MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, May 27th 2019 - 01:47 UTC

Corruption investigation: Court allows investigation of Bolsonaro son's banking records

Tuesday, May 14th 2019 - 09:58 UTC
Full article 26 comments

A Brazilian court will allow investigators to examine the banking records of President Jair Bolsonaro's senator son and his former driver in a money-laundering investigation. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • :o))

    Why are they troubling an innocent gentleman?

    May 14th, 2019 - 10:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Why are they troubling an innocent citrus fruit? :o))

    May 14th, 2019 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • :o))

    @DemonTree

    :o))))

    As if Brazil doesn't have enough unmanagable problems:
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-14/billions-of-dollars-on-the-line-with-brazil-bills-set-to-expire?utm_medium=social&cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic

    May 14th, 2019 - 12:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    About time too.....one more reason why the COAF has to remain under Moro....after Flavio's and Queiroz's delayed, superficial explanations didn't satisfy the prosecuotors, they should have come forward with evidence (if there is any) which would have allowed them to clear their names (or not) ....the fact they didn't bother, is a clear indication there's a lot of hidden sh*it to be uncovered...

    May 14th, 2019 - 04:20 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • :o))

    @Jack Bauer

    REF: One more reason why the COAF has to remain under Moro.

    True!

    The ONLY problem is that out of them all; he is the Most Obedient Servant, eager to say “Yes Sir”! That's why/how I hear that the Nº 2 Cash-Box was liberalized and most generously too! So maybe the same rule can be applied to his decisions for/against ”The Family & their Illustrious Associates [inclusive of Queiroz of course]
    https://uploads.metropoles.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/18221808/pente-fino-queiroz.jpg

    May 15th, 2019 - 10:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • imoyaro

    Well it is certainly getting more entertaining...

    https://riotimesonline.com/brazil-news/rio-politics/society/nineteen-properties-calls-of-organized-crime-and-irregular-profits/

    May 17th, 2019 - 05:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    REF: “Court allows investigation”:

    They being hand-in-glove with the corrupt; the verdict for sure is going to be “not guilty AT ALL”!

    May 17th, 2019 - 09:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @JB
    RE “Bolsonaro denies he's a racist...”

    “I'm saying I don't think it would've made things any worse”

    You were speculating whether Brazil would be in less of a mess if the army had decided to kill thousands of mostly innocent people. I think it would have made little difference, to the economy or anything else - except to all the dead people, grieving parents, and orphans.

    “Since you mentioned it, yes, “less populism” might have been a consequence... it reflects the level of mental subdevelopment in Argentina, and LatAm in general.”

    All this says is, it's the voters who are ultimately responsible for populism. Every country has plenty of politicians who could adopt it as a strategy; whether they get any power depends on the people. And killing people isn't going to improve the level of mental development in Brazil.

    “I can think of at least half-a-dozen Petistas whose premature deaths would've benefited Brazil...my opinion, period.”

    I daresay Bispo thought Bolsonaro's premature death would benefit Brazil. Doesn't give him the right to commit murder, does it?

    “You believe I'm just making “excuses” for B”

    I think you know B a lot better than any congress members in a different country. For him you know the context, have an idea what motivates him... for them you have what you read about, which is not always accurate, and you don't get the full picture. Plus you agree with a lot of B's views, so you want to defend him. I doubt you'd bother defending any US Democrats, even if someone said something you knew to be untrue about them.

    “If we show the Muslims we love them, they will love us back”

    I've never heard a liberal say that. It's the other way around: if you hate someone, they will surely hate you back. If you hurt them, they will hurt you back. “If you wrong us, shall we not revenge?” I don't know what those two really think, but they're not trying to spread hate against any group I'm a part of. Meanwhile I'm pretty sure B does hate liberals like me.

    May 19th, 2019 - 02:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    @DT / @JB

    REF: “If you hate someone, they will surely hate you back. If you hurt them, they will hurt you back.”

    Have you noticed that hate is more easily/readily aroused than the sentiments/feelings of love/sympathy?

    Could there be a logical explanation? DNA???

    May 19th, 2019 - 11:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    It's probably just self interest. If someone wants to harm you, you don't have the option to ignore it, you have to defend yourself. Whereas if someone treats you well, it might benefit you more to take advantage, rather than be nice back.

    May 19th, 2019 - 05:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    DT
    Ok, now that speculation on BZL being better off/worse had the military killed 1000s has been put to rest, I don’t think it would’ve needed anywhere near 1000s….a few dozen would’ve done the trick…and BZL, in the long run, would’ve benefited. imo.
    But tks for the “think it would have made little difference, to the economy or anything else”…that was my point.

