MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Bolsonaro: EU/Mercosur agreement will take at least three years to come into force
Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro said on Sunday that it could take up to three years for the free-trade deal agreed by the European Union and Mercosur to come into force, as it depends on approvals by lawmakers of all countries involved. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesLet us hope that the UK uses its vote at the EU wisely, know what I mean?
Jul 01st, 2019 - 08:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0The PT and the rest of the Brazilian commies in Congress will vote against it......which will be no surprise as that is what they always do, when a good project is presented and they cannot claim authorship.
Jul 01st, 2019 - 03:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Golfcronie, the UK won't have a vote. Pity, we might've got some concession from Argentina on the Falklands.
Jul 01st, 2019 - 04:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0DT
Jul 01st, 2019 - 07:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(Cont “Bolsonaro sacks moderate...”
Apologize, you’re right, was (March) 2016. When you said “No, before the latest election..” I presumed it was ‘immediately b4’ the election…which occurred more than 30 months later. Besides being the only leak deemed illegal, it was 15 months before Lula’s 1st conviction ; still don’t see how it embarrassed him.
“but his actions before then indicated he already thought Lula was guilty. Eg the wiretaps mentioned above”
Disagree – what “actions before then”, other than that ONE leak, which had absolutely no bearing on the trial.
You :“One of them said the case looked solid before seeing the evidence”…Me : “Ah yeah ? who ?”....“...before seeing the evidence” ? Don't think so.... Lula was convicted in July 2017, and in August, when Lula’s lawyers started making absurd claims, the President of the TRF-4 Carlos Thompson Flores said the case was solid, technically irreprehensible…Obviously familiar with ALL the evidence.
Lula tried to kick out Larry Rohter for saying he was a drunk…I doubt B would try to deport GG, but this case if different : publishing accusations , which are neither serious (from the point of view of what was allegedly said) nor can be proved, as until the source is identified ‘n (if) the conversations can be authenticated, they are just irresponsible…I doubt this’ll go anywhere, but it’s serves the PT’s plans to throw shit in the fan. But GG might become subject to prosecution.
Once ‘n for all : Dilma broke the Law…the Budget Law (‘LDO’ in the Constitution) – an impeachable offense - by forcing 2 federal banks make large, illegal loans to cover deficits, and then proceeded to try to cover it up…If after accused of breaking the Law (which she did) it became political (in Congress), that’s another story.
What Temer did was ncry ‘n very welcome, ‘n has nothing to do with her impeachment. And what ‘great’ policies were they ‘elected on’, that Temer disregarded ? It was all legal, ‘n definitely moral.
@Jack Bauer
Jul 01st, 2019 - 11:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0REF: “The PT and the rest of the Brazilian.......................... they cannot claim authorship”:
As expected!
REF: “will take at least three years”:
If today's expectations are THREE years, imaging the growth in the number of years AFTER the three years are over.
Luckily, UBER is here:
https://www.otempo.com.br/image/contentid/policy:1.2202997:1561985660/Charge%20Duke%2001.07.JPG?f=3x2&q=0.6&w=620&$p$f$q$w=0d84f9e
@JB
Jul 02nd, 2019 - 06:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yeah, it was a good while before. Did Lula first say he was thinking of standing again before or after Dilma's impeachment?
We looked at the wiretaps already; for the call with Dilma there was a public interest in releasing it, but the others were mostly irrelevant and would only prejudice an ongoing investigation.
“what “actions before then””
Calling Lula in for 'coercive questioning' on some pretext is another incident I recall. Trying to make it look like he wasn't cooperating with the investigation/had something to hide.
Re the TRF-4, what do they actually do? Can they look at the evidence and go “we don't find this convincing, he shouldn't have been convicted”? Or do they just check the law has been followed wrt gathering the evidence, running the trial, ensuring the accused's rights etc?
”publishing accusations , which are neither serious (from the point of view of what was allegedly said) nor can be proved”
If there's nothing unethical or illegal in the transcripts, then what's the problem with publishing them? Perhaps you think they embarrass Moro? What's sauce for the goose...
If they're not true, then Moro can sue GG for libel.
If Dilma broke the law, why wasn't she prosecuted for it after her impeachment? And whatever she actually did, the whole thing was clearly political. First Cunha protected her, then he supported impeachment, all based on political considerations (and unlike Dilma, he *was* prosecuted afterwards and is in jail for corruption). And the Congress who voted to impeach Dilma refused to remove Temer's immunity, let alone impeach him, when he was charged with serious crimes. It's clear a desire for justice was not their motive.
As for what policies they were elected on, let me put it this way: you'd have voted for Temer's program, but you sure as hell didn't vote for Dilma's, did you? So you know they were very different, and the people who voted for Dilma and got Temer instead have a reason to feel betrayed.
REF: agreement will take at least three years to come into force
Jul 02nd, 2019 - 10:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Are you absolutely SURE? Please ASK Emmanuel Macron:
https://www.france24.com/en/20190702-france-casts-doubt-giant-mercosur-trade-deal?ref=tw
DT
Jul 03rd, 2019 - 05:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0To refresh yr memory ; 2006 Lula’s down payment on a flat in future ‘Solaris’. Feb 19, 2010 Lula, in interview to “Estadão”, declares will not run for president again (2014), as Dilma not indicated to fill in for just one term, ‘n would be unfair to treat her as a “vaquinha de presépio” (a ‘manger’ cow, term meaning ‘yes’ man), so he could run again. Dilma elected Oct 2010. March 2014 Lavajato starts, investigating PB corruption. Dilma re-elected Oct 2014. Lula still adamant - won’t run again.
Nov 2014, 1st rumors - press - connecting Lula to the ‘triplex/OAS’. 2015 : various PB execs made plea-bargains, confessed bribes, returned US$ millions. Feb 2015, PT treasurer (Vaccari) arrested. Aug 2015, J.Dirceu arrested. More plea-bargains by construction co execs…OAS president confesses bribes ‘n admits triplex a gift for Lula.
Nov 2015, PT senator squeals on Lula. Things get hot. Nov 2015, triplex ready, but Lula’s wife announces they’ll no longer be “buying” it. Investigations show Lula & wife definitely associated with triplex/ PB corruption /favoring OAS. Dec 2015, Dilma’s impeachment process starts. Beginning 2016, Lula’s name popping up. March 2016, Dilma, fears Lula’s arrest, tries to appoint him as her Cab Min. Moro releases conversation re “Bessias & the doc” to prevent it - but no connection to LJ, only Lula trying to obtain immunity.
