MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Brazilian public opinion remains deeply divided on Lula: strong support but also highest rejection rate
Ex Brazilian President Lula da Silva's combative testimony before a federal judge this week did little to dismantle the graft case against him and improve his chances of securing a new term in office. Lula, a founder of the leftist Workers Party (PT) that controlled Brazil's presidency from 2003 until last year, can only run in next year's presidential election if he avoids a conviction that is upheld on appeal. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThe Bottom-Line is that NONE of the politicians - unitedly - are truly interested in the success of the Operation Car-Wash &/OR of any other “operation”.
May 12th, 2017 - 11:32 am - Link - Report abuse +2Hence ALL the investigations will have the minimum necessary cooperation and the Maximum Possible Resistance from ALL the politicians + all the political parties. In other words; the Total Support to Lula is directly/indirectly guaranteed by ALL of “them”.
As [almost?] ALL [!] of them ARE involved in corruption - in one way or the other and at one stage or another - their ONLY chance of Safety & Escape is the innocence of Lula; which will eventually - AUTOMATICALLY - abandon ALL the Investigations/Operations; WHEN [& not “IF”] Lula returns back to power.
No matter how distant their individual differences are right now; they can forget the animosity for a time being to have a United Brotherhood [of crooks] to ensure the Total Helplessness AND a Total Failure of the Entire Judicial System. In short, very soon, “they” will be Back in Business and Brazil will be “NORMAL” as before.
Paraphrasing the “follow the money” saying, in this case “follow the polls” appear appropriate.
May 12th, 2017 - 01:49 pm - Link - Report abuse -3In a word, we have here the most successful president in Brazil's history who remains the most likely winner in the next election.
On the other side, we have he ultra-wealthy who are determined to bar by any means his candidacy from happening.
Now that the favourite toll of the past--handy coup d'états--has fallen out of favour, there's always a willing judge to be found to make the deed.
Hey, Lula may have made some photocopies without paying, eh?
How typical of Enrique.
May 12th, 2017 - 02:15 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Brand your enemies as “ultra-wealthy”.
At the very crux of this - Lula was made wealthy himself by pandering to other wealthy people.
Then Enrique goes on to trivialize gross corruption and accepting huge bribes as “not paying for all his photocopies” while in office.
Enrique is emblematic of the corruption problem in SA - it's ok if he's 'my' crook.
Guess who: http://www.sindojusmg.org.br/site/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Corrup%C3%A7%C3%A3o-na-justi%C3%A7a.jpg
May 12th, 2017 - 02:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Reekie,
May 12th, 2017 - 07:49 pm - Link - Report abuse +1you lost a good chance to keep your mouth shut. Your defence of the toad proves you are an ignorant leftist who is not interested in the proof against Lula....and when I say proof, I'm not talking about the evidence collected during the hearings of the ex-politicians, ex-PB directors, Odebrecht and OAS executives, and the PT's marketeers (during the last three presidential campaigns), but bank statements, e-mails, notes, notarized documents found during searches of various premisses by the Federal Police...the plea-bargains only furnished information which made it easier to know where to look...you idiots, like the toad, will keep on denying the charges, despite the proof, long after “Nine” is sent to prison...
At least pretend you are well informed and stop showing off your ignorance.
Enrique Massot is like our old Chavist friend “Stevie”.
May 13th, 2017 - 05:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ideology before people, right Enrique??
Jack Bauer
May 13th, 2017 - 11:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0“The proof against Lula….” So far it remains unrevealed. Out of ‘cite,’ out of mind.
Lula will be an excellent consultant to Trump, for teaching him a few tricks in escaping from the inevitable impeachment.
May 13th, 2017 - 01:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0OR Maybe Trump could not afford to attend the [VERY] Expensive Workshop which was conducted by Lula.
Regardless of what THill believes, he might do well by pulling his head out of his...erhh, the sand...
