After boycotting the National Assembly election in December, Guaido insists that he is the democratic leader of Venezuela and installed a competing legislative body Tuesday during a small ceremony, in an unknown location to avoid repression by police or Maduro supporters. It’s unknown how many lawmakers participated in the session that ratified him as head of Parliament and “interim president” of the country. Most of them attended virtually.
“We are standing here because we are not going to succumb to the threats and terror of the dictatorship,” Guaido said during the webcast ceremony. “Here is Parliament defending Venezuelans, the constitution and the right to be free. The dictatorship intends to destroy the democratic alternative.”
After boycotting the National Assembly election in December, Guaido insists that he is the democratic leader of Venezuela and installed a competing legislative body Tuesday during a small ceremony, in an unknown location to avoid repression by police or Maduro supporters. It’s unknown how many lawmakers participated in the session that ratified him as head of Parliament and “interim president” of the country. Most of them attended virtually.
“We are standing here because we are not going to succumb to the threats and terror of the dictatorship,” Guaido said during the webcast ceremony. “Here is Parliament defending Venezuelans, the constitution and the right to be free. The dictatorship intends to destroy the democratic alternative.”
After boycotting the National Assembly election in December, Guaido insists that he is the democratic leader of Venezuela and installed a competing legislative body Tuesday during a small ceremony, in an unknown location to avoid repression by police or Maduro supporters. It’s unknown how many lawmakers participated in the session that ratified him as head of Parliament and “interim president” of the country. Most of them attended virtually.
“We are standing here because we are not going to succumb to the threats and terror of the dictatorship,” Guaido said during the webcast ceremony. “Here is Parliament defending Venezuelans, the constitution and the right to be free. The dictatorship intends to destroy the democratic alternative.”
What is a constituent assembly?
President Hugo Chávez established a similar body in 1999 that was intended to give the people “originary” power. Venezuelan constituent assemblies have the authority not only to change the constitution but also to dismiss existing officials and institutions.
The newly elected assembly is expected to dismiss the rebellious attorney general and perhaps even the opposition-dominated legislature. On Sunday night, Maduro called on the assembly to lift the immunity of legislators and to hold them accountable via a new Truth and Reparations Commission. This has led to fears of yet more recrimination and repression.
Theoretically, the Constituent Assembly could assert yet more power and even cancel the presidential election next year.
On 8 August 2017, the Constituent Assembly declared itself to be the government branch with supreme power in Venezuela, banning the opposition-led National Assembly from performing actions that would interfere with the assembly while continuing to pass measures in "support and solidarity" with President Maduro.[15] On 18 August 2017, the Constituent Assembly gave itself the power to pass legislation and override the National Assembly on issues concerning "preservation of peace, security, sovereignty, the socio-economic and financial system"[16] and then stripped the National Assembly of its legislative powers the following day.[17] The opposition-led National Assembly responded, stating it would not recognize the Constituent Assembly.[18]
Via wiki
So... maduro loses control of the Legislature... creates his own pocket legislature...
And now, after the first legislature has power again... and freezes Guaido out... he creates his own pocket legislature too.
The thing made in 1999 by Chavez was not a legislature made by Maduro in 2018, Lanz.
It is perfectly possible to think Guaido is illegitimate or corrupt without just making stuff up.
This one was 2017, the Chavez one is mentioned as a predecessor/precedent
Like, this was a big thing at the time because part of the argument supporting Guaido was he was the head of the National Assembly, which had been deprived of power in favor of Maduro’s own National Constituent Assembly, which was argued as being illegitimate because it was Maduro attempting to create a legislature that was responsible to him and stacked with his own cronies
The Guaido thing is there because the alternative is to admit that Venezuela is on a legal limbo without a Legislative branch. Despite everybody knowing that it was going to happen if the Guaido strategy didn't managed to oust Maduro before the Legislative period finished.
The situation in Venezuela continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. Therefore, I have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13692 with respect to the situation in Venezuela.
