Senator Marco Rubio praised mainstream media outlets for withholding reports about a U.S. operation to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, despite being aware of it.

Rubio's remarks, made on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, were a rare instance of a senior Trump administration official publicly commending legacy media, which President Donald Trump has frequently criticized as biased and hostile.

Rubio stated that the decision by newsrooms to delay reporting while U.S. military personnel conducted a high-risk, late-night operation likely saved American lives.

According to Semafor, The New York Times and The Washington Post learned of the secret operation shortly before it began on Friday night.

Two sources familiar with the communications told Semafor that the outlets withheld their reports after administration officials warned that early reporting could expose U.S. military personnel and jeopardize the operation.

Despite the deep animosity between the Trump White House and mainstream media, the incident demonstrated a rare moment of cooperation on a critical national security issue.

The New York Times was the first to report on the Maduro capture operation, making a direct call to President Trump's cellphone as it was being executed.

Rubio explicitly thanked the press for its restraint, emphasizing that "operational security" was paramount.

"It would have put the people who conducted this operation in an extremely dangerous situation," Rubio said. "And frankly, several news organizations, when they got the information that this was about to happen, they held their fire for precisely that reason. And because of that, lives may have been saved. American lives."

For the conservative movement, Rubio's remarks highlight two realities often overlooked amid the daily media wars.

First, that leaked information can cost lives, and second, that even adversarial institutions sometimes recognize the imperative to protect U.S. troops fighting on the ground.

The timing of Rubio's praise is particularly noteworthy.

The New York Post recalled Trump's blistering condemnation of The New York Times just before Christmas, when he labeled the paper a "serious threat to national security" following a major report on its ties to the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Rubio's comments, however, suggest that editors in this instance prioritized discretion over a scoop. The administration contends that the decision helped ensure the operation proceeded "covertly," "precisely," and without American casualties, as described by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegses.

Semafor noted that Hegses praised the operation's secrecy without mentioning the decision to withhold reporting, but that the incident aligns with a long-standing practice of U.S. media outlets delaying sensitive reports that could threaten lives if made public.

The New York Post cited historical precedents, including The New York Times' delay in reporting details about the preparations for the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, the deferral of reporting on National Security Agency surveillance activities after 9/11, and the decision by news organizations to hold back reports during the 2011 raid that killed Osama bin Laden until U.S. forces had safely withdrawn.

The decision also raises new questions about how widely operational information had spread outside of government and media circles, according to Newsmax.

In separate remarks to reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday, Trump confirmed discussing Venezuela's entry with oil companies both "before and after" the operation, saying they "desperately want to get in." He described Venezuela's infrastructure as "rusted" and "rotten."

By Hong Sung-goo, Chief Reporter for NNP, U.S. Correspondent NNP info@newsandpost.com