May 13th, 2017 - 10:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0He should watch the news on Brazilian TV, read the 'O Estadão', watch the testimony of the many whistle blowers - many of whom didn't and don't know each other, yet all say the same thing - Lula was/ is the supreme commander of the 'mensalão' and the PB corruption scheme - and by furnishing details here and there, which are being put together like a jugsaw puzzle, permit us to see the whole picture...only the idiots can't, or don't want to see it ; but most of all, watch Lula's interrogation - 5 hours - a bit boring, as all he did was lie and say he didn't know of anything, trying to insert a bit of political propaganda here and there...the moments when Moro politely cut him off and told him to keep on track... nevertheless, it was crystal clear that he's a born liar and cynical SOB. He even had the nerve to blame his dead wife, for doing things behind his back....not surprising really, after seeing him disrespect his wife's memory when he used her wake to grab a microphone and start 'growling' against his political opponents, as if he were on some political rally.
Jack Bauer
May 13th, 2017 - 11:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“He should watch the news on Brazilian TV, read the 'O Estadão’,”
By that you mean you mean such unbiased sources as Rede Globo “The main historical controversy surrounding the television network and the rest of the Globo Organizations media empire centers on both the support for the Brazilian military government and the censorship of pro-democracy developments in its news broadcasts. The military regime, according to critics of the broadcaster, provided government concessions to Marinho family's media group and specifically to the Globo television network which had a very poor coverage the 1984 Diretas Já protests.[3] The Globo network itself admitted in the Jornal Nacional 49 years later, pressured by the 2013 protests in Brazil,[4][5][6] that the support given to the 1964 Brazilian coup d'état and the subsequent regime was ”a mistake”.”
Criticism of Rede Globo From Wikipedia
“In 1964, the Estado supported the military coup … “
O Estado de S. Paulo From Wikipedia
Makes a Thought Provoking reading [depends on the readers' “Belief-System”: http://www.opovo.com.br/jornal/colunas/politica/2017/05/o-que-as-delacoes-premiadas-revelam.html
May 14th, 2017 - 12:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0:o))
May 14th, 2017 - 01:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A treatise based entirely on speculation. “For my friends, anything - for my enemies, the law,” Getulio Vargas
Besides, “Ignorance is BLISS” for you! :o))
May 14th, 2017 - 03:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The offensive of the right in Brazil has, fortunately, quickly shown its true goals with Temer and company. Lula's tireless work in favour of Brazil's less fortunate still remains in the minds of people and will make attempts to return to the past unsuccessful.
May 14th, 2017 - 04:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0:o))
May 14th, 2017 - 06:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You have advantage over all of us when it comes to ignorance. That’s why you named yourself Bone head.
Terridiot Hill
May 14th, 2017 - 08:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Wherever did I mention that I watched Globo ? and even if I did/do, that it is ALL I watch ? jumping to your biased conclusions again, I see...
I know you don't follow the news through Brazilian channels, and instead get your info third-hand from liberal foreign journalists who defend Lula and his organized crime gang...
But just for your enjoyment, here's 3 (more) Lula lies (during his interrogation):
1) he claimed that Leo Pinheiro, President of OAS, was a simple salesman, trying to push one of his apartments on to Lula...really ?
2) In 2010, O Globo (newspaper) revealed that Lula was the owner of a 'triplex' in Guarujá....when questioned, he confirmed the information....after all, at the time, he had no reason to deny it.
3) Lula claimed that since 2003, after he was elected president for the first time, he hadn't participated in even one meeting held by the PT leadership, and that as of the same time,
he had absolutely no more influence in Party decisions...well, he managed to force Dilma on them in 2010, he chose Haddad to be the PT's candidate for mayor of São Paulo in 2012 , and more recently, got his way, so that Gleisi Hoffman be appointed party president...(she too, will soon be denounced for corruption - along with her husband, Paulo Bernardo, one of Dilma's ex-ministers)...and he has also 'appointed' himself to be their candidate in 2018 ; For someone who claims he wields no influence in the party, he has sure been doing a lot of 'non-influencing' over the past 14 years....
Wake up, numbnuts !
Tweedledum
May 14th, 2017 - 09:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So your diatribe is unsupported, then it follows it cannot be true; by failing to meet your obligation as the asserter. Thus, you are subject to 'adverse inference’ and I can simply state your claim is untrue and the burden of proof supports me entirely. Your claim is adverse evidence of a falsehood just like every thing you post, bozo.
Terridiot
May 14th, 2017 - 09:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0it is your brain that is unsupported....get a new jockstrap...
