This is a pretty smarmy response. My “supposed journalism.”
But to a few of your points:
You write, “The regime change policy is at the hands of the Venezuelan people.”
Hopefully, Bloomberg passes your litmus test for media organizations that can be cited in rebuttals to your arguments because it would appear Juan Guaido and the opposition carrying out regime change efforts hardly has widespread support from the Venezuelan people.
When Guaido was in Colombia, its president, Ivan Duque, expressed frustration to him. Witnesses said Duque complained about the failure of Guaido’s promise to bring tens of thousands of Venezuelans to the border to receive the humanitarian aid.
The regime change efforts have the support of the US government, Latin American countries in the Lima Group, much of Europe, and some other countries. (Even so, 140 countries do not support Guaido. That is more than 70 percent of the world.)
Guaido and the opposition are relying on tools of economic warfare to break Nicolas Maduro’s government. This is a game of chicken. How many people do we have to starve and deny access to medicine through a trade embargo, sanctions, and other harsh measures before you resign and let a political faction seize the power they have claimed?
They also rely on propaganda. A member of the opposition threw a Molotov cocktail in the direction of an aid truck. It caught fire. This was promoted as Maduro is supposed to humanitarian aid that he would set fire to it so his people starve. But the act never happened.
You write, “It’s not a coup attempt; it’s a perfectly well execution of what is allowed in its own Constitution. Do some research, this is embarrassing.”
Okay, some research about the coup attempt. I found this narrative of events. I directly challenge you to prove that this is not what happened in the past few years in Venezuela before the U.S.-backed opposition, led by Guaido, ramped up its destabilization campaign.
…Despite cries of dictatorship, the opposition [won] the last election they contested — taking over the Assembly in late 2015 and using their platform to try to overthrow Maduro.
When the Assembly insisted on seating legislators charged with election fraud, the Supreme Court declared the legislature in contempt, and we have since seen a tit-for-tat standoff between the legislature and judiciary. To break the deadlock, Maduro called elections to a National Constituent Assembly, as Article 348 of the Constitution empowers him to do. The opposition boycotted those elections, citing unfair electoral conditions, and handed victory to Chavismo. When Maduro was up for reelection last year, most again refused to participate.
Now, it is from The Nation. It probably does not pass your litmus test. I’ll leave it up to you to show me how you will avoid engaging with the substance of this article by attacking the author or the publication in an effort to avoid substantiating your viewpoint.
You write, “You don’t have to research long to see how even with aid, this is not reaching the people that they need.”
Great, then how about a source for where you are getting this claim that the aid the Maduro’s government has received is not reaching people, who deserve and need assistance? It doesn’t take long to research. Fantastic. You can quickly pull up a link and drop it in a response article for all of our benefit to show this is true.
“[Maduro] imprisoned a lot of the opposition to the point that many were afraid of running against him.”
Again, please provide a source for this claim. Which opposition leaders are you specifically referring to in this sentence? What acts were they accused of engaging in? Did the acts involve violence? Did they defy the Supreme Court? This is all crucial context.
I did not grow up in Latin America. I grew up in the United States, which is all the more reason for me to challenge the actions of President Donald Trump’s administration as he engages in a cynical agenda that is increasing the despair and misery of Venezuelans every day.