[rad-green] For Western Press, the Only Coup in Venez uela Is Against Guaidó

https://fair.org/home/for-western-press-the-only-coup-in-venezuela-is-against-guaido/

*FAIRNESS AND ACCURACY IN REPORTING          JANUARY 10, 2020*

*For Western Press, the Only Coup in Venezuela Is Against Guaidó*

*By LUCAS KOERNER <https://fair.org/author/lucas-koerner/>*

[image: New York Times image of Juan Guaido outside the National Assembly]

   -

[image: WaPo: Venezuela’s last democratic institution falls as Maduro
attempts de facto takeover of National Assembly]

*The Washington Post (1/5/20
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/venezuelas-last-democratic-institution-falls-as-maduro-stages-de-facto-takeover-of-national-assembly/2020/01/05/8ba496fe-2d8f-11ea-bffe-020c88b3f120_story.html>)
described Venezuelan lawmakers voting against someone other than
Washington’s chosen candidate to head the assembly as “sedition within the
opposition.”*

The international corporate media have entered crisis mode following the
replacement of Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaidó as head of the
country’s National Assembly.

In headline after headline, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro “Takes
Over” (*NBC*, 1/6/20
<https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/venezuela-s-socialist-government-takes-over-congress-opposition-re-elects-n1111081>),
“Claims Control of” (*New York Times*, 1/5/20
<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/05/world/americas/venezuela-noticias-maduro-guaido.html>
; *CNBC*, 1/6/20
<https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/06/venezuela-maduro-claims-control-of-congress-as-guaido-remains-defiant.html>)
or “Seizes” (*Reuters*, 1/5/20
<https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics/venezuela-opposition-pushes-to-re-elect-guaido-as-congress-chief-idUSKBN1Z40J4>
; *NPR*, 1/6/20
<https://www.npr.org/2020/01/06/793884001/supporters-of-venezuelas-maduro-try-to-seize-control-of-legislature>)
parliament, and “Ousts” Guaidó (*Wall Street Journal*, 1/5/20
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-maduro-ousts-opposition-head-of-national-assembly-11578263134>)
in the process.

The *Washington Post *(1/5/20
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/venezuelas-last-democratic-institution-falls-as-maduro-stages-de-facto-takeover-of-national-assembly/2020/01/05/8ba496fe-2d8f-11ea-bffe-020c88b3f120_story.html>)
takes this hysteria to another level, hyperbolically proclaiming that
“Venezuela’s Last Democratic Institution Falls as Maduro Attempts De Facto
Takeover of National Assembly.”

Such headlines obscure the elementary if inconvenient fact that Guaidó
failed to secure the necessary votes from his own coalition’s deputies to
continue as president of the legislature, leading him to convene a
parallel, ad hoc session in the offices of the right-wing *El Nacional *
newspaper.
*Serving up state propaganda*

Corporate journalists repeat unceasingly the US State Department talking
point <https://twitter.com/WHAAsstSecty/status/1213901979749158914> that
the January 5 assembly election, which chose Luis Parra as the legislative
body’s new president, was “phony” because Guaidó and his loyalists were
barred from attending the session, rendering the vote void.

“Venezuela’s socialist government installed a new head of Congress on
Sunday after armed troops blocked opposition legislators from entering
parliament,” *Reuters* (1/5/20
<https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics/venezuela-opposition-pushes-to-re-elect-guaido-as-congress-chief-idUSKBN1Z40J4>)
misinformed readers.

As *Venezuelanalysis *(1/5/20 <https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14755>)
reported, this narrative was refuted by pro-Guaidó lawmaker William Davila,
who, after strolling in
<https://twitter.com/venanalysis/status/1213950999162998785> to the
legislature, told
<https://twitter.com/venanalysis/status/1213931653791440903> press that
with few exceptions, virtually all deputies were permitted to take their
seats. Other senior opposition lawmakers, including the outgoing first and
second vice presidents of the body, were visibly present
<https://twitter.com/madeleintlSUR/status/1213858684616560641> inside the
parliament.
[image: NYT: Venezuela’s Maduro Claims Control of National Assembly,
Tightening Grip on Power]

New York Times

Moreover, video evidence
<https://twitter.com/madeleintlSUR/status/1213955699505614850> reveals that
Guaidó was not himself “prevented,” as the *New York Times* (1/5/20
<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/05/world/americas/venezuela-noticias-maduro-guaido.html>)
had it, from entering the legislature, but rather refused to do so except
in the company of fellow lawmakers whose parliamentary immunity had been
revoked for alleged criminal offenses. Likely knowing he did not have the
votes to secure reelection, Guaidó appears to have declined to attend the
session, going as far as to scale a fence in a publicity stunt widely
reported by Western outlets that all but ignored the crucial facts behind
the day’s events.