@JB
May 14th, 2017 - 10:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I thought it turned out that Lula didn't own that triplex, although it was supposedly decorated to his specifications?
@DT
May 14th, 2017 - 10:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The triplex was reserved for Lula as part payment (bribes) by OAS, in “appreciation” for 03 Petrobras contracts....Lula now claims, that when he went to visit it in Feb 2014, he wasn't interested in it.....nevertheless, in August 2014, Lula's wife asked Leo Pinheiro, OAS president (simple salesman, according to Lula) to make a 'few' modifications, to better serve the 'royal family'...such as a private elevator, swimming pool, gourmet kitchen (identical to the one ordered and installed in the country home in Atibaia) etc, at the cost of R$ 1 million....It wasn't 'supposedly' decorated to his specifications...it was decorated 'exactly' to his specs.....funny thing, Lula NOW also claims his wife hated the beach, and would you believe it, 'never told him of that piddling expense' ...during the reform, Lula's wife - and sons - visited the triplex several times, to orient the engineers and architect ...and made a special request to Leo Pinheiro : please have the flat ready for us to spend Christmas (2014) in it....Leo obliged, flat was ready to move in, September....The “Lavajato” investigation was announced in October 2014, when Dilma was re-elected, but suddenly, only a few days later, Lula's wife announced that 'royal family' was no longer interested, and felt the need to announce this publicly...now who, when they don't go through with the purchase of some property, feels the need to go public about it ? who cares ?
The fact that the flat was not in Lula's name, is a mere detail....and despite it was to be handed over to Lula, in payment of past favours (discounted from the bribe money owed to him by OAS), it is likely it would never be put in his name ...just like the countryhome...or, a way to hide his assets. Dozens of witnesses have testified that the flat was for Lula, and the fact it wasn't in his name is irrelevant....but now used 'ad nauseam' by his defence, in the attempt to prove it's not his....waste of time.
Tweedledum
May 15th, 2017 - 01:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0“The fact that the flat was not in Lula's name, is a mere detail. … Dozens of witnesses have testified that the flat was for Lula, ” But you can’t name one, just the same lies you’ve always presented. If they weren’t an honest person would be able to prove their claim , you never have not even once.
FORMER EXECUTIVE OF OAS EMPREENDIMENTOS CONFIRMS LULA’S DEFENSE
April 26, 2017
“The account given by Paulo Gordilho, former executive of OAS Empreendimentos – according to which, in 2011, it came to his knowledge that the unit 164-A of the Solaris Condominium in Guaruja had been reserved for the former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva – became an isolated statement without evidence after he admitted, in answers to the questions asked to him by the defense, that he never worked in or had information about the company’s sales department.
Besides, the statement differs not only from the testimonies of 73 witnesses who had already testified in the case of the three-story apartment before he did – of which some were employees of the same company – but also from what was said by Fábio Yonamine, also a former executive of the OAS Empreendimentos. Gordilho and Yonamine, who are also defendants in the criminal proceeding, were heard today in Curitiba.”
April 11, 2017
“As it is important to remember, 102 people have already been heard in the proceedings involving the former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, among which are the notorious informers as well as prosecution and defense witnesses. None of these witnesses mentioned anything that could associate Lula to any crime related to Petrobras or the properties …attributed to him, … “
http://www.averdadedelula.com.br/en/category/publication/
TH: I know - I told U so! :o))
May 15th, 2017 - 10:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0Bone head
May 15th, 2017 - 11:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0“The end justifies the means” according to those who give support for the return of the dictatorship like Jack Bauer. “Am pretty sure that military are accompanying all this … and I hope they DO take over..”; “I’d welcome back the military, with open arms.” For myself I’d rather examine the truth of the situation and show the proof of the same.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Christopher Hitchens
@JB
May 15th, 2017 - 04:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So if the apartment was never in Lulu's name, what exactly did O Globo reveal in 2010 that Lula confirmed? And whose name was/is it in anyway?
I also don't understand why he was viewing it in 2014 if he 'owned' it since 2010. And by the sounds of it he never actually stayed there either.
Also I'm curious; CAN you name some of the witnesses who testified that the flat was for Lula? Are they involved in the Lavajato?
