U.S. Discovers International Law, Only When It Suits Its Empire
The AP glibly notes that U.S. courts "do not recognize him as Venezuela’s legitimate leader," therefore conveniently sidestepping international law on sovereign immunity. This isn't a legal debate; it's a playbook. Remember Noriega? The U.S. invaded Panama in 1989, kidnapped him, and put him on trial. Now, with Maduro, the "ordered operation" (Trump’s phrase, per AP) raises "constitutional
concerns" only *after* he's in custody. Not before. Because imperial powers get to decide who is a legitimate head of state, and whose sovereignty is worth protecting (hint: their own). One might wonder what makes a leader a 'dictator' versus an 'ally' in Washington's eyes. Could it be their stance on U.S. corporate interests, or perhaps, their country's oil reserves? When is the U.S. going to
'depose' Netanyahu for his multiple indictments and alleged corruption? Or is that sovereign immunity for allies only?