Corporate media followed up their lie that the pro-Guaidó opposition was
banned from parliament with the dubious claim that the subsequent vote held
in the offices of *El Nacional *was “official.” The *Washington Post* (
1/5/20
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/venezuelas-last-democratic-institution-falls-as-maduro-stages-de-facto-takeover-of-national-assembly/2020/01/05/8ba496fe-2d8f-11ea-bffe-020c88b3f120_story.html>)
matter-of-factly stated, “In a 100-to-0 tally — enough to put him over the
top in a full session of the 167-seat chamber — those present reelected
Guaidó as head of the legislature.” The reporters evidently neglected to
inspect the actual vote tally
<https://asambleanacional-media.s3.amazonaws.com/documentos/documentos/lista-de-votacion-junta-directiva-periodo-2020-2021-20200107021133.pdf>,
which contained glaring irregularities such as votes by legislators abroad
fleeing criminal charges, as well as those cast by substitutes for deputies
who had already voted for Parra. As even hard-right, Miami-based journalist
Patricia Polea highlighted
<http://www.ultimasnoticias.com.ve/noticias/politica/patricia-poleo-guaido-se-nego-a-entrar-al-hemiciclo/>,
Jose Regnault Hernandez, the substitute for newly sworn-in National
Assembly Second Vice President Jose Gregorio Noriega, was allowed to vote
for Guaidó despite Noriega having himself stood for election on a rival
ticket earlier that afternoon.

It is also deeply ironic that Western outlets would rush to declare the
legitimacy of an irregular vote held in the offices of a local *newspaper*,
given the lengths they have gone to deny the existence of press freedom in
Venezuela (*FAIR.org*, 5/20/19
<https://fair.org/home/theres-far-more-diversity-in-venezuelas-muzzled-media-than-in-us-corporate-press/>
).
*Why isn’t Guaidó in jail?*

Procedural formalities aside, the real question, which corporate
journalists will never ask, is why an opposition figure who
arbitrarily declared
himself “interim president” <https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/14304> with
the backing of hostile foreign powers, and who urged the military to rise up
<https://fair.org/home/venezuela-its-only-a-coup-if-the-us-government-says-so/>
to
install him in the presidential office, would be permitted to set foot
outside a jail cell in Venezuela, let alone stand for reelection as head of
parliament?

The answer would require admitting that this naked violation of sovereignty
is only tolerated because of the constant threat of lawless imperial
violence, which US corporate media enthusiastically cheerlead
<https://jacobinmag.com/2020/01/war-iran-qassem-soleimani-drone-strike-death-mainstream-media>
against
other independent Global South states like Iran.

Instead, Western journalists continue to whitewash the US-sponsored
coup–the sixth major attempt
<https://fair.org/home/theres-far-more-diversity-in-venezuelas-muzzled-media-than-in-us-corporate-press/>
since
2002–impugning Maduro’s democratically elected government as
“authoritarian” or a “dictatorship” (*FAIR.org*, 4/11/19
<https://fair.org/home/dictator-media-code-for-government-we-dont-like/>;
8/5/19
<https://fair.org/home/npr-shreds-ethics-handbook-to-normalize-regime-change-in-venezuela/>),
which is newspeak for “legitimate target for bombing and/or murderous
sanctions.”

Throwing to the wind any semblance of neutrality, the *New York Times *(
1/5/20
<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/05/world/americas/venezuela-noticias-maduro-guaido.html>)
reported:

Venezuela’s authoritarian leader, Nicolás Maduro, moved on Sunday to
consolidate his grip on power by taking control of the country’s last
independent institution and sidelining the lawmaker who had staked a rival
claim to the presidency.

