Trib should tell rest of Venezuelan story

In 'Trump's effort to oust Venezuela's despot' (editorial, January 25) so many elements of the volatile political crisis there are missing that Trib readers are being denied the undeniable truth. Let's start with recognition of Juan Guaido, who the Trib claims "declared himself president, defying President Nicolas Maduro's authority". But without explicitly calling Guaido's move what it is, a coup, the Trib declares Trump is right to instantaneously recognize Guaido's illegitimate claim. The Trib justifies US interference by claiming Maduro "is slowly destroying Venezuela", omitting US lust to oust Maduro, as fervid as their lust to oust his predecessor Hugo Chavez, has aided that destruction by imposing crippling sanctions in mid 2017. Nor does Trib tell readers the US and its allies worked against a negotiated political settlement in Venezuela in 2016, initiated by the Vatican. That negotiation was critically needed because neither political side there has the power to prevail, guaranteeing a bloodbath should civil war break out. Does the US and the Trib want that? Of course every US intervention somehow gets back to Russia, and Venezuela is no different. The Trib frets about Russian President Putin's "fervid interest in the place" while US efforts at regime change are noble. Why is it OK for the US to support a coup to get a pliable ally in Guaido while calling Putin's billions of investment, which ultimately helps the Venezuelan people, simply a cynical effort to gain a "pliable ally just 1,160 miles from the US coast." But the kicker is no mention by the Trib that the US is explicitly threatening military action if Maduro doesn't leave peacefully. Last time I checked with the Geneva Convention, that represents illegal, immoral and criminal war.

This Trib reader of 67 years is still waiting for the Trib to give us what the legendary radio commentator Paul Harvey used to give us every weekday from World War II till his death in 2009...The Rest of the Story.