Have U.S. law enforcement agencies opened investigations into allegations of payments from Venezuelan officials to U.S. politicians?
Executive summary
The available reporting reviewed here does not show publicly disclosed U.S. law enforcement investigations specifically targeting allegations that Venezuelan officials paid U.S. politicians; mainstream coverage focuses on narcotics indictments and alleged corruption within Venezuela rather than verified kickback schemes to named U.S. officeholders [1] [2] [3]. Claims circulated on social media about a “Venezuela list” of U.S. politicians allegedly paid by Caracas have been examined and found to lack named, verifiable targets in the documents cited, and fact-checkers stress those posts do not provide evidence of identified U.S. politicians receiving payments [4].
1. What the indictments actually allege: corruption and drug-trafficking within Venezuela, not explicit U.S. political payoffs
Recent high-profile U.S. indictments unsealed against Nicolás Maduro and others allege long-running narcotics trafficking and that drug proceeds were used to bribe and capture Venezuelan institutions and law enforcement, with prosecutors describing profits used to corrupt officials inside Venezuela rather than documenting payments to U.S. elected officials [1] [2] [3]. Reporting and official charging documents highlighted allegations that Maduro’s government provided “law enforcement cover and logistical support” for drug shipments and that traffickers moved tons of cocaine through Venezuelan ports and airstrips, but those same sources do not set out named U.S. politicians receiving kickbacks [5] [3].
2. Social-media claims and the Hugo Carvajal material: unverified, lacking named U.S. targets
Social-media posts in late 2025 and subsequent circulation claimed former Venezuelan intelligence chief Hugo Carvajal released lists naming U.S. politicians who received millions from Caracas, but Snopes and other fact-checkers found that the purported letter and posts did not name specific U.S. politicians or include the alleged “Venezuela list,” and cautioned readers about the absence of verifiable documentation tying payments to identifiable U.S. officeholders [4]. That gap leaves such claims as unsubstantiated allegations in the open-source reporting examined here, not as predicates to confirmed criminal probes.
3. DoJ and investigative posture: major U.S. actions have been criminal prosecutions of Venezuelan officials, not public inquiries into U.S. politicians
U.S. law-enforcement activity evident in the reporting has concentrated on gathering and prosecuting evidence of narcotics trafficking and conspiracy involving Venezuelan officials and criminal networks—actions characterized as law enforcement by U.S. officials and reflected in indictments and press coverage—rather than disclosures that a parallel DOJ or FBI probe is investigating payments from Venezuelan officials to specific U.S. politicians [6] [7] [8]. Public statements and legal filings described by multiple outlets present the U.S. operation and indictments as focused on drug-trafficking and corruption within Venezuela, and experts questioned the international- law and policy framing of the operations rather than reporting emergence of tipping or grand-jury matters naming U.S. politicians as recipients [7] [8].
4. Alternative explanations and caveats: cooperation by insiders could change the picture, but reporting shows no confirmed follow-up
Some reporting notes that cooperating figures—such as Hugo Carvajal, who pleaded guilty to narcotics and related charges and has provided information to U.S. authorities—might be sources of intelligence that could prompt further inquiries, and outlets have noted U.S. prosecutors may benefit from such cooperation [2]. However, the material reviewed does not document any subsequent, publicized DOJ or FBI investigations opened specifically to examine payments to U.S. politicians arising from that cooperation. Given that law-enforcement inquiries can be secret until charges are filed, the absence of public reporting does not definitively rule out confidential investigative steps; it does mean there is no publicly available, corroborated evidence in the sources reviewed that U.S. law enforcement has opened investigations targeting named U.S. politicians for taking payments from Venezuelan officials [4] [2].
5. Bottom line and limits of available reporting
On the record in the sources provided, U.S. law enforcement has aggressively pursued narcotics and corruption charges against Venezuelan officials and their networks, but those materials do not show publicly disclosed investigations into allegations that Venezuelan officials paid identifiable U.S. politicians; social-media claims about lists remain unverified by fact-checkers and mainstream reporting [1] [2] [4]. This assessment is constrained by the scope of the cited reporting: prosecutors’ sealed grand-jury activity or classified investigative steps—if they exist—would not necessarily appear in public documents immediately, and the sources reviewed do not provide evidence of such probes into U.S. officeholders.