As Dilma’s impeachment gets closer, Lula crapping his pants. Asa she’s impeached (Aug 2016), PT starts pushing for ‘new’ election, ignoring Constitution / Temer as VP must take over. Lula declares he could run again. Clear ?
“If nothing unethical/ illegal in transcripts, what's the problem publishing them?” Seriously ? false accusations to weaken Moro ‘n Govt, combat the Lavajato, screw the pension reform ?...of course, just a joke. Very likely GG will be sued.
Dilma’s crimes were impeachable offenses, not subject to later prosecution. But not losing her rights for 8 yrs, WAS political. VP’s have no program...no betrayal
Re timeline, I had a feeling we'd talked before about when Lula decided to run again. See here:
Jul 03rd, 2019 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0https://en.mercopress.com/2018/11/12/cristina-fernandez-jose-mujica-and-dilma-rousseff-in-a-critical-thinking-forum/comments#comment494836
I'd forgotten the coincidence of timing between Lula announcing he would run again and Moro arresting and charging him a few days later...
Here's an article about the 'coercive questioning', which also mentions a leak of secret bank data to the media:
www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/04/brazil-police-raid-home-former-president-lula-petrobas
Another leak:
en.mercopress.com/2016/05/30/lula-regrets-having-elected-dilma-as-his-successor-according-to-taped-conversation
Nothing about crime in there, why was it leaked?
The impression at the time was that Moro/the prosecutor was trying to manipulate press coverage to convince the public Lula was guilty. Which is very much confirmed by the leaked conversations. That's what makes them so plausible.
Do you agree it's right to publish the transcripts if they are true?
Re Dilma, what is impeachable in Brazil? In the US it's 'high crimes and misdemeanors', which apparently include getting a blowjob in the Oval Office...
“VP’s have no program”
Which is why he should have stuck to Dilma's. Imagine if Aécio Neves had made a bargain with a left-wing party in 2014, including making their leader VP, and won the election. Then two years later that party had colluded with the PT to impeach him over some budget irregularity, and the new President started spending with abandon, nationalising businesses right and left, and reformed the constitution to give unions more power. Totally fair, you'd have no problem with that?
REF: “agreement will take at least 3 years to come into force”:
Jul 03rd, 2019 - 09:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0ASK IPIRANGA:
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1146511785035538432
DT
Jul 04th, 2019 - 06:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Lula declared he could run again”, after Dilma’s impeachment (08/16). Get one thing clear : despite Lula’s official intention of not running again – until then – PT ‘n his followers always wanted him to, so don’t confuse their wishes with his official intention.
The 1st link (MP, 2018/11/12), refers to an article of April 2015, ‘n says “Lula wants to run for office again in 3 years, OR SO THE STORY GOES”….so, only speculation, probably from within PT…’n don’t forget, Dilma’s popularity was in the toilet, ‘n even the PT wanted to get rid of her…believing they could wangle a new election, 'n get Lula in.
“I'd forgotten the coincidence of timing btwn…” No coincidence. The PT senator squealed on Lula end 2015. Lula taken in for questioning March 2016 (Moro’s court order was clear “take him in forcibly ONLY IF he refuses to attend the summons to accompany police…Lula had already said he would not go if summoned, ‘n his defense alleged he was not summoned…this did not hold up, even in TRF-4, or STJ.
Moro charged him formally in the triplex case 29 July 2016. Lula declares he could run, one month later. So, the other way around.
As far as the Guardians article is concerned, all the “raids” (LOL) were executed based on warrants, so no abuse, not illegal.
Re MP article 2016/05/30, the taped conversation btwn Sarney ‘n Machado revealed tt Lula regretted having indicated Dilma (not his 1st choice), but so what ? He had already said as much publicly, that Dilma’s administration was a disaster. The leak had nothing to do with Lula’s guilt, but Dilma’s incompetence.
“if they are true ?” well, if we were to agree that hacking private messages is ok, and IF they weren’t adulterated - everything points to that they are – ‘n if they actually proved crimes were committed, yes.
Impeachable ? breaking the Constitution. Dilma’s program was a disaster…to stick to it, stupid. Re Aécio, IF he broke the Constitution (budget law), for 2 yrs running etc, totally OK to impeach.
JB
Jul 04th, 2019 - 08:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That Guardian link in my original comment is to an article dated end of Feb 2016, where Lula says he'll run again 'if necessary'. Moro questioned him beginning of March, and according to you didn't charge him until July.
My theory is that a or the main reason for him changing his mind was Dilma's unpopularity, and believing only Lula could win the next election for the PT (and indeed, Haddad lost it). I doubt wanting immunity was a factor at that stage, as he probably still thought he could get out of the accusations. Later it would be more of a big deal.
As for Moro, IMO he thought Lula guilty from near the beginning of the investigation, and looked at (and for) evidence with that in mind. When Lula declared he was thinking of standing again, Moro and Dallagnol hurried up the timetable, attempting to convict him of some case in time to prevent him running for President. And many of their actions were aimed at hurting Lula's reputation and the PT's popularity, rather than finding out the truth and ensuring justice was done.
As for motives, I think Moro wanted to keep the PT out of power, and doesn't see anything wrong because he's really convinced of Lula's guilt (exactly why he shouldn't have judged him). I don't think he conspired with B before the election - if anything he probably thought he was helping the PSDB - but his actions helped get B elected and also worked to increase Moro's own fame and reputation, and as a result he was rewarded with the ministry. Now he's tipped for the STF, which is pretty good going for a previously ordinary 1st instance judge.
Do you have anything showing Lula refused to be summoned for questioning? None of the articles I saw mentioned that.
I bet if my scenario with Aécio had happened, you'd be pretty pissed off that the l-wing parties took over after losing the election. They could have tried to impeach Temer, too, but I don't think you were in favour of that. You were hoping he'd be able to carry out more reforms.
“The Intercept has now partnered with two other Brazilian news outlets — Folha de São Paulo and Veja — that are helping to dig into the material. Folha reporter Ricardo Balthazar said he was able to verify the messages by identifying his own Telegram exchange with a Moro assistant in the database.”
