MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Brexit: Falklands makes public UK's “absolute commitment to BOT's safety and prosperity”
EU funding for British Overseas Territories organisations and the impact of Brexit on business and travel are all subjects covered in a Brexit update from the Minister for the Commonwealth, the UN and South Asia this week, according to the transcript published by the Falkland Islands weekly “Penguin News”. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesStandard issue placatory nonsense from Boris and friends! Wouldn't trust the Tory's on anything but that's me.
Jan 30th, 2020 - 08:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'd trust Labour on even less, but that's me. Politicians all come from the same swamp.
Jan 30th, 2020 - 09:52 pm - Link - Report abuse +1I'd trust Labour over the Tories on the NHS. Perhaps MPs should be forbidden from using private healthcare.
Jan 31st, 2020 - 09:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0TWIMC...
Jan 31st, 2020 - 10:02 am - Link - Report abuse -2Since the1807 Terror Bombardment of København ..., I wouldn't trust no Perfidious Albion bloody murderous terrorist Whig nor Pittite...
And don't get me started about the South-Atlantic in 1833...
Capisce...?
Something happen in 1833?
Jan 31st, 2020 - 10:53 am - Link - Report abuse +1Aye....
Jan 31st, 2020 - 01:36 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Anything important?
Jan 31st, 2020 - 10:33 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Well...
Jan 31st, 2020 - 10:39 pm - Link - Report abuse -4“Important” diverges if you are an Engrish Farang in Siam or an Engrish Kelper in Malvinas..., copper...
1766 was important for the Falklands people. 1829 quite notable. Some squatters turned up in 1832, but were asked to leave. Other than that, 1833 only appears worth mentioning due to the whinging and whining coming from the Confederation. A nation in name only. 1841 was a good year mind.
Jan 31st, 2020 - 10:59 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Pfff...
Jan 31st, 2020 - 11:42 pm - Link - Report abuse -2I have to admit that Gorgory is very funny. and great historian and researcher and most importantly, the impartial in his silly comments
Feb 01st, 2020 - 03:05 am - Link - Report abuse 01833 was an important year for Think, he took part in a mutiny and helped kill a bunch of people.
Feb 01st, 2020 - 12:19 pm - Link - Report abuse +21833 is when uk returns to malvinas/ Falklands, when the people of the continent were becoming independent, which later formed countries and that led to the islanders being a colony today.
Feb 02nd, 2020 - 02:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0it's my humble opinion
Guillote
Feb 02nd, 2020 - 12:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Being a colony today.” Wrong, there was a referendum held on the issue of 'self -determination.
”Decolonization (American English) or Decolonisation (British English) is the undoing of colonialism ... The fundamental right to self-determination is identified by the United Nations as core to decolonization, allowing not only independence, but also other ways of decolonization. The United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization has stated that in the process of decolonization there is no alternative to the colonizer but to allow a process of self-determination.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decolonization
DT (Cont of “Eclectic B...”)
Feb 02nd, 2020 - 09:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“B funding the media”...yeah, that which does not make it their priority to attack him. Don’t think Congress in '88 was just worried abt covering all bases, some parts of the Constitution were definitely oriented by leftist ideas at the time. I’ve already mentioned that it was a reaction to the military regime’s 'excesses', as percieved by the left, 'n I can’t say for sure that the fact it includes many situations which should’ve been dealt with in ordinary law, was to “carve them in stone”, as in the long term, the practical effect in some cases has made necry updating / modernization, difficult.
B did try to make the disarmament law more flexible, but Congress overturned most if it.
IF he had appointed politicians for ministeral positions, he might have been successful...
Re GG “...but publishing the information they gave him isn't illegal…” ; as it was illegally obtained (and GG was aware of it), that still has to be decided….but the new evidence uncovered far more recently, indicates that GG would have oriented them what to hack into….that is why he is not off the hook.
