BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Optimism Bias, and Begging the Question, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 34.5% saturation with 79 hits. Analysis detected 748 faulty-reasoning hits from 229 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 76.4% and a BS Rank of 83% (2,703 of 15,743 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 82.80% of the article peer group.
On January 3, Venezuelans cheered when the United States removed their longtime dictator Nicolás Maduro, and seemed to open the door for a return to democracy.
But since then, U.S. policy has been to keep that door shut.
Support for Maduro’s replacement and former vice president, Delcy Rodríguez, has been firm despite her regime’s poor response to the devastating earthquakes that struck on June 24.
And now the United States risks losing the goodwill it earned by removing Maduro six months ago.
As The New York Times reported last week, Venezuelans are “turning their anger toward the Trump administration, which has. . . stood by the government’s management of the disaster.”
This is not only a betrayal of America’s long-standing commitment to restoring democracy in Venezuela after 27 years of socialist authoritarianism.
It’s also against America’s own interests and counterproductive to the Trump administration’s main priority: extracting Venezuelan oil and getting it to consumers.
I served as the special representative for Venezuela in Trump’s first term.
The administration imposed sanctions on Venezuela and rejected the 2018 presidential election stolen by Nicolás Maduro.
And we backed the president of the National Assembly, Juan Guaidó, as interim president, while demanding an end to the Maduro dictatorship.
Then came January’s daring raid on Maduro’s home and what Venezuelans hoped was a new era of freedom and democracy.
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.