Rubio Testifies in Trial of Ex-Florida Congressman Accused of Lobbying for Maduro Regime

Secretary of State Marco Rubio testified Tuesday in a federal trial against his former roommate and colleague, David Rivera, who faces charges of illegally lobbying for Venezuela’s socialist government under Nicolás Maduro. The high-profile hearing took place in a packed Miami courtroom with heightened security measures.

Rubio recounted how he and Rivera developed a “very close” relationship during their six-year overlap in the Florida Legislature in the early 2000s. Rivera, a Republican who once served as a congressman from Miami, was arrested in December 2022 on multiple charges including money laundering and acting as an unregistered foreign agent.

According to Rubio’s testimony, Rivera approached him in July 2017 with an urgent request to discuss Venezuela. The following day, Rivera traveled to Washington for a meeting at Rubio’s home, where he revealed he was working with Raul Gorrin, a Venezuelan media magnate with connections to the Maduro regime, on a plan to persuade Maduro to step down from power.

“I was skeptical,” Rubio testified, noting that the Maduro government was known for having “double dealers” who frequently proposed schemes to betray Maduro. “But if there was a 1% chance it was real, and I had a role to play alerting the White House, I was open to doing that.”

Within days of their meeting, Rubio delivered a speech on the Senate floor using talking points provided by Rivera. The speech signaled that the U.S. would not seek retribution against Venezuelan government insiders who worked to remove Maduro from power.

“He provided me with insight into some of the key phrases that regime insiders would’ve wanted to hear to know this was serious,” Rubio explained. “No vengeance, no retribution.”

Prosecutors have emphasized that Rubio did not act improperly during these events. Instead, their case focuses on Rivera’s alleged activities under a $50 million consulting contract with Venezuela’s government.

The indictment claims that Rivera, during the early Trump administration, participated in a conspiracy to lobby on Venezuela’s behalf without proper registration as a foreign agent. The lobbying efforts reportedly aimed to ease U.S.-Venezuela tensions, resolve a dispute with an American oil company, and end U.S. sanctions against the South American nation.

“This case is about two things: greed and betrayal,” prosecutor Roger Cruz stated during Monday’s opening arguments. “The evidence will show that for $50 million these two defendants made a pact to secretly lobby for Nicolás Maduro,” as well as for Delcy Rodríguez, who was Venezuela’s Foreign Minister at the time and now serves as acting president.

As part of their alleged scheme, Rivera and his co-defendant reportedly attempted to arrange meetings between Rodríguez and various high-level U.S. officials, including White House staff, members of Congress, and the CEO of Exxon Mobil. The meetings were planned for multiple locations including Dallas, New York, Washington, and Caracas.

Prosecutors claim the defendants created a secretive chat group called “MIA” where they used Spanish-language code words like “Little Cuban” for Rubio, “The Lady in Red” for Rodríguez, and “melons” to reference millions of dollars.

Rivera’s defense team contends that his firm, Interamerican Consulting, was hired by an American subsidiary of Venezuela’s state-owned oil company—not by the Venezuelan government directly—and therefore did not require registration under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. His attorney maintains that Rivera’s three-month contract focused exclusively on commercial work to entice Exxon back to Venezuela, which would generally be exempt from foreign agent registration requirements.

The defense also argues that Rivera’s efforts to facilitate Maduro’s potential exit were entirely separate from his consulting work and were conducted in collaboration with Venezuelan opposition forces.

The trial continues amid broader geopolitical tensions between the United States and Venezuela, with American policy toward the South American nation remaining a contentious issue in diplomatic circles and among Venezuelan exile communities in South Florida. The case highlights the complex interplay between U.S. foreign policy, lobbying activities, and political relationships.