“What were they teaching kids at 5, 6 and 7?”...Already told you…under the PT, 6 year olds were being taught about gender identity etc…By 10, reckon it’s ok to learn how to put a rubber on a banana…could be very useful by the age of 12 or 13.
“Nowadays they say you shouldn't force young kids…”; ok, I can agree with that, not necrly to protect them against paedophiles, because why would any kid hug someone they don’t know well ?
No, I don’t have any kids. Generally speaking, some might be a handful, but within my circle of friends, they have brought far more happiness than problems. Today it’s become a bit of a lottery, and it requires greater efforts to protect them.
See that Gollum has had a moment...he got to tell Guillote he was 'wrong'...and, defining “ColoniZSation” has been very important to understand what happened in 1833.
Jack Bauer Proof less & Truth less
Feb 02nd, 2020 - 10:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”The information they gave him ... was illegally obtained (and GG was aware of it), that still has to be decided ….the new evidence uncovered ..indicates that GG would have oriented them what to hack into.“ There is nothing to be decided it is already in legal terms of a 'fait accompli' According to Walter Vieira Ceneviva, a media attorney and former president of the Press Freedom Commission of the Brazilian Bar Association. “Even if the origin of the information turns out to be criminal, this does not associate the journalist with the crime,” he says. “And there are no legal restrictions to the journalist’s right to publish information of public concern that has been illegally obtained by a third party.”
https://www.cjr.org/analysis/the-intercept-greenwald-brazil-soccer.php
If there was any new evidence your unsupported opining has destroyed any likelihood of that.
”He got to tell Guillote he was 'wrong'“ Yeah! Just like I get to tell you you're wrong when you fail to meet your burden of proof. Which means an assertion ”is either true or false, never both or neither”
Que manera de decir tonterias usando muchos caracteres
Feb 03rd, 2020 - 01:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0Good bye
T. Gollum Hill
Feb 03rd, 2020 - 01:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“There is nothing to be decided it is already in legal terms of a 'fait accompli' According to Walter Vieira Ceneviva, a media attorney and ...”
With all due respect to Ceneviva, that is only 'his' legal opinion...which would have to hold up in court IF GG is indicted...that's why I said “..still has to be decided”...or can't you read ?
Anyway, looks like GG's participation in the scheme went a lot deeper than just publishing stolen information, being acive in orienting the hackers...Gollum, this is not yet over. Get used to it.
Ah, and before I forget, thanks once again for defining “coloniZSation” for us....no one knew what it meant before you came along...
Guillote
Si, estoy de acuerdo.
Jack Bauer Proof less & Truth less
Feb 03rd, 2020 - 04:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Respect to Ceneviva, that is only 'his' legal opinion...” Funny his opinion is supported by the Supreme Court of Brazil versus your unqualified and unsupported assertion. Well that's another no brainer as the SCB has the last word.
“Greenwald published some of those leaked embarrassing messages and, per a criminal complaint, damaged the reputation of an anti-corruption task force.”
”Brazil’s Top Court Prevents Investigation Into U.S. Journalist
Brazil’s top court says officials cannot investigate U.S. journalist Glenn Greenwald for his work or for protecting confidential sources.”
https://en.mercopress.com/2020/01/17/brazil-steps-out-from-celac-because-of-its-failure-to-protect-democracy/comments#comment506474
Gollum
Feb 03rd, 2020 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Funny his opinion is supported by the Supreme Court of Brazil”....now, 'that' is really funny.....the STF, meaning a decision taken by the 11 judges (during a plenary session) or just an injunction, or an individual decision granted by the corrupt Gilmar Mendes in August 2019 ?
Hardly a definitive decision.
And, btw, the injuction only covered the act of divulging illegally obtained, or stolen information.....the new evidence (4 months later) suggests he actively participated in the hacking, so it's a whole new accusation, not covered by the August injunction.
You really need to consult reliable sources Gollum, or you'll keep on making a fool of yourself.
