#1
We already know that the US is trying to coup the lion maduro, and already coup'ed brazil (where its already receiving dividends) so this cant be a surprise to anyone here but the US is now officially expanding its scope to bolivia as well!

I thought it could be good to have a thread to discuss these events in a more unified way, so lets post post post!
#2
the accepted story says that it was suicide via an overdose of barbiturates, but there are some theories that she was murdered
#3
With any luck the americas will be the front line of the future, china and russia would love some payback.
#4

Populares posted:

With any luck the americas will be the front line of the future, china and russia would love some payback.


With any luck there will be a future at all

#5
Death is a preferable outcome to capitalism.
#6
choose life
#7
SUPPORTING DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS IN BOLIVIA AND THROUGHOUT LATIN
AMERICA
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 58, S. Res. 35.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will report the resolution by
title.
The bill clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 35) supporting democratic principles and standards in Bolivia
and throughout Latin America.
There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the resolution
which had been reported from the Committee on Foreign Relations, without
amendment, and with an amendment
to the preamble, as follows:
Whereas the nation of Bolivia proclaimed
independence from Spain on August 6, 1825,
with Simo´n Bolı´var as its president;
Whereas Bolivia endured more than a century
of fragile governance and instability, with more
than 150 changes of leadership since it gained
independence;
Whereas Bolivia experienced a succession of
military coups that resulted in the irregular
transfer of power between presidents and military juntas during the period of 1964 to 1982;
Whereas a transition to civilian democracy occurred in 1982, after the ruling military junta
handed over power to a civilian government,
which managed to maintain control despite
major economic upheavals and painful market
reforms;
Whereas elected President Gonzalo Sanchez
de Lozada and his successor Carlos Mesa both
resigned in the face of destabilizing protests in
2003 and 2005, respectively;
Whereas, in 2005, Evo Morales won his first
term as president, becoming Bolivia’s first indigenous citizen elected to the office;
Whereas Bolivia’s historically marginalized
indigenous peoples represent approximately 41
percent of the country’s population, according
to the 2012 Bolivian census;
Whereas, in 2006, the people of Bolivia elected
a constituent assembly to write a new constitution recognizing greater political and economic
rights for the country’s indigenous population,
while key opposition parties boycotted the constituent assembly election;
Whereas, in 2008, a recall referendum on
President Morales was rejected by 67 percent of
voters in Bolivia;
Whereas, in 2008, amidst growing protests in
the country and rising tensions between Bolivia
and the United States, President Morales expelled the United States ambassador to Bolivia;
Whereas, in 2009, Bolivians approved, by a
vote of more than 60 percent in a nationwide
referendum, a new constitution that included a
limit of two five-year presidential terms;
Whereas, in 2009, President Morales won reelection to a second term with more than 60 percent of the vote;
Whereas, in 2013, President Morales’ loyalists
in Bolivia’s Legislative Assembly approved legislation allowing him to run for a third term—a
law that President Morales’ political allies in
the Bolivian Constitutional Tribunal affirmed,
ruling that the two-term limit in the country’s
new constitution did not apply because President Morales’ first term was under the old constitution;
Whereas, in 2013, President Morales expelled
the United States Agency for International Development for trying to ‘‘conspire against Bolivia’’;
Whereas, in 2014, President Morales won his
third term as president, with 60 percent of the
vote;
Whereas, in 2016, the Government of Bolivia
called a national referendum to modify the constitution in order to allow for an additional term
for Morales;
Whereas, that same year, more than half of
voters in Bolivia rejected the proposed lifting of
presidential term limits that would have allowed
President Morales to run for a fourth term and
serve at least 19 years in office;
Whereas, after the referendum, the Morales
Administration increased its troubling rhetoric
against opposition media and advanced a narrative suggesting a plot to prevent President
Morales from staying in power;
Whereas, in 2017, President Morales’ loyalists
on the Bolivian Constitutional Tribunal lifted
constitutional term limits arguing that they violated the candidates’ human rights, citing the
American Convention of Human Rights, adopted
at San Jose November 22, 1969, the main human
rights treaty in the Americas, as the legal foundation for its decision;
Whereas the Convention states that political
rights can only be limited under very specific
circumstances, a provision which, when drafted
in 1969, was intended to prevent abusive governments from arbitrarily barring opposition candidates and not to impede constitutional reelection limits designed to reduce corruption and
abuse of power given Latin America’s long history of violent and prolonged dictatorship;
Whereas the Bolivian Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling rendered Bolivia one of a very small
