Have a closer look at the article. I read it after posting here.
Argentine Foreign Minister Diana Mondino shared Mr Blinken's view, writing in a post on X, formerly Twitter: "We can all confirm, without a doubt, that the legitimate winner and President-elect is Edmundo González."
Ecuador, Uruguay, Costa Rica and Peru have also recognised Mr González as the president-elect...
[Machado] claimed her party's candidate, Mr Gonzalez, won by a landslide and Ms Machado said she could prove this because she had receipts from more than 80% of polling stations.
Ms Machado appealed for help, saying it was now up to the international community to decide whether to tolerate what she called an illegitimate government.
And even if we accept that, the US has declared effectively that the US takeover, while removing the supposed false winner, will also not restore the actual winner that called for help, but that the US will run the country directly, while seizing its oil resources (contrast with the 1990 invasion of Panama, where we also deposed and arrested a leader we accused of illegally holding power, and charged him with US crimes, but openly stated and followed through on intent to restore the government we described as having won, and did not declare that we would run the country or seize its resources, and did not, in fact, do that.)
International observers concluded the election didn't meet standards of international election and those were already heavily filtered.
It seems the only evidence you would accept is written testimony signed by Maduro himself. I don't think it's a reasonable standard though.
If we accepted your standards we would be helping dictators stay in power. This is not reasonable way of thinking imo.
Is this a trustworthy source?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd1d10453zno
> The US secretary of state has said there was "overwhelming evidence" Venezuela's opposition won the recent presidential election.
As I wrote, "the US says so" is not evidence.
Have a closer look at the article. I read it after posting here.
Argentine Foreign Minister Diana Mondino shared Mr Blinken's view, writing in a post on X, formerly Twitter: "We can all confirm, without a doubt, that the legitimate winner and President-elect is Edmundo González."
Ecuador, Uruguay, Costa Rica and Peru have also recognised Mr González as the president-elect...
[Machado] claimed her party's candidate, Mr Gonzalez, won by a landslide and Ms Machado said she could prove this because she had receipts from more than 80% of polling stations.
Ms Machado appealed for help, saying it was now up to the international community to decide whether to tolerate what she called an illegitimate government.
4 replies →
And even if we accept that, the US has declared effectively that the US takeover, while removing the supposed false winner, will also not restore the actual winner that called for help, but that the US will run the country directly, while seizing its oil resources (contrast with the 1990 invasion of Panama, where we also deposed and arrested a leader we accused of illegally holding power, and charged him with US crimes, but openly stated and followed through on intent to restore the government we described as having won, and did not declare that we would run the country or seize its resources, and did not, in fact, do that.)