@DT
May 15th, 2017 - 07:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0None of them can come up with any solid proof--and that is simply because there aren't any. Characters such as Jack Bauer, who are here to keep a fiction alive, will never understand what “public service” means.
Same for judges and politicians who made possible the soft coup against Dilma Rousseff. They must create and maintain a fiction: that politicians such as Dilma and Lula cannot be motivated by the public interest, but instead ”they stole soooo much money!!
Just like in Argentina, there is much judicial activity that is just that: a lot of noise and no substance.
@DT
May 15th, 2017 - 08:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In Brazil, and I reckon most places, when you buy an apartment still to be built, or under construction, you make a downpayment to reserve the flat you chose, and once it's ready do you either pay the balance or get financing...it is during this final bureaucracy that the flat is transferred to your name (with or without a bank lien, depending on whether financed or not) and receive the keys....until then it is the name of the construction company or in that of the bank responsible for the financing.
In 2006, Lula's wife had made the downpayment - R$ 47.500,00 - to Bancoop, a (public servant's) cooperative that went bust after João Vaccari (president of the coop, and later Lula's treasurer) stole all the funds (R$ 100 million, for the PT, and himself), so the 'skeleton' of the building was handed over to OAS, for conclusion.....
In 2010, “O Globo” got wind of the flat, as the “mensalão” trials were about to start, and at the time, Lula (obviously counting on eternal impunity), confirmed the intention to go through with the purchase once it was ready.....when Bancoop went bust, and transferred all rights to OAS, something very unusual happened.....OAS offered to reimburse Lula's wife the full R$ 47,500 with monetary correction, if that's what they preferred...usually, when that happens to a common citizen, they need to go to court to be payed back....
When the flat was reaching the 'finishing' stage (Feb 2014) Lula went to see it ....despite his current claim that he didn't like it, in August his wife ordered all the modifications....ready end September, and with the “Lavajato” just launched (Oct 2014), they said they no longer wanted it...
Witnesses ? the condo janitor, the OAS engineers and architects, OAS president (Leo Pinheiro) and executives....Leo Pinheiro has already been convicted (by Moro) to 35 years in prison for the bribe money syphoned off from Petrobras....and for his participation in the 'triplex' scam.
Jack Bauer
May 15th, 2017 - 11:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Witnesses ? the condo janitor, the OAS engineers and architects, OAS president (Leo Pinheiro)” An unsupported claim or a property supported one. “… the statement differs not only from the testimonies of 73 witnesses who had already testified in the case of the three-story apartment before he did – of which some were employees of the same company – but also from what was said by Fábio Yonamine, also a former executive of the OAS Empreendimentos. Gordilho and Yonamine, who are also defendants in the criminal proceeding, were heard today in Curitiba.” April 11, 2017
Its you who bear the burden to prove, not your opponents to disprove. If you fail then you have once again revealed yourself as a proven liar.
Not everyone has heard of the fact that:
May 16th, 2017 - 10:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0#1: The Shady-Deals such as bribing, money laundering, etc. are not exactly carried out against signed [& registered] Agreements, Invoices, Receipts, etc, etc. proofs.
#2: In such transactions, ONLY the fictitious names, slangs, private money changers, counterfeit accounts, overseas banks, Virtual-Money, etc. are commonly used - SPECIFICALLY to avoid the bureaucracy, the Legal Complications, and the subsequent “sentence”.
:o))
May 16th, 2017 - 10:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0Your spurious claims against Lula versus my proven facts is no contest.
Brazil’s Never-Ending Corruption Crisis: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/brazil/2017-04-13/brazil-s-never-ending-corruption-crisis
May 16th, 2017 - 11:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0:o))
May 16th, 2017 - 12:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That may well be. But, after the period of time and 102 witnesses there has been no evidence that implicates Lula. It is simply as his defence claims ‘lawfare’. “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Christopher Hitchens
THill
May 16th, 2017 - 02:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0your comment to ':o))', “Your spurious claims against Lula versus my proven facts is no contest” shows what an idiot you are......your “proven facts” don't exist, except in your small brain....all you've managed to do is prove is that you'd love to be rear-ended by Hitchens.... would say that your incessant use of his quotes, translates into an irresistable attraction....best keep the vaseline handy...
Long after Palocci - Lula's ex-right-hand man and confidant - has spilled the beans, you will still be insisting the toad is innocent....