Natasha Bertrand, White House Politico Reporter/MSNBC Contributor: New: POTUS intends to work with Congress to repeal the AUMFs that have underpinned U.S. military operations across the globe for the past two decades, and negotiate a new one that reins in America’s foreign wars, the White House said Friday.
So not only did Biden call off a second strike because of worries of civilian casualties, he's also totally for stripping the current AUMF's.
Fucking *good*; the US military is the most formidable organization the planet has ever seen and shouldn't be sent off willy nilly to shore up votes or attack brown people.
I'm seriously hoping that the dems in the senate have the will to push this shit through the filibuster line.
Putting GOPers in the position of limiting a Dem president's power vs giving that Dem president what he wants *and* a political win.
That's good politics *and* good policy.
Did they ever complain about a Dem for being *too* warlike? That this war was just a bridge to far and we shouldn't be involved?
I don't think this is as difficult a choice here as you make it out to be. Maximum war for minimal congressional responsibility has to be the prevailing sentiment.
Putting GOPers in the position of limiting a Dem president's power vs giving that Dem president what he wants *and* a political win.
That's good politics *and* good policy.
Did they ever complain about a Dem for being *too* warlike? That this war was just a bridge to far and we shouldn't be involved?
I don't think this is as difficult a choice here as you make it out to be. Maximum war for minimal congressional responsibility has to be the prevailing sentiment.
Putting GOPers in the position of limiting a Dem president's power vs giving that Dem president what he wants *and* a political win.
That's good politics *and* good policy.
Did they ever complain about a Dem for being *too* warlike? That this war was just a bridge to far and we shouldn't be involved?
Absolutely. In fact, they can turn on a dime and oppose a war that they supported under a Republican President and become peaceniks concerning the same war under a Democrat President.
It would be nice to cite recent examples because I don't remember. They dumped a lot on Obama for his fake red line and not occupying Syria, even though they wouldn't vote to support it. They did not dump on Obama for all the people killed in drone strikes or violating sovereignty to get Bin Laden and the like. At least not as a national concerted effort.
They attacked Obama for not being hard enough on Syria and for taking action against Syria in excess of his authority. Its all pointless. There's no value in by your logic strategies.
If theres anything the past 2 decades have proven it's that republicans can engage in mental gymnastics that would make cirque de solei look like a terry shiavo cosplay convention.
+10
Options
Kane Red RobeMaster of MagicArcanusRegistered Userregular
The situation in Venezuela continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Even I can't be convinced that Venezuela poses a threat to our national security.
Well, it's closer than Iran I guess.
I can see it becoming a threat if it collapsed and became a total like chaos filled s*** show. Like Libya but with a nicer climate.
But I don't know how sanctions are supposed to help in that particular case.
Venezuela has no armaments that can reach the United States. It could turn into a mad max esque hellscape and it would effect the US precisely zero. We should really be taking our lead from Venezuela's neighbors and our allies who are actually close enough to have to deal with it.
After boycotting the National Assembly election in December, Guaido insists that he is the democratic leader of Venezuela and installed a competing legislative body Tuesday during a small ceremony, in an unknown location to avoid repression by police or Maduro supporters. It’s unknown how many lawmakers participated in the session that ratified him as head of Parliament and “interim president” of the country. Most of them attended virtually.
“We are standing here because we are not going to succumb to the threats and terror of the dictatorship,” Guaido said during the webcast ceremony. “Here is Parliament defending Venezuelans, the constitution and the right to be free. The dictatorship intends to destroy the democratic alternative.”
I haven't actually heard anything on Biden's plans for south american foreign policy. There's been a bunch of stuff about wanting to try and deal with the issues in a lot of these central american countries that are causing, among other things, many of the migrants at the southern US border. But I haven't heard much about the rest of the americas to the south.
I think reducing the number of refugees via finding ways to avoid them becoming refugees in the first place is a good idea on other grounds as well.
Moral and practical, but to conservatives, it's just sending money to countries we don't care about.