Jack Bauer Proof less & Truth less
Feb 03rd, 2020 - 10:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Hardly a definitive decision” It's definitive enough ”... the new evidence (4 months later)suggests he actively participated in the hacking“ The man is a US constitutional lawyer, who has 40 lawyers on tap. So such a suggestion is simply unbelievable, if wasn't so you'd have provided evidence to the contrary.
”The federal police,... conducted a comprehensive investigation and found that I had no involvement of any kind in the hack, principally because the first time the source talked to me, he had in his possession all the information that he gave to me, making it logically impossible for me to have been involved. ... This particular prosecutor who nonetheless brought these charges is notorious for abusing his office. ... But obviously, the first thing I did when I was contacted by the source was sit down with our team of Brazilian lawyers to try and understand the similarities and differences between Brazilian law on the one hand and American and British on the other, which I was very familiar from my work as a lawyer but also the Snowden case.”
https://www.wfae.org/post/journalist-glen-greenwald-cybercrime-accusations-brazil
JB
Feb 04th, 2020 - 01:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“that which does not make it their priority to attack him”
It seems odd the government can not only pay for advertising to publicise/defend their policies, but pay famous TV and radio presenters to say how great they are. How can you trust anything these people say?
“IF he had appointed politicians for ministeral positions, he might have been successful...”
Why, because he could have handed them out to allied parties in return for support? Or because politicians would have known how to bargain with their peers to get votes?
Re GG, if publishing the material was illegal in itself they would have arrested him months ago instead of messing around with financial investigations and now trying to charge him with directing the hackers - something he knew better than to do.
If they were just telling kids some people are born with their brains not matching their bodies, I don't see a problem. What I object to is not education but this idea of letting people self-diagnose, especially teenagers who often struggle with rapid changes to their bodies and feeling like they don't fit in. Experimenting with pronouns is pretty harmless, but hormones have irreversible effects.
Re paedophiles, unfortunately most are someone the child knows well; relatives or friends of the parents, teachers or priests. If you teach your kids to keep quiet and do what they're told, that's how they will act in this situation too.
Guillote seems to have Terry's number. And a better way of dealing with him, too...
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
Feb 04th, 2020 - 02:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Guillote seems to have” been less than a sterling winner like you, which is why he has slunk off.
Jack Bauer Proof less & Truth less
“Brazil Calls Glenn Greenwald’s Reporting a Crime
He’s faced continual threats since revealing texts showing illegal activity by a judge who helped Jair Bolsonaro’s election. ... Mr. Greenwald said he had “exercised extreme caution as a journalist never even to get close to any participation” in the hacking; he also noted that the complaint was brought by the same prosecutor who had earlier tried, and failed, to prosecute the head of the Brazilian bar for criticizing Mr. Moro.
Is simply unbelievable, when the only clear evidence we have is of prosecutorial, and Moro's criminal misconduct.
”The case against Greenwald happens to be almost a carbon copy of the Justice Department’s argument in the affidavit it filed against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange last year. Just like the Brazilian government, US prosecutors try to make the case that Assange didn’t just receive leaked diplomatic cables from former Army staffer Chelsea Manning, but that he actively participated in the hack and leaks.“ https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/brazil-greenwald-assange.php
So our old friends from the USDOJ are at work again, like their discredited case against Sen. Ted Stevens.
”A blistering report found that the government team concealed documents that would have helped the late Stevens, a senator from Alaska, defend himself against false-statements charges in 2008.
The report, described it as a milestone in the history of prosecutorial misconduct.
For instance, the report says the Justice team argued to the jury that Stevens, who served the state of Alaska for 40 years, accepted pricey renovations to his Alaska chalet from oil services company executive Bill Allen.”
https: //www.npr.org/2012/03/15/148687717/report-prosecutors-hid-evidence-in-ted-stevens-case
Identical to the claim against Lula.
