MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, April 19th 2024 - 00:29 UTC

 

 

A weakened Temer faces a second corruption charge with a divided congress

Wednesday, September 6th 2017 - 07:28 UTC
Full article 23 comments

Brazilian President Michel Temer faces a tougher battle to quash an imminent second corruption charge because he has lost support among disgruntled members of his governing coalition in Congress, the country's lower house speaker said. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Jack Bauer

    With the disclosure that the two Batista brothers (JBS) lied during their plea-bargain, and that they were looking for a way to manipulate the Supreme Court Justices, asper newly-divulged recordings, I'd say the case against Temer is weakend...

    Sep 06th, 2017 - 04:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    @JB:
    Right! And we'll NEVER know the “real” story behind the ”Well PUBLICISED Story:
    https://i1.wp.com/www.humorpolitico.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Brasileiro-Palhaco.jpg?w=640&ssl=1

    Sep 07th, 2017 - 01:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @JB
    I hadn't heard that. Did they admit they had lied? And what about the recording of Temer that was released? But anyway, the article doesn't say the case against him is strengthened, it's whether he has the political support to avoid it being heard at all, and whether he can pass the reforms.

    @ :o))
    What does Temer call Joesley in your cartoon? The dictionary says 'Stapler-General' which doesn't make any sense to me.

    Sep 07th, 2017 - 02:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    No they didn't admit anything....no point now, the recordings say it all....but after the recordings were divulged, and Joesley realized his cock-up, he did go public to try to control the damage by apologising and saying he “was just lying...and that he didn't mean a word of it”....sure, tell me another !! when he handed over the new recordings, he believed that previous recordings, that he had erased, could not be recovered...a real dimwit.

    No, the article says “Temer is weakened”...I say the 'case against him' is weakened...based on the fact that the contents of the first recording presented by Joesley Batista are put under suspicion (again), now that it has become public that Joesley had been scheming all along, to try to find ways to compromise Temer, and well as some of the Supreme Court justices.
    Besides, regardless of 'for or against' Temer, the majority in Congress cannot deny that the time has come to approve the long-needed, inevitable reforms, especially that of social security.

    Regdng the joke, it’s play on the word “GERAL”, which means GENERAL….Temer is accusing Joesley of calling him the GENERAL-thief of the Republic ; Joesley : “because you called me the GENERAL wire-tapper of the country”; Janot , “I’m only the Attorney GENERAL of the Republic, and the last one, representing the population, says “I’m only the GENERAL-clown”…

    Sep 07th, 2017 - 05:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    I found an article, it wasn't on the BBC for some reason. So he accidentally attached a recording to his email? Lol. He must be kicking himself, screwing up the deal he made to stay out of prison so stupidly. Also he's cut his hair, I hardly recognised him.

    The article is saying Temer is weakened politically, but you're right that this could help him. As for Congress, you said before that they vote for their own interests, not the good of the country, so they'll deny the need for reforms all they want. It's what they can get out of it, and whether they will be re-elected after voting for something so unpopular.

    Ah, General wire-tapper, that makes sense now. I worked out the others, but google and the dictionary thought grampeador means stapler. I guess wire-tapper is too obscure for them.

    Sep 07th, 2017 - 09:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Juanma

    #ForaTemer

    Sep 08th, 2017 - 03:33 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • :o))

    REF: 'Stapler': As a slang; “Voice Recording Clandestinely” or the recorder of dialogs. Anyway; it's nice to know that ALL is WELL and NORMAL in Brazil:https://i1.wp.com/www.humorpolitico.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Sergio-Cabral.jpg?resize=555%2C420&ssl=1

    Sep 08th, 2017 - 11:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    Seems he recorded his conversation without realizing he hadn't turned the recorder off - as you can hear him saying, before he starts to shoot his mouth off, “how d'you turn this thing off ?” His next haircut will be even shorter. He'll also receive an orange uniform.

    You might be right that that Congress won't vote the reforms if there's nothing in it for them, but if they don't, it won't be long before the population is faced with the reality that their pensions are a thing of the past....and they will know who to blame...I'd say better be unpopular for voting something essential, than to be for not voting it.

    Besides Google usually showing the literal, or more obvious translations, think it depends on users to update it with the 'not-so-obvious' (or 'slang)' versions as they go using it....

