Home | About | Donate

Continuing Long History of Supporting US-Backed Regime Change, NYT Hands Venezuela Opposition Leader Op-Ed Megaphone

Continuing Long History of Supporting US-Backed Regime Change, NYT Hands Venezuela Opposition Leader Op-Ed Megaphone

Jake Johnson, staff writer

Adding another chapter to its long history of supporting U.S.-backed coups in Latin America, the New York Times editorial team on Wednesday gave Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaidó prime op-ed real estate to call on governments of the world stand with him and the Trump administration as they attempt to overthrow elected President Nicolás Maduro "with the minimum of bloo

They are shameless. Only an entity that is convinced that the masses of people will swallow their swill will act in such a manner.

We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false"

Attributed to William Colby in a meeting with Ronald reagan.


The days of the Times being true to journalism rather than propaganda and big-money service has long gone…this de facto support for the coup in Venezuela is exceeded by the Times’ asskissing service to the Israeli racist entity and its illegal colonization of the Palestinian Occupied Territories. Our Fourth Estate generally, and the once great Grey Lady now both extinct…


By the way I could not help but note this statement coming from a Democrat.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) argued that while “Maduro is an authoritarian leader who has presided over unfair elections, failed economic policies, extrajudicial killings by police, food shortages and cronyism with military leaders,” U.S. intervention in Venezuela’s internal political affairs will only “make a bad situation even worse.”

The only thing not to hit the USA as of yet are the food shortages which , in Venezuela, are a result of US economic sanctions and destabilization efforts.This looks like more projection.


Guaidó sez:
“… we need the support of pro-democratic governments, institutions, and individuals …”

Ah. That explains Bolton, Abrams, Pompeous et al.
Any transnational resource-extracting corporations on board yet?


What Rep. Khanna fails to do is make the connection between those problems in Venezuela and how the U. S. has created those problems over the past 20 years. I am begging supposedly progressive leaders and officeholders in the U. S. to now just stay the F#$% out of Venezuela’s affairs, quit commenting about Maduro and focus your anger at what Trump is doing to try and oust him, and stop it from happening.

Once again, things have gone way too far for any kind of negotiating with the fascist opposition in Venezuela. Maduro’s only play is to militarily crush the opposition and execute ALL of the leaders, all of the industrial oligarchs causing the shortages, and all of the media moguls whipping up the riots. It’s the only way now. Declare them all traitors against the Bolivarian revolution and execute them on TV by firing squad, starting with that little F#$ker Guaido and everyone around him. The military knows who are. Crush them, kill them. It is kill or be killed time for Maduro.

Look up the CIA’s long history of using the media. The NY Times also endorsed the coup in 2002, which was against a democratic government that was at the time the most popular government in the hemisphere. The NY Times didn’t care.

If Xi Jinping looked at the election in Georgia for governor and determined that it wasn’t a fair election and that a lot of bullshit went on, what would we think if Xi just appointed someone governor, then the state media in China gave column space to the person Xi picked?


This didn’t work to well for the US in the 40’s, 50’s & 60’s so why not try it again? During those years the US interfered in many So American AND Central American elections and internal politics. I don’t think we will EVER learn to not get involved in other countries internal business or get involved in wars that have nothing at all to do with our “security”.

1 Like

Actually, it didn’t work out well for the citizens of the countries on the receiving end. But it has always been quite profitable for a handful of U.S.-based interests.



“Maduro is an authoritarian leader who has presided over unfair elections, failed economic policies, extrajudicial killings by police, food shortages and cronyism with military leaders”

The problem with this comment, beyond the fact that some of it is highly misleading, is that it frames the situation in such a way so as to concede a large amount to people like Guaidó, and it places blame on the government in such a way that is not at all accurate. I don’t say that so as to say Maduro and those around him are free of blame, which they aren’t. Yes, Maduro is corrupt, and so are some around him. Yes, the government has failed to diversify the economy, and yes there has been mismanagement. But, are any of these problems new in Venezuela? The right is thoroughly corrupt, and their corruption in the past is how they largely got rich. Inflation is an issue, but it was worse in the years directly leading into Chavez than it was during his time. The hyperinflation started years after he died, and it coincided with the intensification of the economic war. Diversifying the economy is a problem, but it is difficult to diversify an economy like Venezuela’s. If you look at other major oil producing countries, they too heavily rely on oil exports. Well over 80% of export revenues in Saudi Arabia comes from oil, and Iran gets the overwhelming majority of its export revenues from oil. And dependence on raw material exports is near universal within developing countries. The IMF has said that about two thirds of developing countries rely on a small handful of raw material exports for at least 60% of their export revenue. It is hard for developing countries to develop productive capacity in value added industries. Haiti and Guatemala will likely not ever be in a position to have private or public industries that are able to compete with Apple, or Ford, or Samsung, for example. That goes into the types of policies that have been historically used by countries to develop, compared to the policies the IMF or the WTO forced on countries now, which is almost always the exact opposite of what countries have done to develop. China, for example, has developed by radically violating those rules, and China is far more “socialist” than Venezuela ever was. Then there is the massive debt bomb in the developing and underdeveloped countries, which people like Éric Toussaint has written a lot about.