number of countries in the Western Hemisphere
that does not place limits on presidential reelection;
Whereas the Secretary General of the Organization of American States said the cited clause
‘‘does not mean the right to perpetual power
. . . Besides, presidential re-election was rejected by popular will in a referendum in 2016.’’;
Whereas, in March 2018, a report commissioned by the Organization of American States
specifically related to this issue stated that—
(1) ‘‘There is no specific and distinct human
right to re-election.’’;
(2) ‘‘Term limits. . .are a reasonable limit to
the right to be elected because they prevent an
unlimited exercise of power in the hands of the
President.’’; and
(3) ‘‘The limits on a president’s re-election do
not therefore unduly restrict his/her human and
political rights.’’; and
Whereas the Morales era has seen many social
and economic gains, but also a weakening and
undermining of key democratic institutions in
order to favor the ruling party: Now, therefore,
be it
Resolved, That the Senate—
(1) supports the important transitions to
democracy and the regular peaceful transfers
of power through elections that have taken
place in the majority of Latin American and
Caribbean countries in recent decades;
(2) recognizes the historic significance of
Bolivia’s 2005 election;
(3) expresses concern for efforts to circumvent presidential term limits in the Bolivian constitution;
(4) supports presidential term limits prevalent in Latin America as reasonable checks
against a history of coups, corruption, and
abuses of power;
(5) expresses the belief that the 2016 referendum vote to maintain presidential term
limits reflected the legitimate will of the
majority of voters in Bolivia;
(6) agrees with the Organization of American States Secretary General’s interpretation of the American Convention of Human
Rights as not applicable to presidential term
limits;
(7) calls on the Government of Bolivia to
respect, and where necessary restore, the
independence of key electoral and governing
bodies and administer the October 2019 election in adherence with international democratic norms and its own constitutional limits on presidential terms; and
(8) calls on Latin American democracies to
continue to uphold democratic norms and
standards among members states.
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I
know of no further debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there
is no further debate, the question is on
agreeing to the resolution.
The resolution (S. Res. 35) was agreed
to.
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the
committee-reported amendment to the
preamble be agreed to, the preamble,
as amended, be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made
and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
The committee-reported amendment
to the preamble was agreed to.
The preamble, as amended, was
agreed to.
The resolution with its preamble, as
amended, reads as follows:
S. RES. 35
Whereas the nation of Bolivia proclaimed
independence from Spain on August 6, 1825,
with Simo´n Bolı´var as its president;
Whereas Bolivia endured more than a century of fragile governance and instability,
with more than 150 changes of leadership
since it gained independence;
Whereas Bolivia experienced a succession
of military coups that resulted in the irregular transfer of power between presidents
and military juntas during the period of 1964
to 1982;
Whereas a transition to civilian democracy
occurred in 1982, after the ruling military
junta handed over power to a civilian government, which managed to maintain control despite major economic upheavals and
painful market reforms;
Whereas elected President Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada and his successor Carlos Mesa
both resigned in the face of destabilizing protests in 2003 and 2005, respectively;
Whereas, in 2005, Evo Morales won his first
term as president, becoming Bolivia’s first
indigenous citizen elected to the office;
Whereas Bolivia’s historically
marginalized indigenous peoples represent
approximately 41 percent of the country’s
population, according to the 2012 Bolivian
census;
Whereas, in 2006, the people of Bolivia
elected a constituent assembly to write a
new constitution recognizing greater political and economic rights for the country’s
indigenous population, while key opposition
parties boycotted the constituent assembly
election;
Whereas, in 2008, a recall referendum on
President Morales was rejected by 67 percent
of voters in Bolivia;
Whereas, in 2008, amidst growing protests
in the country and rising tensions between
Bolivia and the United States, President Morales expelled the United States ambassador
to Bolivia;
Whereas, in 2009, Bolivians approved, by a
vote of more than 60 percent in a nationwide
referendum, a new constitution that included a limit of two five-year presidential
terms;
Whereas, in 2009, President Morales won reelection to a second term with more than 60
percent of the vote;
Whereas, in 2013, President Morales’ loyalists in Bolivia’s Legislative Assembly approved legislation allowing him to run for a
third term—a law that President Morales’
political allies in the Bolivian Constitutional Tribunal affirmed, ruling that the
two-term limit in the country’s new constitution did not apply because President
Morales’ first term was under the old constitution;
Whereas, in 2013, President Morales expelled the United States Agency for International Development for trying to ‘‘conspire against Bolivia’’;