    Sep 08th, 2017 - 04:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Lol, poor Joesley. Do they send these people to the jails that are run by drug gangs who chop each others heads off? Because if so I'm surprised any of them are still around to testify.

    We'll have to wait and see what the Congress does. They might think it's better to let the crisis happen, then blame someone else, or they might not want it to go that far.

    Perhaps I should tell google what the word means, but I'm not sure what the proper equivalent is in English. Wire-tapping to me implies recording other people's conversations rather than your own. Term for recording clandestinely is wearing a wire, but that doesn't fit. It's not such an everyday occurrence outside Brazil!

    Sep 08th, 2017 - 09:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    REF: “Weekend - Temer”:
    https://i2.wp.com/www.humorpolitico.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Charge-08.09.2017.jpg?resize=580%2C414&ssl=1

    Sep 09th, 2017 - 02:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT (re reply to “CF just manages..”.)
    I’m mentioning it because, AFAIC, it hasn't yet been satisfactorily clarified. If that's fair or not, is just a matter of opinion. Disagree with the ‘naïve’…if proof was “conclusive”, it WOULD end the discussion for me. A few disgruntled people might not let it go, 99% would. If not mistaken, that clause goes back to the Constitution's original version, and back then, probably had good reason to be enforced ; if today, enough people disagree with it, have it revoked…legally.

    Regarding the secret Muslim issue, it is difficult to dismiss it after so many demonstrations that raised serious doubts in people’s minds. You’re right, I don’t hang out with US liberals…we think differently, end of story.

    I don’t think, nor imply, all Muslims are terrorists, but to call those that are, “Islamic terrorists”, should have been perfectly normal for BO…but it wasn’t; his excuses for not doing so, were pathetic. Despite the IRA’s past actions, you cannot compare them to the radical Islamic terrorists of today…there’s a big difference, one, that you are not dealing with, or trying to negotiate with nutcases who are prepared to blow themselves up and believe 72 vestal virgins are waiting for them. And a united Ireland, or even an independent Northern Ireland, sounds like a pretty reasonable cause.

    Possibly the CBP interviews were banned from youtube, but if BO had not scrapped the constitution with DACA, and obliged CBP officers to look the other way, how did hundreds of thousands of UNaccompanied “minors” just walk in ?
    I’ve been to the US 47 times…on a visa - NEVER encountered anything unpleasant while going through immigration...maybe the officer who checked your papers had had a bad night…some TSA officials need better training, but you've best tread lightly with them.

    Joesley etc, stay imprisoned in Fed Police installations. Wire-tapping is listening to private (phone) conversations, with or w/o legal authorization

    Sep 09th, 2017 - 04:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @JB
    What would you consider conclusive proof? Seems to me you think the discussion hasn't ended because the proof isn't conclusive, and you think the proof isn't conclusive because it hasn't ended the discussion. That's circular reasoning.

    I believe the requirement for the US President to be born a citizen was supposed to prevent people who might have a loyalty to their original country from becoming president, and IMO the rule does not do this very well in modern times. Look at Think, he was born in Argentina but boasts about being a viking and has called himself European. Or you: I don't think you have any loyalty to Argentina; would you feel more Brazilian if you had been born there instead? But that's just my opinion; you're right that it's up to the Americans to make their own rules, and Britain has no such restriction.

    For me and I think most people, Obama's 'demonstrations' just imply 'sympathises with muslims', not 'is a secret muslim'. Like him refusing to say 'Islamic terrorists'; I don't necessarily agree with him but I don't find it suspicious.

    You think the IRA are better than the Islamic terrorists because they were only willing to blow *other* people up? They were less crazy, sure, but that doesn't mean the government should give in to blackmail. Anyway, the point is, you wouldn't demand people call them 'Irish terrorists', would you?

    Considering what else is on youtube I doubt the CBP interviews are banned, more likely just buried under newer stuff. But DACA only applied to children who had lived in the US since 2007, so it doesn't oblige officials at the border to let in new immigrants, or allow them to stay. Do you agree with the principle of DACA even if you don't like the way Obama enacted it?

    Ran out of room to talk about Benghazi before, but I didn't really follow it at the time. Sounds like Clinton and/or Obama didn't take the danger seriously enough and badly misjudged the situation. What did you want to see happen afterwards?

    Sep 09th, 2017 - 09:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    @JB: “I don’t think, nor imply, all Muslims are terrorists”:

    In general & speaking broadly; ANY kind of extremism and/or intolerance; may lead to terrorism of SOME form - some day!

