21–26 of 26 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good? What's he accused of? Something from 2 years ago? Why would he need to be under house arrest, just start the trial immediately you had forever to prepare. If you can't get the evidence in 2 years then maybe they didn't commit the crime or you should have a slam dunk obstruction of justice case.
He trial is happening. There's a bunch of proofs. He likely will get convicted next month at worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The part where the current president's former lawyer is one of the "impartial" judge-kings involved in the case. "We defeated Bolsonarism!" -- Barroso, one of the judge-kings. Is further proof necessary?
Yeah, you'll need more than that because the results of the investigations so far are pretty coherent with Bolsonaro's beliefs in democracy as well as all the people who surrounded him.
Good! https://archive.ph/j5EBq
Good? What's he accused of? Something from 2 years ago? Why would he need to be under house arrest, just start the trial immediately you had forever to prepare. If you can't get the evidence in 2 years then maybe they didn't commit the crime or you should have a slam dunk obstruction of justice case.
The most serious accusation entails the creation of a "parallel intelligence apparatus" which was apparently keeping tabs on the supreme court judges. I don't doubt it.
He's also accused of ordering brazilian police to interfere in the elections in the northeast. I'm not sure if that can be directly attributed to him.
The "questioning of voting machines" and "incitation of protests" are just there to pad the list and insult our intelligence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Whatever Bolsonaro may or may not have started, it's bigger than him now. I mean, it's a pretty big deal if he started it or not. Punish crimes or take the laws off the books. https://web.archive.org/web/20230108201723/https://www.busin...
There are no laws against protests or the questioning of voting machines in Brazil. Quite the contrary, our constitution is quite explicit in defending political freedom of expression. What are you supposed to do when the supreme court starts violating the law and the constitution? Who are you supposed to turn to? Their abuses started in 2019 with a "fake news" censorship inquisition and by 2021 they were disproporti…
Well, you can
> ...[seek] to violently overthrow the democratically elected president Lula, who had been inaugurated on 1 January. Many rioters said their purpose was to spur military leaders to launch a "military intervention" (related to a misinterpretation of the 142nd article of the Brazilian constitution and a euphemism for a coup d'état) and disrupt the democratic transition of power.
> Several law enforcement officers assaulted and injured by rioters, at least 44 hospitalized [1]
You can have, in Donald Trump's words, "a day of love." [2]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8_January_Bras%C3%ADlia_attack...
[2] https://www.npr.org/2024/10/29/nx-s1-5159868/2024-election-t...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are no laws against protests or the questioning of voting machines in Brazil. Quite the contrary, our constitution is quite explicit in defending political freedom of expression. What are you supposed to do when the supreme court starts violating the law and the constitution? Who are you supposed to turn to? Their abuses started in 2019 with a "fake news" censorship inquisition and by 2021 they were disproporti…
> What are you supposed to do...? Well, you can > ...[seek] to violently overthrow the democratically elected president Lula, who had been inaugurated on 1 January. Many rioters said their purpose was to spur military leaders to launch a "military intervention" (related to a misinterpretation of the 142nd article of the Brazilian constitution and a euphemism for a coup d'état) and disrupt the democratic transition of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What are you supposed to do...? Well, you can > ...[seek] to violently overthrow the democratically elected president Lula, who had been inaugurated on 1 January. Many rioters said their purpose was to spur military leaders to launch a "military intervention" (related to a misinterpretation of the 142nd article of the Brazilian constitution and a euphemism for a coup d'état) and disrupt the democratic transition of…
If only he could claim responsibility for that. Like I said, he betrayed all of those people. By January 8th, he had already given up and was in the USA enjoying a "vacation". Those protests happened in spite of him.