DT
Feb 04th, 2020 - 04:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“ How can you trust anything these people say?”...the programs of the selected TV presenters are directed towards 'n attract the lower middle/ low social classes, those that usually do not follow the news, aren't too well informed, so the purpose of the advertising is two-fold ...one, to inform, two, to convince people it is essential. They are used because they are 'influencers'...
“Why, because he could have handed them out to allied parties in return for support?”
Exactly. Despite being corrupt, Temer was the first Prez who decided to appoint 'some' ministers based more on their qualifications, than (political) clout.
“Re GG, if publishing the material was illegal....” the STF - as a whole - still needs to decide that...but based on the 'freedom of the press', unlikely it'll go anywhere.
“...now trying to charge him with directing the hackers - something he knew better than to do”. The investigations will show if, and how involved he was in that....as to “knowing better”, are you sure ? might have presumed no one would find out...
“If they were just telling kids some people are born with their brains not matching their bodies...” 'IF'.....even so, there's an “appropriate average age” to get into that, and it's not 6 or 7.
“...but this idea of letting people self-diagnose”....if kids become confused, and believe they alone, can decipher what's going on, that would be the moment to look for orientation. “Different” behaviour can be noticed in some young kids (6 or 7 yr olds) but then, I think it's up to the parents to accept the fact and guide them, w/o antagonizing, or confusing them even further.
Regarding protecting kids against the possibility of being abused by paedophiles / people they know well, it's just common sense of the parents to take precautions...we travelled by ship a lot, and I clearly remember when I was 10 or 12, w/o going into detail, my mother warned me against letting grown ups get “too close”. She had to say no more.
Sounds like you can't trust them. May as well give the money to instagram celebrities.
Feb 04th, 2020 - 09:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“based on the 'freedom of the press', unlikely it'll go anywhere”
Exactly, it's in the constitution. And it would have been pretty reckless to assume no one would find out. If you antagonise the Justice Minister then investigating it is going to be top priority.
“even so, there's an “appropriate average age” to get into that, and it's not 6 or 7.”
Depending who you know, you might have to explain earlier. Once kids are old enough to know the difference they get curious. And if your child wants to act like the opposite gender that's a difficult decision. I don't think it's good to stifle their personality and try and force them to be someone they're not, but no one wants their kid to be bullied in school or have no friends. In many ways adults have a lot more freedom to express themselves whereas children are expected to conform.
“He uses traditional journalistic practices to expose corrupt behavior the powerful would love to hide. It’s called reporting.
Feb 05th, 2020 - 11:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Brazilian prosecutors allege that the writer Glenn Greenwald was a member of a “criminal organization”. I allege that Brazilian prosecutors are merely offering the best definition of good journalism.
Greenwald would like draw comparisons between his case and that of Julian Assange, charged by U.S. authorities with conspiring to hack government computers. But there’s an important distinction: Assange allegedly participated in the initial criminality by offering assistance in breaching passwords, while Greenwald advised a source on how to protect his or her identity after already handing over information.
Last year, a justice on Brazil’s supreme court barred federal police from investigating Greenwald’s role in disseminating hacked messages. The ruling prohibited Bolsonaro from using “coercive measures” to stop Greenwald. It’s unclear if the Bolsonaro administration will fight the judge’s decision or simply ignore it and move ahead with a prosecution of Greenwald.
Either way, it’s authoritarian to use police powers to silence journalists who embarrass you. Because often — maybe most of the time — the most consequential journalism entails working with informants or whistleblowers who engage in illegality to uncover unflattering or corrupt interactions that powerful people would love to bury. Without such muckraking, much meaningful journalism would illegal.
National Review was founded in 1955 by William F. Buckley Jr. as a magazine of conservative opinion. The magazine has since defined the modern conservative movement and enjoys the broadest allegiance among American conservatives.”