    Sep 10th, 2017 - 11:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    Conclusive proof ? how abt an authentic birth certificate, with corresponding records at the hospital ?
    If the Constitutional clause doesn't serve its original purpose any more, then revoke it legally instead of acting as if you're above it. As far as “Think” is concerned, let him claim whatever makes him happy. I've looked into my ancestry, and besides the more recent (last 400 yrs) being Sottish and English, the evolution of my surname over the last 1000 years has a strong link to the Vikings, as well. As to my loyalty, it sits with my blood culture (British) and the place I've chosen to make my home (Brazil).
    Re BO, you may not find it 'suspicious'...I do, and as they say, where there's smoke, there's fire.
    Re the IRA, I never supported the bombing and killing, but put it this way, they weren't as bad, or indiscriminate as the islamic terrorists....the IRA was one group, and very likely referred to as IRA terrorists. No matter how bad they were, they were on a completely different scale than the Islamic terrorists.
    The DACA, established in 2012, may have been to cover minors who'd arrived before 2007, but in 2015/2016 dozens of thousands of unaccompnied minors poured in, expecting that their families would too, later on...this escalated in the last year, and especially in the last months of the BO adminstration, due to the fear that Trump would clamp down on illegal immigration. I'm not against immigration, be it by those running from conflicts or looking to improve their lives, but it MUST be done in a orderly fashion, checking everyone...not just opening the flood gates, and 'trusting' them to present themselves in court at a later date, to either become legal, or to be deported.
    Both Clinton and Hillary were directly to blame for the outcome of the Benghazi fiasco, exactly because they didn't take it seriously, despite insistent pleas/warnings to the contrary. Hillary should have been fired, and BO should've apologized publicly, accepting blame.

    Sep 10th, 2017 - 05:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @JB
    Here's his birth certificate specially requested from the Hawaii State Department of Health:

    https://www.slideshare.net/whitehouse/birth-certificatelongform

    Correspondence where he requested the 'long-form' birth certificate:

    obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-correspondence.pdf

    Here it is on the Hawaii state health department website:

    health.hawaii.gov/vitalrecords/files/2013/05/News_Release_Birth_Certificate_042711.pdf

    Here is the Hawaiian Health Director confirming the birth certificate was genuine:

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9D4n6_Uifk

    Here's a scan of the birth announcement from 1961:

    the.honoluluadvertiser.com/dailypix/2008/Nov/09/hawaii811090361V3_b.jpg

    Is that good enough?

    And Obama is not acting as if he is above the 'natural born' clause. He says he was born a citizen, and it's hardly an extraordinary claim. Millions of people were born in Hawaii, one of his parents was a US citizen, they met in America, they lived in America... why on earth would they have gone to Kenya for the birth?

    ”As to my loyalty, it sits with my blood culture (British) and the place I've chosen to make my home (Brazil).“

    That's what I thought. It has nothing to do with where you were born. But it's up to Americans who they want to be eligible, and all the evidence shows that Obama WAS eligible under their rules.

    I don't know who my ancestors were 400 years ago. It would be interesting to know, but it wouldn't change who I am, and I already know that. I only feel any loyalty to one country.

    ”Re BO, you may not find it 'suspicious'...I do”

    Sure, but I probably have a better idea of what is normal for liberals, and you have a better idea of what is normal for conservatives, no?

    I guess I can't be fair to the IRA, because I grew up hearing about how they killed and maimed children just like me. There's some similarities, and some differences, and I really hope Brexit doesn't restart the violence.

    No room left for DACA...

    Sep 10th, 2017 - 11:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    Ok, it’s good enough….One other argument I’d heard, the literal interpretation of which would mean BO was ineligible to be president of the US, was that both parents had to be US citizens (born there), as well…but having checked a few sites on the definition of “natural born American citizen”, found one that suggests this narrow interpretation is no longer regarded as valid…Maybe you should ask BO’s granny why she said he was born in Kenya…but ok, with what you've presented, I'm prepared to drop it.
    As to liberal’s v. conservative‘s ‘normal’ beliefs, I agree, but let me put it this way, “seeing is believing”…
    The point I was trying to make regarding the IRA and the Islamic terrorists, is that , while obviously both were/are a bunch of murderes, the effects of the latter are felt around the world, and what caused their terrorism in the beginning, has long left being the main motive…nowadays, besides bloodthirsty revenge, it’s about world domination by the faith, either through silent revolution or, indiscriminate, extreme violence. I know that number wise, they represent an insignificant minority, but given the tactics used, that’s all they need.