Whereas, in 2014, President Morales won
his third term as president, with 60 percent
of the vote;
Whereas, in 2016, the Government of Bolivia called a national referendum to modify
the constitution in order to allow for an additional term for Morales;
Whereas, that same year, more than half of
voters in Bolivia rejected the proposed lifting of presidential term limits that would
have allowed President Morales to run for a
fourth term and serve at least 19 years in office;
Whereas, after the referendum, the Morales
Administration increased its troubling rhetoric against opposition media and advanced
a narrative suggesting a plot to prevent
President Morales from staying in power;
Whereas, in 2017, President Morales’ loyalists on the Bolivian Constitutional Tribunal
lifted constitutional term limits arguing
that they violated the candidates’ human
rights, citing the American Convention of
Human Rights, adopted at San Jose November 22, 1969, the main human rights treaty in
the Americas, as the legal foundation for its
decision;
Whereas the Convention states that political rights can only be limited under very
specific circumstances, a provision which,
when drafted in 1969, was intended to prevent
abusive governments from arbitrarily barring opposition candidates and not to impede
constitutional reelection limits designed to
reduce corruption and abuse of power given
Latin America’s long history of violent and
prolonged dictatorship;
Whereas the Bolivian Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling rendered Bolivia one of a very
small number of countries in the Western
Hemisphere that does not place limits on
presidential reelection;
Whereas the Secretary General of the Organization of American States said the cited
clause ‘‘does not mean the right to perpetual
power . . . Besides, presidential re-election
was rejected by popular will in a referendum
in 2016.’’;
Whereas, in March 2018, a report commissioned by the Organization of American
States specifically related to this issue stated that—
(1) ‘‘There is no specific and distinct
human right to re-election.’’;
(2) ‘‘Term limits. . .are a reasonable limit
to the right to be elected because they prevent an unlimited exercise of power in the
hands of the President.’’; and
(3) ‘‘The limits on a president’s re-election
do not therefore unduly restrict his/her
human and political rights.’’; and
Whereas the Morales era has seen many social and economic gains, but also a weakening and undermining of key democratic institutions in order to favor the ruling party:
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate—
(1) supports the important transitions to
democracy and the regular peaceful transfers
of power through elections that have taken
place in the majority of Latin American and
Caribbean countries in recent decades;
(2) recognizes the historic significance of
Bolivia’s 2005 election;
(3) expresses concern for efforts to circumvent presidential term limits in the Bolivian constitution;
(4) supports presidential term limits prevalent in Latin America as reasonable checks
against a history of coups, corruption, and
abuses of power;
(5) expresses the belief that the 2016 referendum vote to maintain presidential term
limits reflected the legitimate will of the
majority of voters in Bolivia;
(6) agrees with the Organization of American States Secretary General’s interpretation of the American Convention of Human
Rights as not applicable to presidential term
limits;
(7) calls on the Government of Bolivia to
respect, and where necessary restore, the
independence of key electoral and governing
bodies and administer the October 2019 election in adherence with international democratic norms and its own constitutional limits on presidential terms; and
(8) calls on Latin American democracies to
continue to uphold democratic norms and
standards among members states.
#8
tldr: theyre gearing up to declare evo morales's government illegitimate based on him exceeding term limits if he runs again
#9
You know Morales is doing good when that's all the ammunition they got. Here is a nytimes article January 2020:

It is time the United States and its American allies restore democracy in Bolivia. The Morales regime has gone too far. The man has been elected by popular vote, one too many times. There is only so much democracy a country can take. Yes, Morales may have substantially improved the material conditions for his constituents. And yes, he is the most popular candidate in Bolivia. But enough is enough. The Bolivian people have enjoyed prosperity for too long. It is time they returned to their senses and support the American backed neoliberal Carlos Mesa. Like my grandfather always said "son, it's important to try all flavors of icecream, even when it's human shit, especially if it's human shit. Eat that shit forever"
#10
Look, the people of Bolivia had their fun getting to elect the president of Bolivia. The United States Congress has been in line for years and hashtag it's their turn.
#11
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-administration-announces-new-measures-against-cuba/2019/04/17/cfc2bc96-6132-11e9-9ff2-abc984dc9eec_story.html?utm_term=.e05cb6db6af2

In a fiery speech to the Bay of Pigs veterans group, on the anniversary of the failed CIA-orchestrated invasion of the island in 1961, Bolton said, “Today, we proudly proclaim for all to hear: the Monroe Doctrine is alive and well.”


#12
thrilled to hear United States is rebooting cringe comedy masterpiece The Bay of Pigs