    “All this says is, it's the voters who are ultimately responsible for populism”…Yes. The larger group gets their candidates elected…in BZL’s case, such group is “usually” made up of the poor, or the majority. As a group, they aren’t capable of seeing thru populist promises, that won’t be kept. The more ignorant the people, the easier for the politicians to take advantage of them.
    The bigger the number of educated voters, the less unscrupulous politicians.

    “I daresay Bispo thought Bolsonaro's premature death would benefit Brazil. Doesn't give him the right to commit murder, does it?”
    Of course not…but the social/political situation in 2018 was nothing like the 60s/70s. Keep the events in the context of their realities.

    “I think you know B a lot better than any congress members in a different country”
    Without a doubt. But if I remember correctly, I did not start to “compare” them, in order to justify B, or to condemn Ilhan/Tlaib…Afaik, I said I did not like them becos of their comments.
    As to perpetuating a lie that I knew to be a lie about a Dem, I probably would defend them, to be fair...for ex., I liked Bill Clinton, despite being a randy bastard.

    About loving Muslims ‘n expecting their forgiveness for being an ‘infidel’, years ago, after 9-11, heard similar thoughts being expressed by liberals (being interviewed on Fox News), in the attempt to justify the attacks, as if they were “only” retaliation to previous events.
    Respecting 'n being nice to your neighbor is a good idea, but what about when he hates you?
    Your “other way around” is also true, but what came first, the chicken or the egg ?

    May 19th, 2019 - 09:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    If killing people would've made no difference, then what do you mean by saying Brazil would have benefited?? The two things contradict each other.

    And even if there was some benefit, you're literally talking about murdering innocent people. That's the kind of thing the bad guys do, in case you've forgotten.

    “The more ignorant the people, the easier for the politicians to take advantage of them.”

    Although ignorance contributes, I don't reckon it's the main reason for populism. Rather I think it's due to politicians who are out of touch with the voters, who they don't have much in common with, and they feel don't understand or care about their problems. Add that to economic or other problems, and institutions that don't seem to belong to, or work for the majority, and you get populism.

    “the social/political situation in 2018 was nothing like the 60s/70s”

    Bolsonaro didn't make his comments in the 60s, though. The social and political situation 20 years ago was more similar to today.

    “I did not start to “compare” them”

    My point is, your knowledge of the congresswomen is more like mine of B. So if you think my view is biased, probably yours is too. If you knew them better you could make excuses for them also: 'taken out of context', 'just letting off steam'. But you don't want to excuse them because you don't like their views.

    I don't see what loving people has to do with retaliation. Retaliation has to be in response to an earlier attack, or some other harm done. Do you remember what previous events it was supposed to be retaliation for?

    “Respecting 'n being nice to your neighbor is a good idea, but what about when he hates you?”

    Try and keep things polite and avoid provoking him deliberately, and defend yourself if that doesn't work. You can't make anyone like you, and some people are just irrational.

    May 19th, 2019 - 11:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    @DemonTree

    REF: “Respecting 'n being nice to your neighbor is a good idea, but what about when he hates you?”

    Hate is unhealthy! Continue to respect+like the neighbors. It'll drive them crazy!

    In the meanwhile:
    https://twitter.com/valorinveste/status/1130435908875030528
    SHOULD THE EXPORTERS BE HAPPY?

    Posted 6 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    DT
    “If killing...would've made no difference…”. You completely misunderstood my point. 1) while you implied tt 1000s of killings would've affected the economy negatively (i.e., ARG?), I don’t think there’s any connection. 2) by saying Brazil would’ve benefited - if a few dozen had been gotten rid of – I’m referring to the political scenario...without Lula, Dirceu, Genoíno, Dilma, Franklin Martins, 'n other radical followers in later years (MST leaders), Brazil would’ve been better. Imo.
    You may consider those I named (‘n many I didn’t), innocent…I don’t. You don’t really know who they were, what their participation was in the armed resistance (70s), ‘n their negative political influence later on (ex.,Foro de SP).
    “That’s the kind of thing bad guys do…” Well, if you consider the indirect deaths of 100s of thousands - who died due to violence in the streets, to drugs 'n horrific health services - just unavoidable occurrences, then you think they’re all good guys.
    “Although ignorance contributes…” I think it IS the main reason – here, it’s not a matter of politicians being out of touch with voters - the former know the latter just too well - It's the voters who don’t understand what is at stake.
    Many politicians who have risen fm lower classes, promising to fight for their neighbors, in no time join the traditional political scum. Then again, I’m not trying to convince you one way or the other, “this” or “that” is better, or worse, just stating the obvious why things don’t work here.
    Maybe not in the UK, but populism is part of the local political culture.
    Maybe you are right, but I’ve followed US politics for years (had to, due to my work), ‘n would think I have a pretty good grasp of the (traditional) political forces…and that Ilhan/Tlaib, don’t fit any.
    “Retaliation...in response to an earlier attack”. Exactly, but tt does not prevent some liberals thinking they can overcome hostility by being “nice”.
    Well, is blowing yrself up, to kill innocents, rational ?

