Step of a predictable script that leads to a certain conviction, had few alternatives in the face of an impassive at the historic moment when a former Brazilian president was inquired Nade to try a coup d’état.
What his allies sold as an incisive testimony was shown the demonstration of a leader seeking to maintain relevance in his political field, capricious in the psychodrama over personal hardships in power.
Objective, new arguments against the accusations there was no. Bolsonaro repeated and tried to emphasize that everything argued concerned questions about the electronic ballot boxes. “We wouldn’t be here,” he said more than once.
Moraes did not agree, of course, but at this time it seems unlikely that any apology for “exaggeration” and “rhetoric” will take the minister out of the way in the report of the Attorney General’s Office.
The magistrate also did not fall in Bolsonaro’s attempt to speak “from the heart” or in jokes, as in which the former president said he wanted him as deputy in 2026. Aside from the “decline”, Moraes seemed to be reminded the politician that he is ineligible by 2030.
Still, the minister maintained the good mood that has marked his conduct in this phase of the case, sounding so right from the way forward that the smile and interventions seem to seem to relieve the environmental tension.
As Bolsonaro designed his presence to cut it out and present it on his social networks, his performance was in the same line. There is the question: that would like to see Moraes’s head in a metaphorical or real skewer, reacted to the climate of camaraderie.
who marked their relationship with the minister and came into minds, “your excellencies” and the aforementioned apology for suggesting that Moraes led to the proverbial ball to guide his decisions. More: the people who went to the door of barracks to ask their permanence
This assessment is vital to see how above water, from a political point of view, follows the former president, with decaying cascade effect on the 2026 electoral scenario,, presence of his relative in the electronic ballot, etc.
Returning to the Supreme Court, the testimony validated in cut what Bolsonaro had already done before, the tacit admission that yes, speaking naturally of “ylations”, state of siege, how to debate the editing of a provisional measure.
He even said that nothing happened because “he had no climate” to contest the election – a virtual confession of guilt, except for someone who believes in the unribable varnish that the coup would be constitutional, a device, like himself.
Bolsonaro even agreed that he should have acted before, remembering the speech of his, Augusto Heleno, in the famous meeting that debated the theme.
It was also left to the former president until I asked Moraes to reconsider the $ 23 million fine that he had applied to Bolsonaro by seeking to invalidate ballot boxes in the second round of 2022. “The money is missing,” he said. “It has already become res judicata in the plenary,” said the minister.
The testimonial conversation historically, with another moment when a former president sat at the defendants’ bench. It was eight years ago, a month and one day, but it seems to have been in another era geological in Brazilian politics the day (PT)
If the differences are many and evidently the story of that duel has given what it gave, it is inescapable to compare the position of the pieces: an corn-mandatory and a controversial magistrate who embodied a political-judicial moment.
But there is a confluence point. What happened in the Federal Court in 2017 regarding the exchange of amenities between Moraes and Bolsonaro on Tuesday (10).
