The presence is not in Venezuela. Sure, they can threaten Venezuela's new president, just like they can (and do) threaten other countries that they have not inv

The presence is not in Venezuela. Sure, they can threaten Venezuela's new president, just like they can (and do) threaten other countries that they have not invaded [recently] and having a powerful military not in Venezuela adds a certain credibility to those threats, but that doesn't change the fact its the successor under the Maduro administration's rules, not theirs, and she's able to publicly insist that Maduro still the president! The threats of dire consequences if she doesn't do what they want are precisely because they don't control the country. It's really not "serious hair splitting" to point out that they haven't "invaded" a country they haven't even attempted to maintain non-covert presence in, particularly not when you've conveniently provided the perfect analogy of a state assassinating a leader and then letting them pick a successor who might be more convenient.