Republicans can't fearmonger about hordes of immigrants and refugees trying to enter the country if there aren't any refugees trying to get in. Well I mean they can, they can fearmonger about anything, but it's more convincing when there are refugee caravans for the news to report on, and people they can detain at the border to show how serious and necessary their policies are.
Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
After boycotting the National Assembly election in December, Guaido insists that he is the democratic leader of Venezuela and installed a competing legislative body Tuesday during a small ceremony, in an unknown location to avoid repression by police or Maduro supporters. It’s unknown how many lawmakers participated in the session that ratified him as head of Parliament and “interim president” of the country. Most of them attended virtually.
“We are standing here because we are not going to succumb to the threats and terror of the dictatorship,” Guaido said during the webcast ceremony. “Here is Parliament defending Venezuelans, the constitution and the right to be free. The dictatorship intends to destroy the democratic alternative.”
Wasn’t forming your own special legislature the exact shit folks charged Maduro with as being a clear sign of corruption?
But now that the original legislature is in force again, Guaido created his own alternative one?
I mean your post right before this was about the legislature voting without letting everyone in. Circumstances might be a bit different.
I’m not sure it is! Like, unless there is some kind of constitutional provision for it, failing that unless there is dominant support amongst the populace for it, Guaido’s own pocket Legislature holds no real legitimacy either.
The Guaido thing is there because the alternative is to admit that Venezuela is on a legal limbo without a Legislative branch. Despite everybody knowing that it was going to happen if the Guaido strategy didn't managed to oust Maduro before the Legislative period finished.
That’s the best case scenario here. My understanding of Maduro is he’s a shit, and even from a leftist perspective my general impression is he fails his people and is self-absorbed with his own power instead of using it on their behalf. But likewise, I don’t see a situation where Guaido exactly has the popular will behind him either. So we’re left with a nation that is in limbo regarding a legitimate legislature that reflects the will of the populace
Is not mere popular will, is legality. Guaido's assemby was elected to serve from January 2016 to January 2021. That's it. Without new elections that can be called legal and can be recognized both inside and outside Venezuela...there just isn't a Legislative branch. Specially not one that can actually command the national budget or sign anything to deal with the debt.
Is not mere popular will, is legality. Guaido's assemby was elected to serve from January 2016 to January 2021. That's it. Without new elections that can be called legal and can be recognized both inside and outside Venezuela...there just isn't a Legislative branch. Specially not one that can actually command the national budget or sign anything to deal with the debt.
No I understand; I’m getting into “what is a legitimate deliberative body, once you have reached the point where your legislature in legal limbo”
If a body is supported by the populace, yet there is no firm legal grounds for its legitimacy, you could still make the case that it holds a moral and ethical political legitimacy during the turbulence of such a transitional period of the state.
But as you said, legally they are in limbo and it is difficult to say which, if either, body holds as the legitimate people’s legislature.
Which to bring this back to US foreign policy makes the US position ultimately self serving. Guaido is supported not because he or his party or his pocket legislature are the voice of the populace. He’s supported because he’s the most favorable figure to US interests if he can gain power, regardless of those interests align with those of Venezuela’s populace
Is not mere popular will, is legality. Guaido's assemby was elected to serve from January 2016 to January 2021. That's it. Without new elections that can be called legal and can be recognized both inside and outside Venezuela...there just isn't a Legislative branch. Specially not one that can actually command the national budget or sign anything to deal with the debt.
No I understand; I’m getting into “what is a legitimate deliberative body, once you have reached the point where your legislature in legal limbo”
If a body is supported by the populace, yet there is no firm legal grounds for its legitimacy, you could still make the case that it holds a moral and ethical political legitimacy during the turbulence of such a transitional period of the state.
But as you said, legally they are in limbo and it is difficult to say which, if either, body holds as the legitimate people’s legislature.