Venezuela’s economy shrunk by 26% between 1980 and 1998, and as the country came more and more under the control of the IMF, riots and coups ensued. Over half of households were living in extreme poverty as of the mid 1990’s, inflation was massive and the oil wealth was only going to very narrow sectors. Then, there is the horrific sanctions. The former UN rapporteur, just visited Venezuela, and he says that the US economic war amounts to crimes against humanity (link below).

So, given this, how fascistic the right like Guaido is, given their undemocratic record, why would Ro Khanna frame things in that way? Again, it gives a distorted view of the situation and places a lot of Venezuela’s struggles on the government in a way that is simply not accurate. Yes, the government deserves blame, but at the same time, which developing country would not be collapsing because of what we are doing? As I have said recently on this site, Venezuela’s neighbor, Colombia, is already a human rights horror show. It already has massive problems, its human rights record is the worst in Latin America, and Colombia has gotten more aid from the US than any country in the world, outside of Egypt and Israel. What would Colombia’s economy look like if we did to it what we have done to Venezuela, and why does no one mention their much human rights record, which they do with large US support (we also played a major role in creating their death/squad, paramilitary system)?


The reason Representative Khanna frames it that way is that even if in opposition the lie must continue. Democrats and Republicans both are part of the warfare and liefare state.


From a couple of days ago now:


I think there is some truth to that, but I think a part of it is also that because of the one sided propaganda against Venezuela, that to challenge the dominant narrative opens that politician up to a wide range of attacks. I don’t say that to excuse him, because I clearly don’t agree with him framing it that way, but I think that politicians on the left are scared to challenge the narrative full on, because they think that they will be attached to the image that they have tried to cultivate in Venezuela, a proper response would be too radical for most of them, and that could undermine their efforts on other issues and could possibly harm the left broadly. The same dynamic exists with Cuba. How many politicians acknowledge anything the country HAS done well, or the impact of our attacks and economic war against Cuba? I don’t think I have seen any US politician offer up much of a nuanced view on Cuba, acknowledging its faults, along with its achievements in education, healthcare, its laudable foreign policy, and the impact we have had on the country and its economy. Every single comment I see is along the lines of, well, the blockade hasn’t “worked” and we clearly need a change of policy. I don’t ever see much more than that. I think many politicians on the left are afraid of this, and to me, it shows the large gap between a progressive and an actual radical. A radical won’t run away from more radical critiques, obviously, whereas a progressive is a social democrat essentially. Some changes they want are structural/radical in nature, say single payer, but there are limits as far as the types of radical changes they are pushing for or at least willing to fight for in the moment. A vast improvement over the status quo in many ways, but it doesn’t often confront reactionary propaganda.


Surprising were the comments supporting the regime change on the NYT’s showing how easily Americans are fooled by propaganda. Also the lack of knowledge of US carnage south of the border. Trumpers have far more power than I realized due to the innocence and lack of knowledge of Americans.
Under Trump Americans getting a dirty name globally despite the attempts of the US at democracy.

1 Like

Does anyone doubt that the Fourth Estate is and has been nothing but a sycophant, a fawning parasite, for the Amerikan, fascist…Fourth Reich?


This is a man suspected of colluding with a hostile foreign government, a hostile foreign government suspected of participating in the kidnapping of the previous democratically elected president in an abortive coup attempt. That foreign government purportedly gave him vast sums of money and also purportedly helped to rig the elections to get him his current seat in Congress.

the Times has always supported imperial policy without reservation. that’s the minimum price of its reputation. they’ve supported every adventure since the Phillipines.


I’ve never believed Operation Mockingbird was shut down, todays MSM supports this.
Khanna’s claim of unfair elections is interesting since more than one group that watches elections has claimed they were honest. Question is, who’s pulling Khanna’s strings?


The New York Times is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the CIA, NSA, and DIA (as is the Washington Post). To know what is really going on, read the Times and Post and believe the opposite. But my favorite was that hack Andrea Mitchell on NBC/MSNBC calling Venezuela a “jewel of democracy” before Chavez. Hahahahahaha. Venezuela under our tool Caldera had even worse inflation than now and massive extreme poverty. Give it up, Andrea.