Jul 05th, 2019 - 01:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0https://globalvoices.org/2019/07/03/interview-with-the-intercepts-leandro-demori-whose-team-of-reporters-challenged-brazils-anti-corruption-probe/
@DT
Jul 05th, 2019 - 02:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0REF: “I think Moro wanted to keep the PT out of power”:
Moro is just GREAT in obeying orders! All PT has to do is to share their loot with Moro so that Moro can dance to the tune ordered by His Master's Voice [whoever The Master is]!
DT
Jul 05th, 2019 - 04:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Guardian article dtd 02/2016, Lula says he'll run again 'if necry' ” After the ‘raids’, 'or so the story goes' “he indicated he may stand again” - during the stress of the moment, Dilma’s impeachmt process, ‘n still not an official announcemt.
Fact tt Moro summoned him for questioning 2 weeks later is irrelevant...perhaps u believe tt the LJ ‘decided’ to question him only because he’d mentioned ‘might stand again’ ? If so, then you’re prepared to ignore the fact the investigation was in its 18th month, reason why the time for searching his properties 'n questioning him had arrived…charged 4 months later (07/2016).
Some time ago, can’t remember when, you implied suspicion when asking me why some politician had taken a 180° turn’…why Lula did, is obvious…feeling trapped, starting to see running again as a way to beat Justice. Sure he knew Dilma was unpopular, but only during her impeachmt did he realize it could be successful. That’s when the idea started to take shape.
Until shortly before the election, Haddad was front-runner, as many still thought Lula would be allowed to step in, take his place. At that stage (Sept 2018), immunity was a still a consideration, altho under different circumstances to March 2016.
By Sept 2018 there was no chance he’d get out of the accusations, he’d alrdy been convicted by the TRF-4, Jan 2018…But, if elected, he could suspend jail time, postpone further accusations, perhaps even get the STF to overturn lower court decisions ; when Dilma’s impeachmt was announced, Lewandowski, disrespecting the Constitution, allowed her to retain her political rights.
Yr opinion on Moro’s intentions, speeding up the process, is based on wishful thinking, no more. Only motive was to put a criminal in prison. Show me ONE instance where he ignored the Law. When he convicted Lula (07/17), the election, the post of Minister weren’t even speculation.
You’d lose the bet, afaic, Aécio’s place is in prison. We've discussed Temer B4, no use rptng it.
Doesn't matter whether it was official or not, it's whether Moro thought there was a decent chance Lula would stand again. Don't get me wrong, they'd have continued to investigate him anyway, but like I said, it put them on a deadline since they wanted to make sure he didn't become President again. Dilma's impeachment started in Dec 2015, so Lula knew the writing was on the wall by then. And I did agree that gaining immunity probably became a motive later.
Jul 05th, 2019 - 06:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Show me ONE instance where he ignored the Law.”
Releasing those wiretaps of Lula and Dilma. The STF said he broke the law there. As for being Minister, no it wasn't mentioned, but there was speculation about whether Moro would go into politics, even stand for President himself. He said he wouldn't get involved in politics then, was only interested in justice. Didn't take long for him to change his mind.
AS for Aécio, I wasn't suggesting you'd object to him going to prison, but to some lefty taking over after being elected VP. You know, like Jango did. And he didn't even do anything to help engineer it, Jânio resigned off his own bat.
Brazil’s justice minister Sérgio Moro is facing renewed pressure to resign after the country’s leading conservative magazine waded into a snowballing scandal over his role in a mammoth anti-corruption investigation..
Jul 05th, 2019 - 09:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But efforts to disqualify the revelations were undermined on Friday when Brazil’s most influential conservative magazine, Veja, published a front-page report featuring damaging new disclosures about Bolsonaro’s most famous minister.
Veja – long a cheerleader for Moro’s anti-corruption crusade – said its journalists had spent a fortnight poring over nearly 650,000 leaked messages between officials involved in the investigation, and concluded the former judge was guilty of serious “irregularities”.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/05/brazil-sergio-moro-jair-bolsonaro-justice-minister
Will real criminal reveal himself.
@Terence Hill
Jul 06th, 2019 - 12:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0REF: “Sérgio Moro is facing renewed pressure to resign”
But seriously - VERY seriously - WILL HE RESIGN?
Pot calling kettle BLACK?
https://aosfatos.org/noticias/nao-e-glauber-braga-homem-gravado-escondendo-dinheiro-na-cueca/
DT
Jul 06th, 2019 - 10:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If Lula only said he WOULD run again when Dilma was abt to be impeached, it implies, with high-probability, tt until then, Lula was confident he was home free...'n whatever Moro thought - as long as he stuck to the evidence to convict Lula - is totally irrelevant. No one can know, or be able to reasonably argue that Lula’s intention was to run again, before he actually declared it. Many times politicians air ideas even if they themselves don’t really believe in them, so the fact he mentioned he ‘might stand again’, during a moment of extreme stress, doesn't mean much.
Suppose you believe that Moro condemned only the left – those he hated, according to you - and acquitted all the rest or, those who although corrupt, had the same political views as he did. I’ve already mentioned names of other politicians (non-Petistas) that Moro sentenced, 'n some he acquitted, on both sides of the political divide, so to accuse him of being partial is childish.
Lula was involved in so much corruption, some still under investigation, plenty to still investigate (such as the BNDES black-box, involving 100s of billions), that it’s no one’s fault except his own if he’s still being investigated. You insist on the ‘deadline’ theory, despite the fact I showed you that Lula only declared himself a candidate after he was charged…it’s really funny to see the extremes you’ll go to, ignoring evidence, in order to claim Lula was convicted unfairly. He can’t be only ‘more-or-less’ guilty, that doesn’t exist.
Re the ONE conversation/wiretap – which is growing whiskers – that “Moro” deliberately leaked, I’ve told you it had absolutely no bearing on his case/conviction.
In 07/2016 (Lula charged), ‘n in 01/2018 (Lula convicted) Moro had no idea he’d be invited to be Minister, as 'til then he’d only had a 15 second casual encounter with B at Brasilia airport, March 2017. If B admired Moro, why not sound him out during the campaign (Oct 2018)? Let’s stick to facts, not speculate - forget Aécio.