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/glenn-greenwald-defense-a-real-reporter/
DT
Feb 05th, 2020 - 06:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Not saying TV presenters are lying - 'cause if they are, it'll eventually backfire; besides, the fact that many people were easily misled by lies /fake news spread by the PT & leftist unions (CUT), which were against losing their immoral privileges (don't ask me to enumerate them again, as we've been through it umpteen times), it's more of a process to clarify the public misconception.
“Exactly, it's in the constitution”; don't count on it - there's plenty in the Constitution (& ordinary law) that's ignored when it suits some members of the STF.
Regardless, don't know of any constitutional clause which says a journalist (or any one else) can divulge stolen private information, with impunity...that's why I say the STF plenary has to decide how they're going to interpret an imaginary limit on freedom of the press.
“would have been pretty reckless to assume no one would find out”....well, then one has to presume he (in this case) 'n most politicians are reckless....who ventures into the legal unknown, or steals, “knowing” they'll be caught ?
And did he believe that Moro 'n the other authorities wouldn't realize their messages were being hacked into (and possibly distorted to cause embarassment) ?
When someone commits a crime it's usually because they believe they won't be caught, and if they are, that nothing will happen.
Re kids, “Depending who you know, you might have to explain earlier”....sure, each case can be different, but you can't just bunch everyone together and start teaching certain things in class, too explicitely, to 6 or 7 year olds. Now, already in the 21st century, of course we need to realize kids develop quicker, have different interests (to 50 years ago), but there is always a 'right' pace to go forward with these new ideas. When kids become curious, just make sure you how to explain it so they'll understand.
Conforming to certain general rules isn't the same as being submissive, 'n it's up to parents to teach them the difference.
How sweeeeeeeeeet...
Feb 05th, 2020 - 07:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The mighty CIA Jack Bauer is worried about them 6-7 year old whitish kiddos getting their sexuality messed up by disgusting communist propaganda...
At the same time he rejoices when them 6-7 year old blackish street kiddos get their brains blown out by the bullets his ilk provides the police death squads...
Help! have I missed something. I can't work out how this thread has changed so radically and to be honest I'm struggling to work out what jack B is on about. Any pointers welcome.
Feb 05th, 2020 - 09:15 pm - Link - Report abuse +1It's a long story..., nurse...
Feb 05th, 2020 - 10:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0RMN - I gave up trying to follow it
Feb 05th, 2020 - 10:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0JB
Feb 05th, 2020 - 10:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The presenters aren't exactly lying, just saying what they are paid to say. Which means you can't trust them any more than an actor in an ad.
“that's why I say the STF plenary has to decide”
According to news articles they already did, in 2009. Probably in case ADPF 130 / DF, but understanding legalese is hard enough in a language I can speak.
”then one has to presume he (in this case) 'n most politicians are reckless”
Or he didn't break the law and the charges are wrong. We'll have to wait and see, but I can't say I have much confidence in Brazilian justice.
As for teaching kids, schools kind of have to bunch everyone together, in every subject. They can't provide individualised education for basic subjects like maths or reading, though some kids are ready to learn things earlier than others. They just have to go with the average, on this topic as well.
Do these government rules and textbooks apply in private schools as well as public ones?
RMN
Don't worry, just ignore us.
OK - Don't forget to turn the lights off when you have finished.
Feb 06th, 2020 - 01:37 pm - Link - Report abuse +1DT
Feb 06th, 2020 - 04:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Wonder if Stink even knows what sex he is.
“what they're paid to say” - basically, yes - to clarify rights /obligations of a polemic law, surrounded by fake news spread by the opposition during discussions, when Congress was pressured by both sides of public opinion...but what's the point of the govt lying, if it'll come out down the road ?
Despite its approval, many still don't understand its implications - such a law needs to be well understood by all, as millions will be affected by it.
The ADPF130/2009 dealt with the STF's understanding that Ordinary Law which dealt with freedom of the press conflicted with the Constitution, 'n it was all about making the former compatible with the latter.