Which to bring this back to US foreign policy makes the US position ultimately self serving. Guaido is supported not because he or his party or his pocket legislature are the voice of the populace. He’s supported because he’s the most favorable figure to US interests if he can gain power, regardless of those interests align with those of Venezuela’s populace
To be fair, those US interests are at least better than the Russian/Iranian interests backing Maduro. But that's nowhere near enough. The EU is not playing the charade anymore, and I don't believe that Biden can make them do so. The populace looks at the entire system as the enemy, and the Venezuelan opposition has been discovered to be on the pocket of the bondholders of the state oil company PDVSA, so people got pissed that they were used as cannon fodder just so the opposition could "negotiate" a bigger share of the pie.
That doesn't mean that the population "gave up" and just meekly accepts what Maduro is doing. I mean, this week they tried to set a checkpoint on the airport to charge 60$ for a COVID test to enter the country....and people just forced their way through.
For context, this is talking about the sanctions that the Trump admin did to Venezuelan "opposition" congressmen that were found to be on the pocket of Panama Papers protagonist Alex Saab:
Sanctioning Saab's proxies, while ignoring Guaido's and Lopez's connections to equally corrupt boligarchs, is the very reason why the Trump's administration Venezuela policy is doomed. Those Congressmen controlled by Saab, became famous for their involvement in exonerating Saab from probes into his corruption, that is for giving amnesty.
But Guaido was once Head of a Congress Commission tasked to tackle corruption and did the exact same thing, i.e. amnestied / exonerated Mauro Libi, yet another hugely corrupt boligarch. Freddy Guevara, Voluntad Popular party leader and first Head of that Congress Commission, DID THE EXACT SAME THING.
So if Congressmen connected to Saab deserve sanctions, so does Guaido, so does Guevara, so does Lopez, so does Borges, so does Vecchio, so does Ramos Allup, so does Rosales, so does Capriles Radonski... for consistency's sake. In the leadership of the "opposition" in Venezuela there isn't a single politician that has not been touched by corruption. NOT ONE.
Trump's error of ignoring the corruption of the Venezuelan opposition until it was too evident to ignore proved to be the undoing of his strategy:
From the head of the Voluntad Popular snake down, no one's clean, no one can say "I never took money, favours, plane rides, in kind, stipends, weekends in Los Roques or in a yatch somewhere." Ditto Acción Democrática, Primero Justicia and Un Nuevo Tiempo leadership. We now know that lobbying for Saab was not limited only to Venezuelan Congress. Have "good folks", like Guaido, Borges, Lopez, Vecchio and co, made any efforts in assisting the Trump administration in locating the wanted thugs that support them financially? Have they given any intel to relevant U.S. authorities? Is the State dept. demanding such intel from them? Have they volunteered anything in that regard? Has Vecchio given State, Justice or Treasury any information regarding whereabouts and activities of Gorrin, Convit and Betancourt?
What Treasury is saying here is #ConMiCorruptoNoTeMetas. How can Gorrin, Saab, and Convit be sanctioned / indicted, while Betancourt is entertaining Trump's lawyer in Madrid? How come Diazgranados mingle with Scaramucci, and Gill and Beracha are free? How about Rafael Ramirez, the architect of it all, or his sidekicks Baldo Sanso, the Neri Bonillas, Beatrice Sanso, Hildegard Rondon de Sanso? How about "bankers", like Victor Vargas and Juan Carlos Escotet, that facilitated all of it?
Those were very good questions at the time, that were probably the hole that ended up sinking Guaido's boat.
SecBlinken: Iran’s moving in the wrong direction. It continues to take steps that lift the various constraints of the agreement and is making its program more dangerous, not less dangerous. We want to see Iran come back into compliance with its obligations.
Nothing about US policy toward Iran has changed, but this American seem to be expecting a different result. What agreement?
SecBlinken: Iran’s moving in the wrong direction. It continues to take steps that lift the various constraints of the agreement and is making its program more dangerous, not less dangerous. We want to see Iran come back into compliance with its obligations.
Nothing about US policy toward Iran has changed, but this American seem to be expecting a different result. What agreement?