Jack Bauer
May 16th, 2017 - 03:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Getting a little testy because your fascist fantasies are starting to look shakier and shakier.
“Your “proven facts” don't exist,” Fact, out of 102 witnesses and still counting their testimony
vindicates Lula. http://www.averdadedelula.com.br/en/category/publication/
Other than your unsupported claims you have produced no evidence, only your bogus speculation.
TH, nobody in his/her right mind would be careless enough to leave a smoking gun behind - specifically, when millions/BILLONS are involved!
May 16th, 2017 - 08:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0However, where there is smoke, there is fire. Maybe, you are too young, too innocent, too ignorant or totally brainwashed; to understand that.
:o))
May 16th, 2017 - 09:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So your certainty is based entirely on ‘could be’s’ or ‘might be’s’. In other words a ‘possibility’. Using such a criteria, it is a lot less likely that a person that has no known criminal propensity. Should suddenly deviate from the moral compass that he has followed.
Just like the ‘Maybe …’You attribute to me. What insufferable arrogance, who died and made you God? What particular expertise supports such bizarre pronouncements?
THick
May 16th, 2017 - 09:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“testy” ??.....not at all....Lula is screwed, and just fyi - not that I think it will do any good...your skull's too THick - amongst some of the witnesses who have pointed their finger at Lula, and state categorically that he knew about all the corruption, and benefited from it, are :
1) Renato Duque : ex-PB director and the PB link with the PT's treasurer, Vaccari Neto....who is in prison.
2) Pedro Correia : ex-PT Congressman, a Lula confidant and as corrupt as Lula....also in prison.
3) Delcídio do Amaral : ex-PT Senator and ex-PT leader in the Senate...a close friend of Lula's, who was instructed by the toad to bribe Cerveró, another ex-PB director, so that he would flee the country...also in prison...
4) Marcelo Odebrecht : ex-president of Obebrecht....the man who commanded the corruption scheme within Odebrecht, for Lula, the PT and other parties...
5) Emilio Odebrecht : president of the board of directors of Odebrecht, and 'very' close friend of Lula's....the man who suggested Lula be called “amigo” in the corruption spread sheets...
6) Leo Pinheiro : OAS president and the man who arranged for the triplex and the Atibaia country home be fitted out according to the “taste of the 'Silva' family”....quite frankly, a pig-sty would have suited Lula better...
7) Monica Moura & João Santana : the 'marketeers' of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th (and last) PT presidential campaigns ...aware of all the payments that switched hands and corruption in Lula's and Dilma' campaigns...and with tons of proof...such as bank statements, e-mails,
some of which, even notarized....Dilma' panties must be brown by now......
But of course, according to the “lokal legend” - of where, only God knows - these citizens, as well as the 300 federal prosecutors in the “Lavajato” taskforce, are idiots, and only Lula is telling the truth...and of course, “Lula's” 102 witnesses, which together don't make ONE...
Terry, climb off your pedestal while you can....
Factless opiner
May 16th, 2017 - 10:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Better give all your certainties to the prosecutor because out of 102 and counting witnesses. Nobody has implicated him according to
http://www.averdadedelula.com.br/en/category/publication/
TH, u r missing the point completely: NOBODY in his or her right mind would be careless enough to leave a smoking gun behind - specifically, if millions/BILLONS of US$ are involved [would U?]! On the other hand, where there is smoke, there definitely WAS fire.
May 16th, 2017 - 10:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0:o))
May 17th, 2017 - 12:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Where there is smoke, there definitely WAS fire.” No, it’s you who is avoiding the point. Those that have benefited have been convicted on the evidence.
Then if there is no proven evidence then Lula is not guilty. http://www.averdadedelula.com.br/en/2017/05/08/ricardo-pessoa-denies-lulas-involvement/
If U say so! :o))
May 17th, 2017 - 10:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0THick
May 17th, 2017 - 04:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The witnesses Lula called are all rabid 'petistas'...so obviously they will say anything to defend him...besides none of them 'know', or can be sure, he is innocent, and even if they think he is, how are they meant to prove it ? what proof of his innocence - as you claim exists - have ‘they’ presented ? It’s pretty clear that you believe the fact that they have only said what they wish were true, is enough ?