The majority (STF) unstood that the Press is the “only institution endowed with the flexibility to denounce malfeasance practises of the 'executive' branch, being the task of investigating them, the reponsibility of other institutions” (FPol, MPF ?).
Accdng to the STF, the press has a “democratic mission, as the public depends on it to obtain information and be able to evaluate government policy”. Reason why it should be independent from the State. So the law was adapted to the Constitution.
However, ADPF 130 talks of “government” malfeasance....nowhere does it foresee steps to be taken when presumably “confidential” information is stolen (from employees of the “Judiciary” branch, not the Executive), then divulged, with the clear intention of creating chaos in the judicial system, for purely ideological motives.
So, if the issue had been settled in 2009, why did G.Mendes need to grant an injunction to GG, 10 years later ? It's different, 'n not over yet.
Your distrust in Bzln law is irrelevant...the facts are coming out, 'n will decide the outcome.
Re education, that's what I'm saying....you can't generalize based on exception. “Go with the average”...yes.
I think there's a nat'l curriculum, but how the public/private sectors go about implementing it, don't know
Jack Bauer Proof less & Truth less
Feb 06th, 2020 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Then divulged, …in the judicial system, for purely…” Thats just your inner reactionary speaking, meanwhile in the real world
Dallagnol was among those cautioning colleagues that using procedural power to investigate journalists who had published leaked material would not only be difficult but ”virtually impossible,“ because ”a journalist who leaks is not committing a crime.“
The Intercept cited a decision by the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region to demonstrate that Dallagnol was right.
https: //riotimesonline.com/brazil-news/rio-politics/national-politics/intercept-journalist-who-leaks-does-not-commit-a-crime-says-embattled-dallagnol/
”The indictment of Assange is a blueprint for making journalists into felons By Glenn Greenwald
The U.S. government unveiled against WikiLeaks founder Assange, charging him under the 1917 Espionage Act for his role in the 2010 publication of a trove of secret documents. So extreme and unprecedented are the indictment’s legal theories and likely consequences that it shocked and alarmed even many of Assange’s most virulent critics.
With these new charges, the Trump administration is aggressively and explicitly seeking to obliterate the last reliable buffer protecting journalism in the United States. The argument by the Trump administration that Assange isn’t a journalist and thus deserves no free press protections. Press freedoms belong to everyone, not to citizens called “journalists.” The First Amendment was written to avoid precisely that danger.
In a 1977 Supreme Court opinion documenting the limitless scope of the constitutional free press guarantee, Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote: “In short, the First Amendment does not ‘belong’ to any definable category of persons or entities: It belongs to all who exercise its freedoms.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/05/28/indictment-assange-is-blueprint-making-journalists-into-felons/#comments-wrapper
JB
Feb 07th, 2020 - 09:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0“what's the point of the govt lying, if it'll come out down the road ?”
Depends how far down the road, most don't seem to think much beyond the next election cycle. But if the goal was to inform people, they should have given the contract to the network with the biggest audience, as originally intended.
Re ADPF 130, why would it be limited to the executive branch? The interpretations I saw said the leaked info had to be of public interest, not that it had to concern the government. For example the Panama Papers were stolen info and the press published all the names, businessmen or politicians or whatever. Plus they said the motives for the leak were irrelevant.
“why did G.Mendes need to grant an injunction to GG, 10 years later ?”
Cos Moro had the Federal Police doing something unconstitutional? Also it wasn't GG who asked for the injunction. According to the STF website:
”The Rede Sustentabilidade party filed a complaint against non-compliance with a fundamental precept (ADPF 601), at the Supreme Federal Court (STF)”
GG does seem to trust in Brazilian law, since he's still in the country and still reporting.
As for education, I already said I disagree that's too young, provided it's simplified enough for kids to understand.
Hmmmmm....
Feb 07th, 2020 - 09:36 am - Link - Report abuse -1An Anglo Turnip above wonders if Mr. Think even knows what Sex he is...
