The one caused by the first lady of Silva in dinner with the Chinese leader eventually exposed some of the palace environment of government disagreements and intrigue.
There is no news in this game of creeping back, disputes and traps in the world of power.
The episode, even quite mild, wakes up, however, starting with the discussion of what would be the public role of the “prime”, let’s say, as married women also perform government and state leadership functions, and the same is true for the rainbow of genres and guidelines-just to quote a nearby example, the governor of Rio Grande do Sul, Eduardo Leite, is a gay and married.
The main point in these situations should be the republican separation between public and private sphere. The appropriate would be that the presidential family, husband, wife, children, would remain distance from the public demonstration in what she may have of government. Marriage or kinship does not transform anyone into an official interlocutor or representative for government affairs.
It is not a matter of being a citizen of first or second class, it is about using the appropriate channels to manifest. Who perform their citizenship and their activities in clear territory.
It is true that much depends on protocols, matters, the occasion… In the case on the agenda, it is not known for sure what happened and exactly what formal and cultural rules presided over and guided the interventions of those present at the dinner offered by Xi Jinping and his wife.
According to diplomats consulted by Sheetwhich governs state visits in, where everything would happen under strict formality.
People who have already interacted in these types of reception state that there is little space for improvisation, and situations that escape the previously agreed would be malesticks.
At the meeting, would Janja wrong the tone? Slip into the timing? Did it cause embarrassment indeed or was there an exaggeration in the account? After all, does this have any relevance, besides replacing the subject of the definition of functions?
Apparently we are on the worldly ground of the politicians’ gossip. With an aggravation: the leak could only have occurred through any present authority.
The official would not need to have contacted journalists, could have commented to someone and this one blown – with that, after checking, the story could be told. It is not known.
Lula, in an interview, showed irritation with the breach of confidence and raised the theme. She would have made a following comment on condemnable contents conveyed by the platform.
Is Janja victim of prejudice? In some cases yes, but it has also given reasons for questions. For example, for Elon Musk (as much as he deserves) and at the beginning of Lula’s management one about the disappearance of furniture at Alvorada, on a TV show, throwing the blame on the Bolsonaros.
These are cases that at least give rise to political exploitation. It should not be, besides being a function of the first lady shooting at the foot of her husband’s government.
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