“Brazil’s anti-corruption drive has been exposed as corrupt itself – and it could bring down Jair Bolsonaro
Jul 06th, 2019 - 10:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The scandal will likely prevent Moro’s widely criticised “anti-crime and corruption” bill from passing in congress. It could also could obstruct the government’s plans for pension reform, damaging Bolsonaro’s scandal-prone government, which is already stumbling after allegations about connections between paramilitary mafias and the president’s family, as well as a recent incident in which a pilot travelling in the president’s entourage to the G20 conference was caught with 39kgs of cocaine.
Lava Jato’s most enduring legacy may end up being the ascension of Bolsonaro, a dangerous bigot who has benefited from an establishment-consuming, anti-corruption drive that turned out to be far less pure than originally thought. And it was Moro – a partisan right-wing figure with messianic delusions, willing to do away with the rule of law in pursuit of his goals – who played the key role in putting him there.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brazil-sergio-moro-corruption-lato-javo-bolsonaro-the-intercept-glenn-greenwald-a8982486.html
JB
Jul 06th, 2019 - 11:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Have you read the article in Veja? https://veja.abril.com.br/politica/dialogos-veja-capa-intercept-moro-dallagnol/
Also this explanation: veja.abril.com.br/politica/carta-ao-leitor-sobre-principios-e-valores/
They're no fans of Lula, but clearly they think Moro was doing something pretty dodgy, even if it was just from over-zealousness. And they seem pretty convinced the messages are genuine. If they were faked, why not include something more obviously and explicitly illegal?
Is it true the Coaf are now investigating GG's finances? That's got to be an abuse of power by the government if it's true.
And did Jair really just give a speech defending child labour? This government gets weirder and weirder...
”If B admired Moro, why not sound him out during the campaign (Oct 2018)?“
What's your point? Are you saying B did not admire Moro? Why make him minister, then?
”forget Aécio”
Okay. If Dilma had really committed no crime, do you think Congress would have impeached her anyway, so someone else could take over? And do you think that would be a good or a bad thing?
“Lawfare Unmasked in Brazil
Jul 07th, 2019 - 01:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0Critics of Operation Car Wash have had reason to suspect the political motivations behind the judicial inquiry for some time. Revelations from The Intercept now provide proof.
When Car Wash uncovered evidence about the legality of contracts for lectures given by both former president Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Lula, Moro and his team declined to take action against the institution managing Cardoso’s contracts for speaking engagements. Although emails shared in one prosecutor’s Telegram groups provided evidence that Cardoso was delivering lectures abroad as a means of collecting political donations, his institute never came under investigation. In a WhatsApp message uncovered by The Intercept, Moro justified not acting because he didn’t want to risk “upsetting one of our strongest supporters,” clearly referring to Cardoso. This stood in sharp contrast to Moro’s approach to Lula’s firm, which he subjected to raids despite a lack of evidence of wrongdoing.
The fight to defend Brazilian democracy faces formidable challenges, and The Intercept is providing an inestimable contribution in making public the malfeasance of Operation Car Wash. Though it is impossible to predict their full scope, we can predict that the revelations will certainly influence the Supreme Court ruling—expected this August—against Lula and his legal team’s appeal to the UN Human Rights Committee, in both cases questioning Moro’s impartiality. If proven, some of Moro’s alleged illegal acts, such as appointing prosecutorial witnesses, may nullify the entire case against Lula, and subject the former judge to criminal charges.”
https://nacla.org/news/2019/07/01/lawfare-unmasked-brazil
JB
Jul 07th, 2019 - 11:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0Now I've got more time:
“it’s really funny to see the extremes you’ll go to, ignoring evidence, in order to claim Lula was convicted unfairly.”
I could say the same. D'you think everyone would ignore the possibility of Lula standing again, until he absolutely positively definitely announced he would? That would be very foolish. And since Moro literally acted as judge and jury, what he thought is extremely relevant. You think because he didn't blatantly let off obviously corrupt politicians, that makes him impartial? He wasn't going to do anything so obvious that it ruined his own credibility, but his actions could still have a huge influence on the elections and even on Dilma's impeachment, and he exploited that as far as he could....
“Re the ONE conversation/wiretap – which is growing whiskers – that “Moro” deliberately leaked, I’ve told you it had absolutely no bearing on his case/conviction.”
That was hardly the only thing Moro leaked. How about Palocci's plea bargain declarations, which were given in April and released by Moro a week before the first round of elections? No ulterior motive there, I'm sure!
https://brasil.elpais.com/brasil/2018/10/01/politica/1538428364_331167.html
More LJ leaks:
jornalggn.com.br/justica/lava-jato-vaza-depoimento-para-atingir-advogado-de-lula/
g1.globo.com/politica/operacao-lava-jato/noticia/2015/07/pf-apura-vazamento-de-depoimentos-de-delacao-premiada-diz-cardozo.html
oglobo.globo.com/brasil/pf-investiga-vazamento-de-depoimento-de-youssef-14393388
This lists LJ headlines per month, showing how much they increased in the month before Dilma's impeachment:
jornalggn.com.br/midia/lava-jato-sob-moro-atingiu-o-apice-nas-semanas-que-antecederam-o-impeachment/
DT
Jul 07th, 2019 - 07:58 pm - Link - Report abuse -1After Esteves, a banker with “very” close ties to Lula 'n who's been accused of corruption, bought the magazine, it has no longer been impartial, far less conservative. To get an idea of who Andre Esteves is, take a look at : https://youtu.be/SK75CAOO53Y
In Nov 2015, Delcidio Amaral, ex-PT senator, 'n Lula's great friend (until he decided to squeal on Lula after being caught red-handed trying to obstruct the LJ), accused both Lula & Esteves, in the PB scandal. Esteves was arrested, sent to prison, 'n 3 weeks later to home-arrest (by the STF), because the evidence was considered insufficient.
This suspicious connection, Esteves -Lula - PB (in Angola, where his bank was PB's partner in oil wells) has been confirmed by Palocci, another of Lula's ex-great (PT) friends, and Lula's first choice ahead of Dilma.
You'll have to excuse me if I don't believe Veja, as along with the Intercept, it has become an instrument of the Lavajato's enemies, to demoralize Moro 'n the prosecutors, in the attempt to shut down 'n reverse all judicial decisions taken in connection with the LJ investigation.
