would say toward the end of last year,

this narrative, this peak demand

narrative really began to break down and

collapse. And I think look look at the

major forecasters from the IEA to the

major companies that think tanks have

put out for everybody's

dialing back and saying, "Wait a minute,

these EVs aren't coming fast enough.

Climate change policies are being

subordinated to energy security,

affordability. Canada, the US,

California, New York, Europe, China,

everywhere is shifting the focus back to

affordability and energy security. So,

the world is starting to realize, oh

boy, we need a lot more oil after 2030

than we thought. Not not next year, but

after 2030. And this is where the timing

is perfect for Venezuela to come out and

say, "Well, it just so happens we have

300 billion barrels here and maybe we'll

be willing to uh, you know, in invite

capital and expertise, get those

Venezuelan expats back and get this

thing humming because it would be just

what we needed to avoid too tight of a

market early in the next decade."

>> Just thinking about what happens next. I

mean, you mentioned that it it's uh

short-term going to be difficult to make

that oil valuable, to get it out of the

ground, to fix up the infrastructure,

and to make it usable. But it seems as

though all you need to do is get your

act together, uh, invest billions and

billions of dollars, which appears to be

exactly what Trump and the oil companies

are prepared to do. Um, and then I guess

the question becomes,

what is America's role in this nation

moving forward? It seems pretty clear

that they are going to commit to getting

that oil out of the ground and Chevron

and Exxon, they're all going to go in

and and and figure out how to make money

off of this. Um, but I I guess the the

the sort of the open question is where

does the US government stand in this

transaction? Will they just run the

country? Do they just own the oil now?

What is their role in this at this

point?

>> Well, those two questions are linked,

right? And I do think you say the US

companies are going to get their act

together, get the money together, and go

in and do it slowly. Slowly. Uh you any

oil company and the board of an oil

company looking to sanction

billions of dollars into Venezuela is

going to be thinking about the world

well beyond the Trump administration.

The Trump administration's already over

in in terms of the lifetime that oil

companies think in decades. Decades.

They've got to think about will this

investment pay off if Gavin Nuome is

president or AOC is president or JD

Vance is president. And so I think

there's going to be a mismatch honestly

between some folks in the Trump

administration who want to see that

capital go in fast and want to see

barrels come out soon and the oil

companies who are going to be very

cautious about this uh very cautious not

only having gotten kicked out 25 years

ago but is there a stable regime? Can

our people operate safely there? What

kind of contracts are we going to get?

How are we going to get our money out?

how badly dilapitated the system is

because they have other options. You can

drill in the Perian, you can drill in,

you can produce in Canada. Guyana's

doing pretty well. Uh offshore is

attractive. Uh there are other options

to spend your capital than betting the

farm on the whale of a Venezuelan

project which has had a tumultuous

history to be sure. So even if President

Trump stepped up, and I don't I don't

hear they're going to do this and they

said, "Look, we got your back. US

government's going to co-invest with

you. We're going to take a stake. We're

going to mitigate all your risk. That's

good for another three years or so,

assuming they even did it, right? And 3

years will only begin the very beginning

stages of the investment and the

workovers and the infrastructure

investment that we would need to get

Venezuela up and running. So an oil

company would have to be confident that

you know it can manage these risks for

decades and betting that the US

government is going to be a a solid

financial or or political partner given

the volatility we've seen politically

here. I don't think that's a bet they

they would easily take.

>> It's really fascinating and I am sure

that this conversation is going to

continue um probably for the next few

weeks certainly I would say probably

months. Um, in any case, we got to let

you go here, but this was this was

really interesting. Thanks for your

time, Bob.

>> Thank you, Ed. Thanks for having me on.

>> Well, we're starting the year with a

bang. I assumed our first big story

would have something to do with AI or

tech or maybe even private credit. I did

not think that it would be a military

story and I especially didn't think it

would be the forcible removal of a

foreign leader, the first one by the US

by the way in more than three decades.

But here we are. That's what's happened.