Big ex-boyfriend trying to control his former partner’s life energy out of the state department here
SecBlinken: Iran’s moving in the wrong direction. It continues to take steps that lift the various constraints of the agreement and is making its program more dangerous, not less dangerous. We want to see Iran come back into compliance with its obligations.
Nothing about US policy toward Iran has changed, but this American seem to be expecting a different result. What agreement?
The agreement which the US violated and rather then reinstate as it was decided to make even shittier for iran by including it's regional rivals into the negotiation?
Go figure that they're kind of done with your shit.
Gaddez on
+13
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
The Biden administration will offer temporary legal residency to several hundred thousand Venezuelans who fled their country’s economic collapse. The move marks a shift from U.S. policy toward Venezuela under President Trump.
SecBlinken: Iran’s moving in the wrong direction. It continues to take steps that lift the various constraints of the agreement and is making its program more dangerous, not less dangerous. We want to see Iran come back into compliance with its obligations.
Nothing about US policy toward Iran has changed, but this American seem to be expecting a different result. What agreement?
Iran made a deal with the USA, not the Democratic Party. They aren’t just going to forget 4 years.
0
Options
Kane Red RobeMaster of MagicArcanusRegistered Userregular
The Biden administration will offer temporary legal residency to several hundred thousand Venezuelans who fled their country’s economic collapse. The move marks a shift from U.S. policy toward Venezuela under President Trump.
SecBlinken: Iran’s moving in the wrong direction. It continues to take steps that lift the various constraints of the agreement and is making its program more dangerous, not less dangerous. We want to see Iran come back into compliance with its obligations.
Nothing about US policy toward Iran has changed, but this American seem to be expecting a different result. What agreement?
Iran made a deal with the USA, not the Democratic Party. They aren’t just going to forget 4 years.
It's a real slap in the face to be told that they should "come back into compliance with its obligations" when the US was the one who broke their obligations to the agreement in the first place.
Posts
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-05/maduro-to-retake-venezuela-national-assembly-cementing-control
Wasn’t forming your own special legislature the exact shit folks charged Maduro with as being a clear sign of corruption?
But now that the original legislature is in force again, Guaido created his own alternative one?
No, it was the allegedly rigged 2018 elections. There were allegations that various wings of government were rigged but none Maduro created.
Wait, this was a thing! The National Constituent Assembly!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/01/venezuelas-dubious-new-constituent-assembly-explained/
So... maduro loses control of the Legislature... creates his own pocket legislature...
And now, after the first legislature has power again... and freezes Guaido out... he creates his own pocket legislature too.
This one was 2017, the Chavez one is mentioned as a predecessor/precedent
Like, this was a big thing at the time because part of the argument supporting Guaido was he was the head of the National Assembly, which had been deprived of power in favor of Maduro’s own National Constituent Assembly, which was argued as being illegitimate because it was Maduro attempting to create a legislature that was responsible to him and stacked with his own cronies
Fucking *good*; the US military is the most formidable organization the planet has ever seen and shouldn't be sent off willy nilly to shore up votes or attack brown people.
I'm seriously hoping that the dems in the senate have the will to push this shit through the filibuster line.
Well, it's closer than Iran I guess.
I can see it becoming a threat if it collapsed and became a total like chaos filled s*** show. Like Libya but with a nicer climate.
But I don't know how sanctions are supposed to help in that particular case.
That's good politics *and* good policy.
Did they ever complain about a Dem for being *too* warlike? That this war was just a bridge to far and we shouldn't be involved?
I don't think this is as difficult a choice here as you make it out to be. Maximum war for minimal congressional responsibility has to be the prevailing sentiment.
Yeah, Obama and Syria
Absolutely. In fact, they can turn on a dime and oppose a war that they supported under a Republican President and become peaceniks concerning the same war under a Democrat President.