During his interrogation, Lula alleged that while in office, he had had virtually no contact with Petrobras and had not met any of the PB directors, except Renato Duque.... on 3 occasions, and in the most unusual of places to discuss supposedly legitimate business…the reasons given by Lula for these encounters, differ greatly from Duque’s version - to shut down the accounts in Switzerland and to destroy evidence……anyway, a bunch of documents from Petrobras has just been given to Moro, and these docs prove Lula lied : from 2004 to 2010, Lula held more than 20 meetings at the PB offices with several PB directors (in addition to those held in other places of which there are no official record) , and even travelled with them around Brazil ; he admitted to only TWO meetings, allegedIy to discuss the subsalt oil reserves…but strangely, with directors who had nothing to do with the oil exploration…. wonder who’s lying , the Petrobras documents or Lula ?
Am not surprised that you resort to “averdadedelula” to get your information ….it’s a site created by the PT to defend and promote Lula….presume you also believe in the tooth fairy, isn’t that right Tinkerbell ?
Why are the words of Lula’s 102 witnesses any more credible to you than those of the 8 witnesses for the prosecution I mentioned above ? the latter at least provided information that is checking out, and provided documents to prove what they have said. More than Lula’s horde of idiots.
Jack Bauer
May 17th, 2017 - 10:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“…none of them 'know', or can be sure, he is innocent,”
That’s not what the defence has claimed, so stop your sophism of misquoting them.
“the words of Lula’s 102 witnesses” As that is the number in toto.
April 11, 2017
“As it is important to remember, 102 people have already been heard in the proceedings involving the former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, among which are the notorious informers as well as prosecution and defense witnesses. None of these witnesses mentioned anything that could associate Lula to any crime related to Petrobras or the properties …attributed to him, especially the apartment in the coastal city of Guarujá and the country house in Atibaia.”
Geeeeeeeeeee.....
May 18th, 2017 - 05:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0When will you ladies stop your inconsequential chit chat and start talking about what's really going on in Brasil...?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gA059SX7NKw
Think's evaluation (and secret wishes to SantA) about today's developments...?
Early Election and Lula President before Christmas...!
;-)))
Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire
May 18th, 2017 - 10:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0“He read the news today, oh boy. The …”
PLEASE HOLD-ON:
May 18th, 2017 - 11:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://politica.estadao.com.br/blogs/fausto-macedo/se-a-jbs-delatar-sera-o-fim-da-republica-diz-eduardo-cunha/
Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire
May 18th, 2017 - 11:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0We already know you’r just catching up.
@McStink the Chimp
May 18th, 2017 - 06:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0...and why don't you tell us something new ?....ahh, ok, I understand, news takes more time to reach Chubut.....
@THick
“..That's not what the defence has claimed......really ? and what did you expect the DEFENCE to claim ?
&
”None of these witnesses mentioned anything that could associate Lula to any crime related to Petrobras or the properties …attributed to him, especially the apartment in the coastal city of Guarujá and the country house in Atibaia.”
Did you really expect the witnesses called by Lula to his defence, to say anything that would incriminate him, even knowing knowing of all his rotten misdeeds ? might as well have just asked Lula whether he is guilty or not.......but regardless of their allegations, which can't be proved, they will make no difference to the outcome.
Your line of defence of Lula's innocence is extremely naive....the fact is that in Brazil, I'd say about 1% of the political body is clean....the other 99% have just succumbed - willingly or involuntarily - to the endemic corruption that has existed here sinc the Portuguese arrived....but of course, you single out Lula in this sea of coruption, as the most honest man in Brazil....don't make me laugh ...
Fact-less and Feckless
May 18th, 2017 - 10:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Did you really expect the witnesses called by Lula to his defence” Yet again you deliberately misquote what was written. Which was “102 people have already been heard … as well as prosecution and defence witnesses.” “As that is the number in toto.” So this is your second attempted fraud. “Lula in this sea of coruption, as the most honest man in Brazil.” I have never stated such. I have simply dealt with what evidence has been presented at this time.
The Soap Opera: http://midia.gruposinos.com.br/_midias/jpg/2016/04/12/tacho_nh_1303-1423744.jpg
May 19th, 2017 - 01:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0@THick
May 21st, 2017 - 06:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Misquoting 'what', numbnuts ? change the record....