After the rumors that GG paid Wyllys US$ 700,000 to buy his seat in Congress (for his boyfriend, wife, whatever), 'n is giving Wyllys pocket-money, nothing more logical for the COAF to check his finances...like they're doing with B's son. Just fyi, the COAF is no longer under Moro.
“What's your point? Are you saying B did not admire Moro? Why make him minister, then?”
You've misunderstood. Of course B admires Moro, reason why he invited him.
What “I” think, is irrelevant....Dilma DID commit a crime. What have you still not understood abt that ? And Temer, as her VP, was the only option to take over.
“I could say the same”..one question: R U familiar with all the evidence ?
Why would Lula stand again ? he thought he could continue to elect his 'posts','n why would anyone believe he wanted to, until he announced it ?
Re other leaks, irrelevant to Lula's conviction.
JB
Jul 07th, 2019 - 10:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Damn. I thought I'd finally found some right-wingers who care more about evidence and rule of law than defending some tosser just because he's on 'their side', and now you say Veja's change of heart is simply due to change of owner. I'm disappointed.
Do you believe the journalists at Veja and Folha, that they've seen the mass of the messages and found things they themselves sent to the LJ team? Giving an opinion for or against is one thing, blatantly faking evidence another. If you think the messages are fake, who could have done it? Creating 600,000 messages from scratch would be one hell of a job, and even more so for a foreigner like GG. Besides, if that were the case it should be easy for Moro and other participants to recognise the falsity of the quotes. Changing them to make them more incriminating would be harder to disprove, but like I said, in that case why not add something more obviously outrageous and illegal?
Re Coaf, you really think they should investigate due to some unauthenticated screenshots published by an anonymous Twitter account? I could knock something similar together myself. This Professor writing in O Estadão doesn't agree with you:
https://politica.estadao.com.br/blogs/fausto-macedo/a-balanca-da-justica-parcial-desequilibra-a-democracia/
Is Estadão still right-wing enough for you?
It's turned out to be a good thing the Coaf isn't under Moro, hasn't it? Too much power in anyone's hands is dangerous.
“for his boyfriend, wife, whatever”
The word you're looking for is 'husband'.
“Of course B admires Moro, reason why he invited him.”
Then why d'you think B didn't try and meet with Moro before the election? It does seem a little odd to offer him the Ministry out of the blue, now you mention it.
“What have you still not understood abt that ?”
I suspect you'd still have supported her impeachment even if she hadn't. But it seems you're not willing to answer the question...
Gollum
You're an idiot. Also, fuck Soma & his dictionary!
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
Jul 08th, 2019 - 01:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0“You're an idiot. Also, fuck Soma & his dictionary!”
Hm it seems to me that one who is proven liar, who resorts to argumentum ad hominem, and profanity at the evidence. Is clear winner in the idiocy stakes, and finally an utter loser.
Thank you, Gollum. I still Soma's a prick, though.
Jul 08th, 2019 - 09:51 am - Link - Report abuse -1JB
“Why would Lula stand again ?”
Why wouldn't he? Seems odd you think Lula had a 'project of power' but believe he'd turn down the chance to be president again. Especially after he said he was considering it.
“Re other leaks, irrelevant to Lula's conviction.”
But very relevant to influencing the outcome of the election. Why else wait to release Palocci's statement until a week before the first round?
Re what I said above, I know some in the left-wing are just as bad about supporting their people above anything else, but there are others who try to be fair and will condemn allies if they behave badly.
Also, why 'Verdevaldo'? I suppose that's meant to be 'Greenwald' in Portuguese, but does it have a double meaning or something? I saw the Bolsominions using it too, so I was kind of thinking it's meant to be insulting? I've seen people using 'Carluxo' too, what's that all about?
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
Jul 08th, 2019 - 10:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0“I still Soma's a prick, though.”
That truths a bitch, especially when it reveals you in your true light.
@JB
Jul 08th, 2019 - 11:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0REF: “You'll have to excuse me if I don't believe Veja, as along with the Intercept, it has become an instrument of the Lavajato's enemies, to demoralize Moro 'n the prosecutors, in the attempt to shut down 'n reverse all judicial decisions taken in connection with the LJ investigation”:
That makes sense!
Admitting that Lulla & his band of thugs should remain - [if possible] permanently - behind the bars; it is far more difficult to agree AND swallow that the rest of the politicians [a vast majority of the shameless councilors, deputies, senators & their boot-lickers (oranges?)] keep not only enjoying total freedom, but they also are being “justifiably” protected by The Law, enjoy shockingly absurd benefits [financial/otherwise] and have a remorseless+cheeky presence in the public [& public offices]; to put it very - VERY - mildly!
https://freethoughtblogs.com/singham/2019/07/06/if-you-thought-the-us-justice-department-was-corrupt-under-donald-trump/
DT
Jul 08th, 2019 - 05:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Damn. Thought I'd finally found some right-wingers, care more abt evidence,rule of law than defending some tosser because he's on 'their side', ‘n now you say Veja's change of heart is due to change of owner. I'm disappointed”.
Damn, unfortunately yr belief that the left can do no wrong, blinds you. You‘re prepared to believe everything bad abt what you label ‘right’, yet question everything unfavorable for Lula & his cronies. Have U no clues as to why Esteves bought Veja ? ok…to buy a respected - until then - media outlet to influence public opinion, in his ‘n his friends’ favor. The evidence against him was not sufficient to convict, but that doesn’t make him innocent.
“…journalists at Veja / Folha, they've seen the mass of the messages ‘n found things they themselves sent to LJ team”. 1st, that is what 'they' claim. 2nd, what business did they have, if true, in trying to obtain information - supposedly confidential - from a task force investigating prior govt corruption ? that’s OK, right ?
R U sure that they – IntercePT/Folha/Veja – have not adulterated original messages, to convey what ‘they’ want ? You obviously think U R. Afaic, screen shots are far more reliable than adulterated messages from an unknown source.
OESP used to be neutral, ‘n even critical of the Military regime, but currently, I wouldn’t call them right-wing.
Was never against the COAF investigating Flavio B, just said it should investigate the other 28 members of the Rio legislature as well.