    Posted 6 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    When you asked whether Brazil would be in the mess it is if the army had killed more people, I assumed you meant the economy. But if not that, then what specifically do you think would be better?

    “You may consider those I named innocent…I don’t.”

    If you murder someone, you don't get to claim it was okay because they cheated on their taxes, or stole your car radio. None of them committed a crime worthy of the death penalty, supposing Brazil had it. And even if we grant that the country might have been better off with other people in charge, you don't know who would have been ruling instead. They might be better, they might be worse, it's a shot in the dark. Furthermore, when you say it's just a few dozen, you're speaking with hindsight. Could you even have named Dilma back in the 60s? How could anyone possibly have predicted that of all the revolutionaries, she would become president one day?

    “if you consider the indirect deaths of 100s of thousands... just unavoidable occurrences”

    I don't, but politics is an even less exact science than economics. Dealing with drugs is hard, dealing with crime is hard, dealing with poverty is hard. Dealing with corruption is hard, though I think they could have done a lot better there. But as I said, there is no guarantee someone else would have done better.

    Most politicians are from the richer part of society, and when they are interested in anything more than lining their own pockets, it's helping people like them. The high inequality in Brazil makes this worse and IMO encourages populism.

    ”would think I have a pretty good grasp of the (traditional) political forces” (in the US)

    Maybe, but things are changing there. More polarisation and less impartial media, and that makes it hard to get a true picture. Besides that, it's much easier to understand someone's motives when they agree with you, and assume the worst of anyone who doesn't. It's the difference between seeing actions from the inside, and from the outside.

    Posted 6 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    THE FINAL SOLUTION:

    REF: “Dealing with drugs is hard, dealing with crime is hard, dealing with poverty is hard. Dealing with corruption is hard”:

    IF NO ONE CAN'T FIGHT THEM; JOIN THEM!

    Posted 5 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    DT
    “…if the army had killed more...I assumed you meant the economy. But if not that, then what…”
    My theory is tt the PT radicals were (‘n still are) responsible for promoting hate between the “haves”/ “have nots” or, class warfare…never b4 were the poor instigated to believe that everyone who was better-off (perhaps excluding part of the business owners 'n of the ‘elite”, who are greedy) are their enemies; don’t bother being fair, put them all - even those who work hard ‘n deserve their success - in the same basket. This was a big part of PT strategy to gain power, as was to convince the people through lies that they were honest ‘n that they were the solution to all evils.
    And, ok, in an indirect way, with less social unrest, less populism, perhaps the economy would have done better. One thing influences the other, but is not necessarily a direct cause.

    Those I named (excluding Lula) were ‘freedom-fighters, who also killed, not idiots who just cheated on their taxes. You’re right, I don’t know who’d have been ruling instead, but it wouldn’t have been the left-wing radicals. I know there are no guarantees, but I’d have been willing to take my chances.

    It’s funny how people disassociate corruption from the 1000s of deaths due to the lack of basic services (hospitals, public sanitation etc). If there were any doubt about the causes, it would be debatable, but the cause/effect is just too clear.

    In the last few years, many politicians – with popular appeal because they ARE from the lower classes – have been elected, but I agree the power (in Congress) is still in the hands of the political oligarchies.
    I still think populist politicians only survive because the ‘people’ can’t see through them.

    Agree, US politics is becoming more polarized, as in many countries…it’s become us against them, and the people come in a sorry 3rd place. People may not agree with you, but if they're honest 'n put their cards on the table, it'd be easier to find common ground.

    Posted 5 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    @JB

    REF: ”It’s funny how people disassociate corruption from the 1000s of deaths due to the lack of basic services (hospitals, public sanitation, etc). If there were any doubt about the causes, it would be debatable, but the cause/effect is just too clear”:

    100% TRUE!

    And what about the thousands of UNFINISHED + now ROTTING Projects in which billions out of the Public Funds were simply WASTED [besides, obviously stolen]? AND why are the culprits+crooks (anonymous?) NEVER held as RESPONSIBLE (& brought to justice)?

    In short, how far+deep has the corruption reached and who has the courage to eradicate/minimize it?

    Posted 4 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @:o))
    “And what about the thousands of UNFINISHED + now ROTTING Projects in which billions out of the Public Funds were simply WASTED [besides, obviously stolen]?”

    Exactly.....presume you refer to the PAC I (2007) and PAC II (2010) which consumed hundreds of billions and as you say, having nothing to show for except 'unfinished + rotting projects', not to mention many projects (planned and paid for) which never got off the ground (.ie., no further than the 'plans', which we know just to well, what they were).

    Congress' main interest at the moment is to save their own butts....screw the country...and the people.