    Sep 11th, 2017 - 06:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    ”both parents had to be US citizens (born there)”

    Yeah that's just not true. Jefferson was the first president to have a parent born abroad, and Trump is the latest (his mother was born in Scotland).

    I think this is the interview with BO's grandma; the relevant bit starts at 4:24 but some versions are cut off just after the 5 minute mark, I'm sure you can work out why:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CY6bPYKLjNw

    I tried to find some stats about unaccompanied minors crossing the border, there is a good report here:

    www.migrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/publications/UnaccompaniedMinors-Factsheet-FINAL.pdf

    It shows there was a dramatic increase in arrivals in 2014, then the number fell - apparently due to increased enforcement - but it has been rising again since.

    It also lists push and pull factors: violence, food insecurity and poverty in three central American countries, and many people already have friends and family members in the US - it says 1 in 5 Salvadorans already live there! There's also a huge processing backlog so people cannot be deported immediately, and that encourages others to come. Another interesting chart is the number of people claiming asylum in other central American countries. It's much less than in the US, but has risen dramatically since 2010, and certainly not due to Obama's policies. I think Obama's image as friendly to immigrants may have contributed somewhat, and Trump's as opposed to them is surely now having the opposite effect, but that's not a specific policy.

    I also read a bit about Benghazi, and apparently the main issue is that Obama and Clinton (as well as the CIA and FBI) were less than truthful about the causes and exactly what had happened in the weeks afterwards. I don't really understand why they wanted to mislead people about it, but apparently they claimed they did not yet know exactly what happened, when internal emails show they were pretty sure it was a planned terrorist attack. Seems like lying to me.

    Sep 11th, 2017 - 09:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    REF: “Divided Congress”:

    They are divided because not EVERYONE is getting the share which they expect/demand:
    http://www.chargeonline.com.br/php/charges/AUTO_nicolielo.jpg

    Sep 12th, 2017 - 11:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    What you saying about the migration flow of unaccompanied minors into southern US seems to confirm my point. The reasons for this migration are multiple, but do not justify orders (from BO) to ignore the (immigration) law (by CBP officers). The whole point in sending in the minors in ahead of the parents, was to try to “force” the US into accepting the latter when they appeared later on. The Central American child migrants, while representing a fiscal burden, are not potentially dangerous…what could be, are the several thousands of Syrians that BO (& Hillary) let in, many claim, without the proper vetting…despite this claim, I presume that the vetting process for those going to the US, will still have been far more rigorous than for the middle-east immigrants crossing the Mediterranean trying to get into Europe…some of which have been linked to the recent terrorist attacks.
    With regards to the Benghazi fiasco, which could have been far less disastrous had the pleas for help been taken seriously, the problem was, as you say, “the main issue is that Obama and Clinton (as well as the CIA and FBI) were less than truthful about the causes and exactly what had happened in the weeks afterwards”….they realized afterwards they had both pissed-out the pot, and resorted to lying to try to save their own butts. And that was that.

    Sep 13th, 2017 - 06:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Ah, but were there any orders to ignore the law and let the children in? I don't trust anything from these right-wing news stories without more evidence.

    As far as I know Obama ordered the police to prioritise illegal immigrants who had committed crimes or recently crossed the border for deportation (and he also deported more people total than Bush or Clinton), but he didn't tell the border police to let people in. AFAIK the problem is that once children have crossed the border it's illegal to simply throw them out again, especially as many are not Mexican citizens so Mexico is not obliged to take them.

    As for the Syrians, they could hardly have received less vetting than in Europe, where Germany decided to let in anyone who could make the trip, with no checks whatsoever. A very foolish decision IMO, as not only was there no vetting, but a decent percentage of the people who came were not even Syrians, or refugees at all, but people from poor countries who wanted to find work in Germany. I think Britain could have done more, but at least our program took people straight from the refugee camps, instead of making them risk their lives crossing the Mediterranean, and concentrated on families with children.

    I suppose anyone can argue over how much vetting is enough, but in the US they *were* vetting people, and I believe their terror attackers have mostly been native born.