Don’t care what Miranda is, but sounds suspicious.
“..odd to offer him the Ministry out of the blue”. 1st you suggested Moro & B were in cahoots…now you insinuate it’s strange B offered him the post w/o knowing him (personally ?) all that well….decide.
Re Dilma, no problem in answering…even if she hadn’t broken the law, IMO she had to go. What Lula thought is anyone's guess...but the FdeSP is there, black on white. As to his intentions, I base myself on what he declared, as official.
Space?
You: “unfortunately yr belief that the left can do no wrong, blinds you.”
Jul 08th, 2019 - 06:45 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Me: “Re what I said above, I know some in the left-wing are just as bad...”
But they're not *all* like that. It would be nice to see people taking the allegations seriously and looking at the evidence, rather than supporting or dismissing them based on political views. Is anyone on the right doing that?
When journalists from three different news sites all say the same thing, it becomes harder to ignore. And publishing evidence of official misdeeds is their job. Autoridades Públicas estão sujeitas a críticas e tem uma esfera de privacidade menor do que o cidadão que não é pessoa pública. - according to one Deltan Dallagnol.
“R U sure that they – IntercePT/Folha/Veja – have not adulterated original messages, to convey what ‘they’ want ?”
I'm not sure, but it seems unlikely. As far as I know none of the task force have denied the truth of specific messages, but only said they can't be sure they're correct. Re the screenshots, someone on Twitter found the phone number attributed to Leandro Demori in the chats is actually linked to the Pavão Misterioso account that published them. Maybe someone did a little role play on the app and then took screenshots? Twitter seems to think it's Carlos B who's doing it.
“currently, I wouldn’t call them right-wing.”
Who is right-wing then, in your opinion? O Antagonista? GG posted an article showing he defended them when the STF tried to censor something they wrote. Now they are proving they are not so dedicated to free speech...
“Was never against the COAF investigating Flavio B...”
That's fair enough. Do they investigate everyone in Congress, or only when there is a suspicion? I was thinking that David Miranda is now a Congressman, so presumably has some requirement for transparency in his finances. Does that extend to spouses?
Gollum
Correction: “I still THINK Soma's a prick”.
Silence is NOT consent, see how quickly you're arrested if you try it...
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
Jul 08th, 2019 - 07:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I still THINK Soma's a prick”. Well of course you would since, it's expertise shows you in your best light.
“Silence is NOT consent” Oh yes it is, as they correctly state. The exception is under criminal law, which is not the issue. If you note I never mention law, nor is mentioned in its title. SOMA'S DICTIONARY OF LATIN QUOTATIONS MAXIMS AND PHRASES
A Compendium Of Latin Thought And Rhetorical Instruments For The Speaker Author And Legal Practitioner
JB
Jul 08th, 2019 - 07:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“1st you suggested Moro & B were in cahoots”
I don't think I did, but it explains why this conversation isn't making much sense. ;) It doesn't seem very likely they were conspiring together; how could Moro have known B was going to win? IIRC, I suggested B gave him the job to get Moro on his side, and have the power to fire him if he stepped out of line. But Moro's popularity and reputation as a crusader against corruption was a good enough reason for B to want him in his government.
“Re Dilma, no problem in answering…even if she hadn’t broken the law, IMO she had to go.”
And did Lula also have to go (to jail) even if he hadn't broken the law? If Moro hadn't convicted him, odds are he'd be your President today...
“As to [Lula's] intentions, I base myself on what he declared, as official.”
It'd be premature to assume Lula would definitely run, but I think it would be strange to ignore him when he said he was considering it, if you were someone with a reason to be concerned.
@Dumbass
Silence is also not consent in contract law:
“The general rule is that silence does not constitute acceptance.”
https://lawshelf.com/courseware/entry/silence-as-acceptance
Since you love maxims so much, I'd like to draw your attention to an English one: “it's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt.”
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
Jul 08th, 2019 - 10:17 pm - Link - Report abuse -1“Silence is also not consent in contract law:” I never said it was dipshit, it certainly is in civil law. It is one of the reliances of the UK government against Argentina. They're ignoring of two diplomatic notices, is legally viewed as acquiescence(the reluctant acceptance of something without protest.)
“The best way to win an argument is to begin by being right.” Jill Ruckeshaus
So eat your own words, as once again you'r proved wrong.
You've posted it 1000 times and never said it only referred to civil law, you lying POS. What the f*** does that have to do with Moro and Brazil?
Jul 08th, 2019 - 10:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
Jul 08th, 2019 - 11:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -1“Never said it only referred to civil law” Neither does Soma's, specifically was used in international law as I have shown
“lying POS” Don't be too hard on yourself, because I always catch you out.
“What the f*** does that have to do with Moro and Brazil?” You're the one who broached the matter on this thread, not me. You're getting lost in your own BS. “Fuck Soma & his dictionary!”
https://en.mercopress.com/2019/07/01/bolsonaro-eu-mercosur-agreement-will-take-at-least-three-years-to-come-into-force/comments#comment502539
DT
Jul 09th, 2019 - 02:28 pm - Link - Report abuse -1“Re what I said above, I know some in the left-wing are just as bad”. Perhaps I wasn’t clear - was referring to yr gen’l evaluation of whatever the left does.
“looking at evidence, rather than supporting / dismissing based on political views / is anyone on the right doing that?”
And I ask, who on the left is ? I’m presenting you with logical conclusions based on timelines, by what I’ve seen/read, ‘n a fairly good perception of how things work here - yet you, always doubting everything I post on Lula, as if I’m arguing based only on ideology.
I try to avoid speculing to back up arguments – prefer to stick to facts, to what is public knowledge/ generally accepted as true.
Just fyi, the 3 sites Veja/Folha/IntercePT are all working closely together…Folha only has access to the “messages” inside IntercePT’s office.
“Afaik none of the task force have denied the truth of specific messages”…neither have they agreed with the contents of the messages ‘as presented’, i.e., presented out of context and with fake insertions.
Re the ‘screenshots’ divulged by the hacker Pavão Misterioso, revealing damning conversations between GG / Miranda, the PT is already up in arms, calling them gross forgeries /demanding the Fed Police investigate.…why only these ‘n not the GG leaks ? No need to answer.
Even “Antagonista” is not right-wing…It’s pretty neutral.
