In a statement marked by ambiguities, the former president () went beyond what until then his official defense had told the (Supreme Court).
Despite repeating many of the, Bolsonaro had not yet admitted to the court formally that he had been defeated in.
The president, however, avoided making more direct statements related to the documents that stayed. Just like and at the electronic ballot boxes.
“We searched for some alternative in the Constitution and thought it did not proceed and ended,” Bolsonaro told Rapporteur Minister Alexandre de Moraes on Tuesday (10).
“These meetings that took place were largely due to the decision of the [Tribunal Superior Eleitoral]”Bolsonaro said, adding that he would have discussed alternatives after being hampered to question the electoral outcome.
Despite making statements admitting conversations about “alternatives,” Bolsonaro sought to refute that he discussed “blow” at any time, just as evasive in questions dealing with the content of the decree drafts.
“For our part I’ve always been with the Constitution, so I refute any possibility of talking about a scam or talking in a draft that is not framed in the Constitution,” he said. “I didn’t talk about this draft, I went to chat only.”
When asked by Moraes if he had been introduced to him a draft, Bolsonaro said he wanted to have access to this draft.
After the minister answered that she was in the file, Bolsonaro said that “was placed on a television screen and shown quickly there.”
He also denied that he had “wiped” a draft, and in the face of the question as to if he had shown some document at a meeting on December 7, Bolsonaro also said he was shown quickly on a screen. “It was passed on the screen the considerations very quickly there.”
Bolsonaro’s speeches submitted so far to the Supreme Court, which sought to suspect Mauro Cid’s statements and technically discuss the criminal framework of the alleged acts imputed to the former president.
Later, asked if he would have argued at meetings about one, Bolsonaro said “I would like to have access to the document to discuss it” and said that “conversations were quite informal.”
Then, when answering his lawyer’s question about “changed, wrote or put some drafts on his computer,” Bolsonaro said no.
In a play filed with the STF with his initial defense, his lawyers did not confirm that the former president had studied alternatives after the defeat or talked about the then-armed commanders.
In the document, which argued that it was not yet possible to enter the merits, his defense team already claimed the “alleged draft of the decree” would be in a stage that is not punishable: that of preparatory acts.
“[A suposta minuta] It is not an act capable of overcoming the limit of preparation, never invading the sphere of the execution of so -called crimes against democratic institutions, “their lawyers wrote.
Bolsonaro in his statement thus admits elements that he had previously only claimed in interviews. Another difference is that he stressed for more than once, as he has done publicly, that he has never convened the Council of the Republic (a body that must be heard in advance to the decree of this type of measure).
Already a common point between the formal defense and Bolsonaro’s testimony is that he emphasizes that he did not signed any decree.
Bolsonaro also denies that he discussed a blow and has always been guided by the “four lines” of the Constitution. This is because, according to the Constitution, alternatives of exception as a state of site do not serve the purpose that the former president moved: the dissatisfaction with the result of the ballot box, which gave victory to (PT).
Early in the interrogation Moraes questioned which Bolsonaro foundation was, specifically, at the polls and that the TSE ministers would be directing the elections.
Instead of responding with some concrete element, Bolsonaro pointed to speech from other politicians in the past, with criticism of the polls and his defense history by the vote in the House of Representatives.
He also cited a report of federal criminal experts with criticism of the electoral system, although he stated that his work aimed to “seek the continuous improvement of electronic ballot boxes” and that “the identification of failures and vulnerabilities does not allow to say that there were, there will be or there will be fraud in the elections.”
Bolsonaro even quoted what he sees as deeds of his government, but did not bring any proof that he founded his accusations.