2026 is up and running. Now this is a

developing story. Our perspective might

change as this all unfolds. But while we

are here, I will just give you my quick

thoughts on Venezuela and what this

invasion means for us. So the first

thing to consider is what the

administration has told us about this

invasion. And based on what they have

told us, it seems that this whole thing

seems to revolve around Maduro and

bringing him to justice. The White House

has emphasized that Maduro will quote

finally face justice for his crimes.

They said he will quote soon face the

full wrath of American justice on

American soil in American courts. And

they also said that this is quote not

regime change. This is justice. That's

what they have told us about what

happened. Now, depending on your

position on foreign policy, this might

seem like a very fair reason to go and

invade another nation. In fact,

Americans and many Venezuelans would

agree on this. They would agree that

this is a good thing, that this is a

good reason to intervene. But that's not

really my question here. I'm actually

less interested in whether or not this

was a fair reason to invade. I'm more

interested in whether or not this was

the reason that we invaded. My question

is, was this really about bringing a

dictator to justice or was this about

something else? Now, if Trump had ever

demonstrated an interest in foreign

policy, and foreign justice at any point

in his career, then maybe I'd be

inclined to believe the story and the

reasoning they're telling us. However,

he has never been interested in this

kind of thing. In fact, Trump has

historically gotten along really well

with autocrats and murderous dictators,

whether it's Putin or Kim Jong-un or

Lucenko or even the former president of

Honduras, who Trump just pardoned after

he was found guilty of using his

position as president to traffic drugs

into the US, which is, by the way, the

very thing for which Maduro has been

charged himself. In other words, I don't

really think that Trump has an issue

with people like Nicholas Maduro. He's

gotten along with many people just like

him before. In addition, it has long

been Trump's position that we shouldn't

do things like what we just saw, that we

shouldn't get involved with other

nations issues and other nations wars.

He was vocally against the war in Iraq,

for example. He also said we should

quote stop racing to topple foreign

regimes we know nothing about. He built

his campaign on this principle that we

need to focus on America and domestic

issues and we need to stop worrying

about other nations and their political

issues. This was the whole premise of

America first. So why is he reversing

his position right now?

Well, as we often say on this podcast,

if you want to know the truth, do not

read the press release. You should read

and observe what's happening in the

markets because the markets usually tell

you the real story. So, let's look at

the markets. In the few days since

Maduro was captured, we saw some pretty

interesting stock market activity. We'll

start with the American oil stocks. Exon

Mobile stock has risen more than 2%.

Kenoko Phillips has risen 4%, Chevron

has risen 6%. Moving on to the large

American oil refinery companies, we've

seen Marathon Petroleum and Philip 66

both rising 6%, Valero rose more than

9%. Then we look at the oil field

service firms, companies like

Hallebertton, which have risen as much

as 10%. Overall,

in just a few days, US oil stocks have

added more than $100 billion

in market value.

So, the truth is that this invasion,

just like any other imperial or colonial

operation, is simply about money. And as

uncomfortable as that might sound, the

reality is taking over another country,

occupying their territory, seizing their

assets, especially if they've got oil.

That is a very profitable business. And

that is why so many nations through

history have employed this strategy.

Whether it was the Romans or the British

or indeed the United States, building

and expanding your empire through

violent force is a great business. And

that is the cold hard truth. Now, the

question many would ask is, does that

make it right or fair or acceptable to

invade another nation? And again, I'm

not going to be the one to make a value

judgment here because all I want for us

to be clear on is what is actually

happening, what we're actually getting

ourselves into. Because no, this is not

really about justice or liberation. In

fact, Trump revealed his true feelings

in a press conference where he mentioned

the word oil six times more than the

word drugs. This is expansionism. This

is interventionism. This is really

imperialism in its purest form. Our

government has decided it wants to build

an empire from Greenland to Venezuela

and they found themselves a good place

to start. Now, you may like empires, you

may not like empires. I don't really

care. But all I would ask is that we

continue this conversation honestly and

that we recognize this decision for what

it is. It's not really about Maduro.

It's not really about human rights. It's

not even about socialism. No, as always,

this is about money.

Thanks for listening to Profit Markets

from Profit Media. If you liked what you

heard, subscribe to our YouTube channel

and tune in tomorrow for more.