The COAF is supposed to investigate all abnormal financial movement…I’d presume their main targets are those who have access to public funds, including family.
Re Moro/ Bolso, exactly…I don’t see anything strange in the way they met / how B invited him to join the team. B would not take Moro from the L J unless he thought he’d be a good minister.
Don’t see why Lula would have to go to jail IF he hadn’t committed crimes of corruption – but he did. Until mid-2016, consensus was Lula’s intention was to elect his puppets indefinitely, ‘n him pulling the strings from the background. It only changed because he became afraid.
”The Accusatory System and the Impartiality of the Criminal Judge in Brazil
Jul 09th, 2019 - 02:38 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Now, on that point, some have argued that the fact that these text messages may have been obtained illegally (possibly by hackers, though this has not yet been definitively established) means that the messages may not be used by a defendant, such as Lula, to challenge his conviction on the basis of judicial partiality. This is incorrect. The alleged unlawfulness in obtaining the messages does not prevent them from being used in favor of the defendant to prove a lack of judicial impartiality.
The principal reason, as the STF case law has explained, is that the greater constitutional relevance of individual freedom in the face of the prohibition to use illegal evidence justifies the admissibility of unlawfully obtained evidence in favor of the defendant (see STF, HC 75261, Rapporteur Justice Octavio Gallotti, First Panel, 06/24/1997, and STF, RE 212081, Rapporteur Justice Octavio Gallotti, First Panel, 12/05/1997).“
https://globalanticorruptionblog.com/2019/07/02/do-the-lava-jato-leaks-show-illegal-or-unethical-behavior-a-debate-between-brazilian-legal-experts/#more-14273
SOMA's, also states
”ex silentio-lit. from silence. This refers to anything arrived at based on a lack of protestation or argument to the contrary. A theory, proof, assumption or conclusion based on a lack of contrary evidence. Commonly used in the expression argumentum ex silentio-proof from silence
As usual, Gollum only shows one side of the story.....the one which suits him....the other side, which he doesn't like, he conveniently ignores...here it is :-
Jul 09th, 2019 - 06:07 pm - Link - Report abuse -1COUNTERPOINT (Professor Luciano Timm): The Lava Jato Leaks Do Not Demonstrate Partiality, Illegality, or Impropriety, and Do Not Justify Vacating Any of the Lava Jato Convictions
Professor Borges, like many other commentators inside and outside of Brazil, argues that the text messages between Judge Moro and the Lava Jato prosecutors demonstrate that then-Judge Moro acted unethically and illegally, and that in light of this new evidence, Lula’s conviction (and perhaps the convictions of other Lava Jato defendants) must be nullified. Professor Borges has laid out his case ably and clearly, BUT HIS ANALYSIS IS INCORRECT.
First, unauthenticated text messages obtained by illegal means are inadmissible as evidence, and thus could not be the basis for vacating the conviction of Lula or any other defendant.
Second, even if one ignores that fundamental problem and assumes, for the sake of argument, that these text messages are authentic and legally admissible, none of the messages disclosed so far shows behavior that violates Brazilian law or ethical codes.
QED
JB
Jul 09th, 2019 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Did I say Lula is innocent of all wrong doing, that the PT are right to vote against any pension reform, that Corbyn would be a great PM or that Maduro is doing a good job in Vz? No, I didn't say any of those things. So what gives you the idea I think the left can do no wrong?
“who on the left is ?”
I've seen people on the left - posters on forums - point out that just because Moro might be corrupt doesn't mean Lula is necessarily innocent. And others seriously considering the evidence on whether the messages are real or not. On the right it all seems to be peacocks and smearing the messenger. GG is a serious journalist who wrote for the Guardian and released the Snowden leaks, and journalists from those 3 sites have done their best to validate the messages, checking dates and times and details against the records. Moro's first response was not that they were fake, but that he'd done nothing wrong.
But you prefer to believe an anonymous twitter account, with paid-for bot followers, spreading unsubstantiated rumours? Which those involved immediately denied, and at least one offered to have his phone examined. I imagine the Intercept would be more amenable to having the Fed Police investigate if they weren't under Moro's control...
I had a look at 'O Antagonista'. Neutral? Bah. They're campaigning at least as hard against 'Verdevaldo' as the Intercept is against Moro. (And using stupid nicknames from Twitter is really the sign of a mature and reasoned publication - not.) Look how different their attitude was only 3 months ago when their own magazine's press freedom was threatened:
https://www.oantagonista.com/brasil/glenn-greenwald-condena-censura-a-crusoe/
Gollum
I don't care what else it says in Soma's tome of tiresome Latin quotes. There's probably nothing wrong with the book, it's just you taking things out of context as usual. Also, you haven't posted a link to the evidence, so by your 'logic', it's all a lie anyway.
DT
Jul 09th, 2019 - 07:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Did I say Lula is innocent of all wrong doing”…No, but you always “doubt” he’s as guilty as convicted…as I’ve said before, a girl can’t be more or less pregnant, neither can Lula be MOL guilty.
”So what gives you the idea I think the left can do no wrong?” yr incessant questioning of, amongst other things, the timeline I posted a few days ago, regarding the beginning of the
L J, to Dilma’s impeachment/ Lula’s intentions (?)…You won’t say he’s innocent, but neither that he is guilty. That’s what gives me the ‘idea’.
What people (both L&R) write on posters is usually exaggerated, more to express their personal feeling than necessarily the truth.
The doubt that exists regarding the authenticity of the GG leaks is real…not fiction. If GG thinks he can present unauthenticated messages as proof of wrong-doing, then why shouldn’t his ‘supposed’ private messages also be ? I’m waiting for him to deny they are real.
Does only the left have the right to point fingers ? I don’t doubt that GG is serious about trying to screw Moro/ get Lula released, but that doesn’t mean he’s above suspicion.
To you, the rumors against GG are unsubstantiated….but his leaks aren’t. Can you guarantee that ? or is what you’d rather believe ? The left has one great quality…it’s capacity to quickly deny all wrong-doing with a brazen face…yes, my opinion.
The Federal Police has always been subordinate to the Ministry of Justice, and if the IntercePT has done nothing wrong, what’s the problem with an investigation ?
