United States | News & Politics

So your problem with Maduro's government is that is corrupt, and which Venezuelan or any other government hasn't been corrupt? Chavez and Maduro 's crimes are summarized by taking back the stolen resources (oil) that was handed to US/EU oil cos. Whether the people saw a benefit from this or not you must be in Venezuela now and before Chavez to realize the difference. Hardly anyone disputed that for the bottom third of the population Chavez was a saint that treated them like humans instead of slaves. And that is what the US/EU governing officials and the oil company media are jumping up and down about. They want their oil back. Isolating them from markets to sell oil, to purchase equipment for drilling and refining oil, has had its economic effects. They have too much oil and nowhere to sell it to, and when they do they can't buy anything from international markets as they are blocked by US/EU. BRICS has been the only alternative but half of BRICS don't even need oil.

99% of the most vicious military dictatorships in Americas were sponsored, supported, and held up by the US as part of their anti-communist activity. Suddenly they are all concerned about Venezuela's quality of democracy. The largest Spanish speaking media outfits in the Americas are owned subsidiaries of US media corporations, do you really expect people to have an educated views of who to vote for?

Are you using one sided propaganda rags as reference to uphold your ideation of legitimate elections, when all international watch credited them as legitimate? Where is the anti-capitalist party in the US or most EU countries who have legitimate elections?

Not exactly free of bias? Lmao. The BBC was seen last week decrying their loss of funding from USAID and y'all still cite it as a reliable source. It's a propaganda rag filled to the brim with tory mouthpieces.

It was the most widely observed election in the world, and multiple parties not currently trying to colonize Venezuela declared their election perfectly legitimate. What's more, US observers outside the State Dept deny any fraudulence. As per usual, gringos gladly apply the Trump playbook (or rather, he took it from US foreign policy), lie lie lie, and if you lose anyway, say it was stolen.

Both sources provided in this article about the election in venezuela come from the same website, which isn’t exactly clear of bias.

The “isn’t exactly clear of bias” nonsense was already addressed (and I would add “not unlike CNN and the BBC”), and the point is moot because the article presents multiple great reasons why it doesn’t matter (wrt US action, and this is what the article is about) if the election was internally rigged, but wrt the sources themselves, there is a bigger problem in sourcing where initial reporting of events is confused with analysis, analysis by sites/papers with “agendas” being dismissed out of hand because it doesn’t conform to the standards required for initial reporting. Whether Venezuelanalysis is biased (towards supporting the Venezuelan govt.) should be noted but isn’t enough to dismiss their articles, which rely heavily on other sources, leading to a web of direct sourcing for everything.

People from the votong polls collected the papers that provide information about the votes per political party, and it shows a clear win for the opposition.

https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/cybersecurity-expert-on-fraud-claims-and-voting-safeguards-in-venezuelas-presidential-election/

Please take into account maduro forbid Maria Corina Machado from taking part in the election process.

We never learn, from the article you gave, exactly why she was forbidden from holding office (and therefore the election process) (not unilaterally by Maduro anyways), only that it was due to a “legal trick.” Reuters states, on the other hand: “A previous ban placed on her [due to corruption, which she denies] has been expanded because Machado supported sanctions by the United States on the Maduro government and backed former opposition leader Juan Guaido, the letter said.”

It’s a verifiable fact that she supported sanctions “on the Maduro government” (90% of sanctions stop right before they’re about to hurt the government and not the people!!), you can just scroll through her Twitter for proof of this (Ex.). Wrt the allegations of supporting Guaido, she has done this as well, blatantly and repeatedly, as her Twitter shows (Ex.), where the intricacies of any material support that opposition media has latched oto are irrelevant. Supporting coup attempts and supporting US economic terror against Venezuela, these are both justifiable reasons for preventing her from holding a govt. position.

I don't think the elections were either "free" or "fair" and they probably did rig it, but that doesn't justify invading a country, if you think it does you are just a warmonger. There are plenty of countries with similarly rigged elections that the US doesn't consider invading and the main reason they are so interested in Venezuela is the massive oil resources American oil companies would be able to access if a government friendly to US companies would somehow get into power.

Both sources provided in this article about the election in Venezuela come from the same website, which isn’t exactly clear of bias.

No media is clear of bias, you are a child if you think like that. You just disagree with the bias which is fair, it's your opinion.