You set up the artificial requirement of "other recent examples" while ignoring the ongoing example of Haiti. The U.S. is currently refusing to extradite Constant with an excuse that doesn't pass the laugh test.
The CIA is a secret organization so the more recent, the less info is available. With freedom of information requests and the statements of former officials we can get more details if we look at history.
But Haiti is recent. As for as economic subordination, I already gave you a link that you apparently didn't read. Look at the fact that Clinton shoved economic conditions on Aristide's return. A "harsh neoliberal program that Aristide was compelled to adopt was virtually guaranteed to demolish the remaining shreds of economic sovereignty" Look at the fact that Clinton allowed Aristide back but was eager for him to step down. "Tonight," Clinton said, "I can announce that President Aristide has pledged to step down when his term ends in accordance with the Constitution" and to transfer power to a successor. That conclusion, however, goes well beyond the Constitution, which says nothing about how to calculate the President's term when he has spent three years in exile while civil society is being decimated. One interpretation is that if reinstated, he should pick up where he left off, so that Aristide's term has almost 4 and a half years to run. Another interpretation is that his period in exile is part of his term as elected President. People with some lingering taste for democracy will presumably tend towards the first interpretation."
Chomsky points out that mainstream media ignores the wrong: "Without any exception that I can discover, U.S. commentators adopted Clinton's anti-democratic interpretation." Someone concerned about democracy would allow the man to serve out the length of his term, they would not count the years in exile as part of his term. And look at the very recent events: The U.S ousted him again, a man democratically elected. Also see: Why they had to crush Aristide
The mainstream media is not eager to report these things and hold the powerful accountable. Look at the fact that the U.S. helped put the Ba'ath party into power in the first place in Iraq. It is incredible that the MSM didn't report this fact to the public. We went to war with Iraq to oust Saddam and not a peep about the CIA's responsibility with supporting the man in the late 1950's (I am not talking about the 1980's support) and the fact of the CIA coups in the 60's that put the Ba'aht party into power in the first place! MSM is not performing anything close to what you assume. Start to do some research and stop being so eager to make excuses for these people.