“The political chaos comes at a time when Venezuela is facing economic
collapse,” the paper of record added, bolstering the rationale for Maduro’s
overthrow. “Hunger is widespread, and millions have fled the country.”
Like most corporate media (*FAIR.org*, 6/26/19
<https://fair.org/home/so-who-is-reporting-that-trump-sanctions-have-killed-thousands-of-venezuelans/>),
the *Times  *reflexively avoided mention of US economic sanctions’ role in
severely exacerbating the crisis and killing tens of thousands
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14446> since 2017, writing off the
illegal, inhumane measures as “sanctions on Mr. Maduro’s government.”

For the corporate press, it would appear that the only “coup” is that
perpetrated by Maduro in insisting on serving out his elected mandate
(*Washington
Post*, 1/6/20
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-latest-coup-11578355710>; *Wall
Street Journal*, 1/6/20
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/venezuelas-latest-coup-11578355710>; *Forbes*
, 1/7/20
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2020/01/07/meanwhile-in-the-failed-state-of-venezuela-another-coup/>
).
*Concealing corruption*

In their elegies to the “last democratic institution in the authoritarian
South American state” (*Washington Post, *1/5/20
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/venezuelas-last-democratic-institution-falls-as-maduro-stages-de-facto-takeover-of-national-assembly/2020/01/05/8ba496fe-2d8f-11ea-bffe-020c88b3f120_story.html>),
Western journalists rarely attribute Guaidó any significant blame for the
perceived debacle.

Despite acknowledging Guaidó’s falling popularity, following his utter
failure to oust Maduro, mainstream outlets have turned a blind eye to the
opposition leader’s string of humiliating scandals. Guaidó has been linked
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14656> to Colombian paramilitary drug
lords, while his inner circle has been accused of embezzling
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14545> hundreds of thousands of dollars
in aid funds, among other illicit acts
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14739>.
[image: CBC: Venezuela's new would-be congress leader shrugs off
accusations]

*The CBC (1/6/20
<https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/maduro-crackdown-venezuela-1.5416440>) has
never referred to Juan Guaido as a “would-be president.”*

Tellingly, the only corruption allegations mentioned in the latest
corporate coverage are those against Parra
<https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14739> and his dissident opposition
colleagues. Making little effort to conceal its bias, *CBC *(1/6/20
<https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/maduro-crackdown-venezuela-1.5416440>)
describes the new National Assembly president as “a previously unknown
backbencher mired in accusations of bribe-taking,” whose “rambling
comments” were challenged by journalists.

The double standard is striking, given that Western media have devoted
strenuous efforts over the past year to anointing a “previously unknown
backbencher” as president of Venezuela. The attacks on Parra comes amid
threats of US sanctions against him and other opposition politicians who
broke with Guaidó. The blatant imperial blackmail recalls similar US threats
<https://www.usnews.com/opinion/world-report/articles/2018-03-03/new-evidence-the-trump-administration-is-meddling-in-venezuelas-elections>
reportedly
issued against opposition presidential candidate Henri Falcón, who defied
the opposition’s 2018 electoral boycott that paved the way for the current
coup efforts.

Corporate journalists’ discouragement over Guaidó’s failures (*FAIR.org*,
7/23/19
<https://fair.org/home/western-media-losing-enthusiasm-for-failing-coup-in-venezuela/>)
is becoming ever more pronounced (e.g., *Reuters*, 12/3/19
<https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-analysis/missed-his-moment-opposition-corruption-scandal-undermines-venezuelas-guaido-idUSKBN1Y72BB>
; *Washington Post*, 12/17/19
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/juan-guaido-promised-to-save-venezuela-a-year-later-the-flame-he-lit-is-petering-out-his-us-backers-are-weighing-their-options/2019/12/17/48a18186-1495-11ea-80d6-d0ca7007273f_story.html>
; *New York Times*, 1/6/20
<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/06/world/americas/guaido-venezuela-trump.html>).
But at the end of the day, they have simply invested too much in this
smooth, technocratic figure to fundamentally fault him, let alone actually
question the imperial regime-change machinery
<https://www.thenation.com/article/venezuela-washington-funded-counterrevolution/>
that
produced him and his elite coterie.

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sid-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sid-l/CACKppcygX6jss_utrJSdDWUUrjSLK3O0bS6WBFioXD4xajj%2BLw%40mail.gmail.com.

---
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>