I've never seen a defendant call a witness that they knew wouldn't speak well of them....so, besides Lula's witnesses not being particularly credible, what proof of his innocence have they presented ? stop beating around the bush and tell me...I'm all ears...
You're right, you never stated that “Lula is the most honest man in Brazil”.....but you don't have to....your relentless defence of the toad says more than a statement. Your refusal to accept the evidence already presented - “at this time” - is a clear sign that even if Lula confessed, you would then say he's lying...
Fact-less and Feckless
May 21st, 2017 - 12:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your fraud is astounding. Bozo, there is no prosecution witness to any material evidence has been presented that confirms your assertions. If such evidence is presented I’m not going to give it a second thought since my remit is purely the legal issue. I have no particular political angst since it is an endless subject. I’m more than happy to let extremists like yourself get bent out of shape.
@THick..as two short planks
May 21st, 2017 - 05:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Bozo”, you say 'fraud', I ask you to prove it...what do you do ? you sidestep the issue with a load of crap about 102 witnesses.....where's 'your' proof ?
Anyway, I have nothing further to discuss with you, as you are blindly selective and ideologically motivated.
Fact-less and Feckless
May 21st, 2017 - 06:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your the party that has made the assertions therefor it is your burden to prove not mine to disprove.
Simply a reading of your posts and my responses makes your fraud crystal clear. I have shown that out of all the witnesses. No one has been able to provide any supposed proof of his wrongdoing. So finally you are unable to substantiate your false claims, proving I’m too smart for you lubberwort.
Thick head
May 21st, 2017 - 08:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You stated that the testimony of Lula's 102 witnesses all but prove he is innocent....see below:
“April 11, 2017
“As it is important to remember, 102 people have already been heard in the proceedings involving the former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, among which are the notorious informers as well as prosecution and defense witnesses. None of these witnesses mentioned anything that could associate Lula to any crime related to Petrobras or the properties …attributed to him, … “
http://www.averdadedelula.com.br/en/category/publication/”
You are sorely mistaken, otherwise, what you call the 'notorious informers as well as prosecution witnesses' have, in your opinion, never told the prosecutors, and Moro, that the 'triplex' was reserved for Lula, that the renovation was carried out exactly as per Lula's wife's wishes, nor that the home in Atibaia, despite being in the names of Bittar and Suassuna, was Lula's....watch some of the testimony of your 'notorious informers'... they all accuse Lula of lying...and have presented very damning proof. So much for your ridiculous theory.
But by all means, keep on ignoring the documents that have been presented as proof , some of which are e-mails exchanges between OAS directors in 2014, photographs showing Lula hobnobbing with the people who he now alleges he hardly knows - or that the OAS president is a simple real estate broker - and bank statements showing the money trail, etc... One email shows the OAS architect (Paulo Gordilho) asking the presumed owner of the country home (Fernando Bittar), to approve the layout of the kitchen project (identical to the 'triplex' kitchen) and what does Bittar do ? he forwards it to Sandro Luiz Lula da Silva, Lula's youngest son, to get his approval...why would he do that, if the home wasn't Lula's ?
If you insist using the site “averdadedelula” you'll never get to the truth....it's just a pack of lies.
Fact-less and Feckless
May 21st, 2017 - 09:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0May 17, 2017
“Lula is not the owner of the three-story apartment and did not receive any undue advantage, as one can conclude from the testimonies given by the 73 witnesses under oath. The unit 164-A at Solaris Condominium has always been a property of OAS Empreendimentos, which has always acted as its owner. The company has even given the property and its receivables as security in financial transactions.
An alleged email of 2012 (page 17 of the supposed email list) refers to a news report of 03/04/2016 written by the journalist Fausto Macedo:
(http://politica.estadao.com.br/blogs/fausto-macedo/operacao-aletheia-vasculha-triplex-164a-que-lula-diz-nao-ser-dele/). How come a correspondence allegedly from 2012 makes reference to a news report published in 2016?”
Cristiano Zanin Martins
http://politica.estadao.com.br/blogs/fausto-macedo/operacao-aletheia-vasculha-triplex-164a-que-lula-diz-nao-ser-dele/).
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!