I Think the Engrish word to be used in a phrase as te above is “Gender”..., ain't it...?
Anyhow... About me sex... Many a lady has kindly referred to it as...: “Gooood Sex”... ;-)
DT
Feb 07th, 2020 - 03:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Depends how far down the road, most don't seem to think beyond next election..”;10 years ago, probably never….today, somewhat different ;
“they should’ve given the contract to the network with biggest audience” : 2 of the presenters mentioned - Ratinho , Datena - are far more popular/influential amongst the middle lower class, than TV Globo's.
“Re ADPF 130, why would it be limited to the executive branch?”
Can’t be sure, but it’s how it’s worded. And, in 2009 – ‘n even today – a few STF members believe they are above suspicion, and if Congress voted to include the Judiciary, how would the former be able to count on their benevolence ? and today, there are cases of the STF ‘creating’ legislation (not their function) to make investigating them, virtually impossible…’n they get away with it.
Who in Congress has the balls to confront them directly ?
“had to be of public interest, not that it had to concern the government” : a matter of interpretation, the majority of the public is interested in seeing the corrupt behind bars.
The political left’s interest is to see them (i.e., the toad) free…(and it was not in B’s govt the toad was convicted - 2 lower courts & one high court did, in 2017/18). So, who would benefit the most by divulging stolen / perhaps ‘forged’ info ? which BTW, after even divulged as it was (adulterated ?), showed Moro did nothing ‘unconstitutional’.
“It wasn't GG who asked for the injunction”. Right, but they (Rede/GG) are acting together.
As much as I don’t like GG, I’m pretty sure the law will be fair to him ;
Yday (Feb 6th), a fed’l judge indicted the hackers but decided to not indict GG “por ora”, meaning, “meanwhile”…he classified GG’s behavior as “relevant in the judicial field” due to a conversation whereby GG ‘suggested’ to one of the hackers, that he destroy the evidence…which could be considered “deletion of documents and / or frustration of criminal prosecution”. If proved he oriented the hackers, his luck can change.
JB
Feb 07th, 2020 - 09:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“2 of the presenters mentioned - Ratinho , Datena - are far more popular/influential amongst the middle lower class, than TV Globo's.”
That's alarming. TV Globo is bad enough.
“a few STF members believe they are above suspicion”
It will be funny if one of the STF ministers gets leaked next. Then we'll see if they change their minds about public interest. And it's definitely in the public interest to know if judges and prosecutors are colluding with each other or biased in carrying out their jobs. If the Intercept published irrelevant details of their private lives then it would not be covered.
Is there an article that includes GG's conversation with the hacker so I can see what he actually said? And what does Rede have to do with it? They had their own candidate for president IIRC rather than supporting Lula.
As for Think, it's simple. He's a turnip and they don't have sex or gender.
Jack Bauer Proof less & Truth less
Feb 07th, 2020 - 11:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“GG’s behavior as “relevant in the judicial field” due to a conversation” It was estopped as a SC justice's opinion out-ranks that of the inferior magistrate. The claim of “a conversation” by an accredited constitutional lawyer and civil rights litigator. Also the author of three New York Times bestselling books -- “How Would a Patriot Act” (a critique of Bush executive power theories), “Tragic Legacy” (documenting the Bush legacy), and With Liberty and Justice for Some (critiquing America's two-tiered justice system and the collapse of the rule of law for its political and financial elites). My fifth book - No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA and the US Surveillance State - will be released on April 29, 2014 by Holt/Metropolitan. Who on being contacted by a hacker, has stated his first action, was a sit-down with his lawyers; is simply unbelievable, and more likely at the direction of the USDOJ.
So he has legal council who as witnesses, can verify what he said, or didn't.
Geeeeeee...
Feb 08th, 2020 - 12:33 am - Link - Report abuse -1Engrish turnips can be sooo funny...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=krgUVduKFL4
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!