Venezuela releases list of US politicians receiving kickbacks from Maduro regime
Executive summary
Venezuelan ex-intelligence chief Hugo Carvajal has been cited in social media posts claiming a “list” of U.S. politicians paid kickbacks by the Maduro regime, but the best available fact-checking and news reporting shows no publicly released document naming U.S. politicians or providing verifiable evidence of specific kickbacks [1]. Reporting on the capture of Nicolás Maduro and heightened U.S.–Venezuela tensions has amplified such claims and partisan reactions, but independent verification of any named U.S. officials is absent in the sources reviewed [1] [2] [3].
1. The origin story: an ex-spy’s allegations without a downloadable ledger
Social posts circulating in December 2025 attributed to Hugo Carvajal — the former Venezuelan chief of national intelligence who has publicly accused the Maduro administration of running narcotics and criminal networks — asserted that a list existed naming U.S. politicians who allegedly received millions from Caracas, but Snopes’ inspection found that the purported letter does not actually supply names or a “Venezuela list” as claimed online [1]. Miami Herald coverage referenced Carvajal’s broader allegations that Maduro’s circle operates as a “criminal organization” and called the Cartel of the Suns a mechanism for trafficking and influence, but that reporting, as relayed in Snopes’ summary, did not present a corroborated list of U.S. officials accepting kickbacks [1].
2. Why the claim spread: context of a geopolitically explosive moment
The timing of these social claims coincides with an escalatory moment — the U.S. operation that captured Nicolás Maduro and his wife, and the polarized political fallout in Washington and internationally — which multiplies appetite for sensational assertions about foreign influence and corruption [3] [2]. News outlets documented fierce partisan reactions to the raid and questions about motives and legality, creating an environment in which unverified allegations about U.S. politicians are more likely to circulate and be amplified [2] [4].
3. What independent sources actually show — and what they don’t
Authoritative fact-checkers and mainstream reporting reviewed here do not identify a publicly released, authenticated document naming U.S. politicians who took kickbacks from Maduro; instead, the record consists of allegations and broad indictments of regime corruption, U.S. sanctions on Maduro associates, and political commentary about regime ties to narcotics [1] [5]. U.S. Treasury and law-enforcement actions have targeted Maduro allies and companies tied to oil and sanctions evasion, but those actions do not equate to a verified list of bribed U.S. officeholders [5].
4. Alternative explanations and hidden agendas worth noting
There are at least two plausible dynamics behind the viral list claim: first, genuine whistleblower-style allegations from a regime insider that lack documentary release; second, political actors or partisans weaponizing ambiguous statements to discredit opponents amid the Venezuela crisis. Fact-checkers like Snopes flag the social posts for overclaiming, and contemporary reporting suggests both the Maduro capture and U.S. political polarization create incentives to circulate unverified accusations [1] [2]. Reporting outlets also show governments and partisans framing facts to buttress policy aims — for example, U.S. officials emphasizing narco-trafficking links to justify action while critics warn of regime-change motives [3] [4].
5. Bottom line: no authenticated list of U.S. politicians in public record
Based on the sources available, there is no authenticated, publicly released list naming U.S. politicians who received kickbacks from the Maduro regime; social-media claims attributing such a list to Carvajal overstate what the alleged letter contains, and mainstream coverage has so far reported allegations without producing corroborating evidence of named U.S. officials [1]. If such a document exists, it has not been produced to the press or independently verified in the reporting reviewed; readers should treat viral assertions as unverified until primary evidence or reliable journalistic corroboration appears [1].