    Posted 4 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    @Jack Bauer

    REF: ”Exactly..........................................what they were)”

    The cases are so innumerable; any statistician would lose count! Besides the inefficiency; thanx to:
    http://www.chargeonline.com.br/php/charges/AUTO_sinovaldo.jpg

    Posted 4 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @JB
    “promoting hate between the “haves”/ “have nots” or, class warfare”

    That makes a little more sense; it's a bad thing but I doubt it would make a huge difference, and certainly doesn't justify killing 30,000 people, or even 400. You say the PT members were freedom fighters who killed, but do you mean they killed people personally, or just belonged to groups who did? When I read up on Dilma, there was no evidence she ever killed anyone.

    But point is you wouldn't have known who to kill back then (probably for the best, or you'd be messaging me from your jail cell), and you can't get rid of all the left-wing radicals. Even Chile had a left-wing president twice, and Peron encouraged class warfare despite formerly being in the military himself.

    ”I agree the power (in Congress) is still in the hands of the political oligarchies.”

    I think that encourages populism, along with the poverty and inequality. Don't know why people can't see through them. Wishful thinking, perhaps?

    Posted 4 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    @DemonTree

    REF: “Don't know why people can't see through them”:

    When ALL are ignorant; THAT's a pity OR a bliss! The masses are not only blind but deaf+dumb too! The only thing worse than being blind is having sight & No Vision! So the expected result is anybody's guess:
    https://www.jornaldopovo.com.br/site/thumb.php?src=arquivos/charge/4479.jpg&x=420&y=3000&f=0

    Posted 3 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    DT
    “…but I doubt it would make a huge difference…”. You may doubt it, but seeing the “have nots” generally speaking, being encouraged to, and agglutinating around the idea that the “haves” were responsible for all of their misfortunes, it was a big factor in the PT victory…so yes, imo it made a big difference.
    So, once again, I’m not agreeing with B when he mentioned 30,000, but I do think that the survival of some of the left-wing radicals and their leaders, was prejudicial to Brazil, both socially 'n economically (in later years).

    The freedom fighters usually acted in small groups (cells), th4 was difficult to pinpoint who “pulled the trigger”...which is unimportant because they were all accomplices.

    “Little evidence Dilma killed anyone”…irrelevant, she was part of and backed those who did.
    And if she had, would she admit it ?

    Back then, some members of the ‘resistance’ were caught during attacks or armed confrontations, or caught in raids (based on intelligence reports), th4 the military knew damned well who they were after. No innocent bystanders were caught in the net.

    “you can't get rid of all the left-wing radicals”…I’m not advocating that for present times…but afaic, it would’ve been better if those who fought against, 'n survived the military regime, hadn’t. Being a social-democrat is ok, but subscribing to a group like the ”Foro de SP“, isn't.
    Peron, and his wife Evita were masters at instigating class warfare, but pls note I’m talking abt Brazil.

    ”Don't know why people can't see through them”….I would’ve thought that was obvious ...perhaps because people are largely ignorant and badly informed ? the oligarchies in the NE (one of the last PT strongholds) perpetuate themselves in power because they’ve always made a point of keeping the people ignorant, ‘n backward (dependent on the State), and will support any party that fights for/ legislates in favor of, the continuation of the ‘old’ political system that B is trying to combat.

    Posted 3 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    REF: Corruption Investigation [similar to the Old One]:

    No wonder, the sale of deodorants keeps increasing! Day-after-day, the stink gets intolerably over-powering!

    Posted 3 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    So you do think it would affect the economy. I disagree for the reason I've already stated, that the Argentine junta did their best to kill all the leftist leaders, and still have all the same problems. But regardless, it's immoral to kill people just for disagreeing with you about how to run the country.

    And it's not irrelevant who did what, unless you think the whole army is guilty because some of them murdered people. How many were killed by the communists?

    “And if [Dilma] had, would she admit it ?”

    They tortured her, so probably, yes. The fact they only sent her to jail for a few years suggests the army didn't believe she was a murderer.

    “No innocent bystanders were caught in the net.”

    How would you know? Can you name all the people they killed and tortured and why? How about the people who fled the country? They obviously felt they were in danger, no one does that on a whim.

    “Being a social-democrat is ok, but subscribing to a group like the ”Foro de SP“, isn't.”

    Being right-wing is okay, but the alt-right and the ideas Bolsonaro praises aren't.

    “perhaps because people are largely ignorant and badly informed ?”

    Doesn't explain why populism has suddenly grown in the US and Europe. Why would people be more ignorant and badly informed now? Unless it's due to the fake news?

    Posted 3 days ago - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    REF: Bolsonaro son's banking records

    http://www.chargeonline.com.br/php/DODIA//clayton.jpg

    Posted 3 days ago - 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!