Ok, the ‘Antagonista’ enjoys exposing the left, but it’s also done its share of criticizing Bolsonaro. It attacks both. If you read ALL their articles you’d know this. Re the STF (Toffoli / Moraes) trying to censor Crusoé a couple of months ago, I think this is about the only case where the press, as a whole, has risen up to defend colleagues, because they saw their own freedom of speech threatened. Definitely, the exception. But if you think what GG has done is valid, ok.
Jack Bauer aka Proof-less and Truth-less
Jul 09th, 2019 - 08:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Unauthenticated text messages obtained by illegal means are inadmissible as evidence”
So you claim, but are unable to produce any rulings that rebut.
”The alleged unlawfulness in obtaining the messages does not prevent them from being used in favor of the defendant to prove a lack of judicial impartiality.
The principal reason, as the STF case law has explained, is that the greater constitutional relevance of individual freedom in the face of the prohibition to use illegal evidence justifies the admissibility of unlawfully obtained evidence in favor of the defendant (see STF, HC 75261, Rapporteur Justice Octavio Gallotti, First Panel, 06/24/1997, and STF, RE 212081, Rapporteur Justice Octavio Gallotti, First Panel, 12/05/1997).“
”None of the messages disclosed so far shows behavior that violates Brazilian law“
It shows an absolute bias towards Lula by directing the prosecutor, this is irrefutable.
Secondly, he should have recused himself as his wife's clients were a political rival party to Lula. This is what would happen under an impartial legal system. But, Brazil is anything but, so we await to see what UNHRC's judgment will be.
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
”You haven't posted a link to the evidence” Yes I have the title and the part.
DT “When they would prove I was right” It is you with constant evasions trying to worm out of your unsupported claim
https://en.mercopress.com/2019/07/05/bolsonaro-insists-europe-has-no-authority-to-discuss-environment-issues-with-brazil/comments#comment502512
JB
Jul 09th, 2019 - 09:10 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Disagreeing with you doesn't mean I think the left can do no wrong. Do you think I'm lying about my opinion or something? I disagreed that Lula's intentions don't 'count' unless they are definite, but I didn't say anything untrue about it.
Sure, stuff on social networks is usually exaggerated, that's one of the big problems with them. But where are the people on the right speculating if the messages might be true and what it would mean if they are?
Once GG has finished publishing the messages, he'll probably hand them over to the authorities. I read that they cannot be used to convict anyone of wrong-doing, since they were obtained illegally, but they could potentially be used to exonerate people - like Lula.
What evidence is there for the 'Carluxo Misterioso' screenshots? Has even the most biased journalist in the world confirmed any 'facts' revealed in them?
“I’m waiting for him to deny they are real.”
https://www.esmaelmorais.com.br/2019/07/greenwald-e-david-miranda-denunciam-novas-fake-news/
twitter.com/MarceloFreixo/status/1147510106709475328
revistaforum.com.br/dallagnol-se-recusa-a-entregar-celular-para-pericia-da-pf-todos-sabemos-porque-diz-greenwald/
“if the IntercePT has done nothing wrong, what’s the problem with an investigation ?”
An investigation the guy they just accused of corruption is in charge of? Please tell me you're joking...
“The left has one great quality…it’s capacity to quickly deny all wrong-doing with a brazen face”
I don't think you're naive enough to believe this ability is confined to any one group.
Perhaps you could link to a few articles where O Antagonista supports an idea or person on the left? GG did not only defend free speech on the left, but put the article from Crusoé up on the Intercept despite disagreeing with it.
@Terrybot
Too slow! You claim those quotes are in Soma, but you've shown no proof. You're just a lying weasel.
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
Jul 09th, 2019 - 09:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“But you've shown no proof. You're just a lying weasel.”
No problem, now where is the proof of your claim “When they would prove I was right” you lying son of a bitch
SOMA'S DICTIONARY OF LATIN QUOTATIONS MAXIMS AND PHRASES
A Compendium Of Latin Thought And Rhetorical Instruments For The Speaker Author And Legal Practitioner
https://books.google.com.br/books?id=BIxyWH0FKgYC&pg=PT490&lpg=PT490&dq=silence,+SOMA%27S+DICTIONARY+OF+LATIN+QUOTATIONS+MAXIMS+AND+PHRASES+A+Compendium+Of+Latin+Thought+And+Rhetorical+Instruments+For+The+Speaker+Author+And+Legal&source=bl&ots=pKwDu6Q0q8&sig=suCAqt4DpJHZg0mOkJS9AT9o8F8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjXrdHe09PcAhUNl5AKHeU-CG8Q6AEwAXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=silence%2C%20SOMA'S%20DICTIONARY%20OF%20LATIN%20QUOTATIONS%20MAXIMS%20AND%20PHRASES%20A%20Compendium%20Of%20Latin%20Thought%20And%20Rhetorical%20Instruments%20For%20The%20Speaker%20Author%20And%20Legal&f=false
Good TerryBot. But your link went to a blank page, what are you trying to show me?
Jul 09th, 2019 - 09:44 pm - Link - Report abuse -1JB
What I didn't have space for earlier:
“B would not take Moro from the L J unless he thought he’d be a good minister.”
Hah, I'd say taking him from LJ was half the point, and the rest was to strengthen B's government and bolster his anti-corruption credentials by appointing the popular judge as Minister.
“Don’t see why Lula would have to go to jail IF he hadn’t committed crimes of corruption”
He had to go to jail so he couldn't be elected again and screw Brazil even more. Is it more important that judges are fair and honest and follow the rules to ensure justice is done, or that Brazil has a good President? (Good in your opinion.)
PS what were you going to post yesterday that you ran out of space for?
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
Jul 09th, 2019 - 10:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“But your link went to a blank page” No it didn't, I just clicked it and it works. As the following is the first and last sentences. So your lack of truthfulness is revealed.
”qui stat, caveat ne cadat-he who is standing, let him take care lest he falls, [cadence]
...qui timens vivet, liber non erit umquam-he who lives in fear will never be free. (Horace) [liberal]
It's highly entertaining to watch each one praise + justify the acts &/or misdeeds of their favored crook and insist that theirs' is better than the others'.
Jul 10th, 2019 - 11:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0They forget the fact that the MAIN culprit is the population which handed over the keys of the safe to the crooks!
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!