Venezuela has no armaments that can reach the United States. It could turn into a mad max esque hellscape and it would effect the US precisely zero. We should really be taking our lead from Venezuela's neighbors and our allies who are actually close enough to have to deal with it.
Refugees would destabilize the surrounding countries and provoke a right-wing backlash in the USA as they tried to make it to safety over the border.
Well we're actively helping to destabilize it so
So increased foreign aid to Venezuela's neighbors and assistance programs for the refugees, got it.
I mean your post right before this was about the legislature voting without letting everyone in. Circumstances might be a bit different.
There were a number of programs that aimed to improve conditions in the countries that tend to produce refugees, which the Republicans cut.
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/andres-oppenheimer/article152709879.html
Moral and practical, but to conservatives, it's just sending money to countries we don't care about.
Republicans can't fearmonger about hordes of immigrants and refugees trying to enter the country if there aren't any refugees trying to get in. Well I mean they can, they can fearmonger about anything, but it's more convincing when there are refugee caravans for the news to report on, and people they can detain at the border to show how serious and necessary their policies are.
I’m not sure it is! Like, unless there is some kind of constitutional provision for it, failing that unless there is dominant support amongst the populace for it, Guaido’s own pocket Legislature holds no real legitimacy either.
Like TryCatcher says here:
That’s the best case scenario here. My understanding of Maduro is he’s a shit, and even from a leftist perspective my general impression is he fails his people and is self-absorbed with his own power instead of using it on their behalf. But likewise, I don’t see a situation where Guaido exactly has the popular will behind him either. So we’re left with a nation that is in limbo regarding a legitimate legislature that reflects the will of the populace
No I understand; I’m getting into “what is a legitimate deliberative body, once you have reached the point where your legislature in legal limbo”
If a body is supported by the populace, yet there is no firm legal grounds for its legitimacy, you could still make the case that it holds a moral and ethical political legitimacy during the turbulence of such a transitional period of the state.
But as you said, legally they are in limbo and it is difficult to say which, if either, body holds as the legitimate people’s legislature.
Which to bring this back to US foreign policy makes the US position ultimately self serving. Guaido is supported not because he or his party or his pocket legislature are the voice of the populace. He’s supported because he’s the most favorable figure to US interests if he can gain power, regardless of those interests align with those of Venezuela’s populace
To be fair, those US interests are at least better than the Russian/Iranian interests backing Maduro. But that's nowhere near enough. The EU is not playing the charade anymore, and I don't believe that Biden can make them do so. The populace looks at the entire system as the enemy, and the Venezuelan opposition has been discovered to be on the pocket of the bondholders of the state oil company PDVSA, so people got pissed that they were used as cannon fodder just so the opposition could "negotiate" a bigger share of the pie.
That doesn't mean that the population "gave up" and just meekly accepts what Maduro is doing. I mean, this week they tried to set a checkpoint on the airport to charge 60$ for a COVID test to enter the country....and people just forced their way through.
Independent journalist Alek Boyd has been the source for Venezuelan corruption. His article last year details pretty much why the Guaido/Trump strategy was doomed.
For context, this is talking about the sanctions that the Trump admin did to Venezuelan "opposition" congressmen that were found to be on the pocket of Panama Papers protagonist Alex Saab:
Trump's error of ignoring the corruption of the Venezuelan opposition until it was too evident to ignore proved to be the undoing of his strategy:
Those were very good questions at the time, that were probably the hole that ended up sinking Guaido's boat.
Nothing about US policy toward Iran has changed, but this American seem to be expecting a different result. What agreement?
Big ex-boyfriend trying to control his former partner’s life energy out of the state department here
The agreement which the US violated and rather then reinstate as it was decided to make even shittier for iran by including it's regional rivals into the negotiation?
Go figure that they're kind of done with your shit.
Per AP:
Iran made a deal with the USA, not the Democratic Party. They aren’t just going to forget 4 years.
Good, more of this.
It's a real slap in the face to be told that they should "come back into compliance with its obligations" when the US was the one who broke their obligations to the agreement in the first place.