    Sep 13th, 2017 - 09:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    It's not a matter of trusting 'right-wing' news stories, as I mentioned, I saw interviews with southern frontier CBP officers complaing they were being instructed to look the other way, besides confirmation from friends I've known for years, who work in State organizations that have access to such info. Otherwise, how do you explain the dozens of thousand of kids who crossed the southern border illegally ? And of course BO would try to ignore or justify his actions, supported and lapped up by the liberal left.

    As to deporting illegals who they discovered were criminals, this happened too late in many cases (after heinous crimes had already been committed by them), and why were they allowed in, in the first place ? What also pisses me off is that I need a visa to get into the US, the illegals don't...
    Agree totally that many crossing the Mediterranean were not true refugess , but just the poor north africans looking for an easy life....choose the country in Europe with the best social benefits and then 'go for it'...
    Again, while many terrorists 'were' home grown, they did discover that the more serious attacks had links to some who had come over in the uncontrolled immigration flow. After all, what the hell is the point in Immigration and Customs control for legal visitors, if there is little or no control for potentially dangerous migrants ? And that is only allowed to happen,
    due to pressure from the bleeding-heart liberals who think that if they 'love' the terrorists, they'll be 'loved' back....absurdly stupid IMO...

    Sep 14th, 2017 - 05:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    It's annoying having to get a visa, but if they didn't require them it would be pointless guarding the border. People would just enter legally and stay; even now more people overstay their visa each year than sneak across the border. There are 336,000 Brazilians in the US, of whom 1/5 to 1/3 are there illegally (actually that's low, there are over twice as many Brits at 679,000), but I bet more would go and work there if they could.

    And how do the kids get in so easily? The difference is adults want to cross without getting caught, and disappear into the country so they can find a job. The kids just have to get across the border and hand themselves into the authorities, where they ask for asylum. Then they are protected by international law. It is possible to deport them, but it's a slow and difficult process, as we know well in Europe.

    Could you find the interviews or any kind of reference? I suspect they were complaining about not being allowed to deport people already in the country - something Obama definitely did - or maybe they were complaining about not being able to imprison the children, something the courts ruled against. Without context it's impossible for me to know what was really going on.

    As for deporting criminals; firstly they weren't allowed in, they came illegally, and second you can't deport someone for a crime until they have committed one, and been caught, but that is the same for any criminal. AFAIK illegal immigrants don't commit more crimes than US citizens, except for ones connected to their illegal status.

    You never answered whether you think DACA would be a good idea, if properly passed by Congress? It makes sense to me, both from a humanitarian point of view, and a practical one, to allow children who have grown up in America and been educated there (at taxpayer expense) to stay and work legally.

    And *no one* thinks if they love terrorists they will be loved back. Germany wanted to help the refugees who were fleeing from them.

    Sep 14th, 2017 - 10:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    That’s my point…immigration’s ok, done the proper way. . “And how do the kids get in so easily?”….Didn’t mean the difference btwn kids & adults, but why the rules were ignored when it came to the kids…that’s why they tried it. If turned away, like adults, would reduce the hordes trying to get in that way. The videos were contained in news bulletins, which I read & deleted ; The CBP complaints were abt not being allowed to turn people away, at the border…not people already in the country, which is no longer their responsibility. Many illegals who were criminals WERE deported – some made their way back, and committed more crimes – others weren’t deported at all, so when it was discovered who they were, that’s when the shit hit the fan…it’s not a matter of who commits more crimes, but the fact that someone who shouldn’t even be there, IS …If deported, some US women might not have been assassinated…simple as that. Didn’t reply about DACA ? thought I had…: the kids under DACA, came in illegally….based on that alone, and which they (the illegals) didn’t ignore, should never have lead to amnesty...it’s like a reward for breaking the law…but ok, we cannot ignore that the situation exists….their being in the US, for a number of years now, some productive, others perhaps not, suggests that a complete vetting system be put in place to decide who “deserves to stay and who doesn’t”….two wrongs - allowing illegals in, then giving them temporary amnesty - do not make a right, so the vetting could be the best solution, for the ‘now-adults” and the US. Have heard nutcases arguing that not allowing Muslims in, or turning away some - who could become potential terrorists - is the cause of their hate for the west and its culture…thus the argument that if they are let in, then they will not attack us….never heard bigger BS….not to mention some placards held by NYC protesters which read “Love Muslims, let them in”...Crazy.
    PS: will be away 20 sept to 27 Oct.

    Sep 15th, 2017 - 08:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!