Ministers of the (Supreme Federal Court) evaluate that the governor of, (), should seek members of the Court in the coming days to explain his speech at the demonstration on Paulista Avenue on Sunday (7).
No contacts were made after 24 hours of speech. Two Supreme Ministers stated, under reserve, that Tarcisio’s only interlocutors sought the court to expose the governor’s situation.
The governor of São Paulo made on Sunday his hardest attack against the Supreme and the minister, rapporteur of the process that can bring Jair Bolsonaro (PL) to prison.
Tarcisio called the magistrate Tyran and asked for a “broad and unrestricted” amnesty to benefit those convicted of the January 8 attacks, the former president and the other defendants of the coup plot.
“We will not accept the dictatorship of one power over the other. Enough,” he said from the sound truck. “We will not accept that no dictator says what we have to do,” he said.
Hearing that the crowd shouted “out, Moraes”, Tarcisio called the dictator’s magistrate. “Why are you screaming that? Maybe because no one can handle anymore. No one can handle the tyranny of a minister like Moraes. No one can handle what is happening in this country,” he said.
Still on Sunday, the decanor of the court, said on social networks on Sunday that crimes against the democratic rule of law are not subject to amnesty and defended the punishment of those responsible.
He did not name Nominally Tarcisio, but indicated that the direct answer was to the governor in saying that in Brazil “there is no ‘dictatorship of the toga’, nor ministers acting like tyrants.”
Barroso, in turn, told the Monica Bergamo column that the judgment is one. “For now, what I can say is that, having lived and fought the dictatorship, it was that there was not due public process and transparent, accompanied by the press and society in general. It was a world of shadows. Today, everything has been done in the light of day,” he said.
The evaluation of three ministers heard by Sheet It is that Tarcisio’s speech was calculated and purposely radicalized. This group understands that the governor decided to scale the crisis with the Supreme because of the political return he may have with the new stance – he is quoted to be the presidential candidate in 2026, but expects the approval of the political godfather to run.
Their reading is that Tarcisio set aside the moderate profile he cultivated with the Supreme and promoted real attacks on the court, with direct onslaught against Moraes.
One of them said that Tarcisio’s decision to radicalize himself, assuming the same tone as Pastor Silas Malafaia, is unfortunate.
The result, these ministers say, is the shudder in the governor’s relationship with the court. Tarcisio was one of Bolsonaro’s allies with the most transit in the Supreme-which made him criticize from Federal Deputy Eduardo Bolsonaro (PL-SP) and other exponents of pockets.
Two other ministers stated that Tarcisio’s speech is, besides a political movement, an outburst in the face of proximity to Bolsonaro’s trial. For them, the governor will not implode his relationships with the Supreme, despite punctual shudder.
Political movement
An ally from Tarcisio said, under reserve, that the politician was uncomfortable with the negative repercussion of his speech in the judiciary and that it would not be his shape so incisively.
Another states that the governor should even have climbed the tone a little, amid the judgment of his political godfather, but it did not need to be so much.
Nevertheless, they deny that Tarcisio made mistakes and say that it was necessary to position themselves politically, especially in front of an audience of supporters.
The expectation of these allies is that he no longer climb the tone against the Supreme, not to implode bridges. They say there is still no break from the governor with the court.
The surroundings of Bolsonaro’s political godson, in general, agrees with the assessment that the Supreme Court has exaggerated in its decisions, in the words of allies.
Their expectation is that the governor seeks the ministers of the Supreme at another time. If he did it now, it might seem like a retreat or that he is afraid of the court.
Tarcisio’s discourse also revived in the Supreme debate on amnesty proposals that surround the congress on the eve of the trial of the coup plot.
A Supreme Wing has argued that the court needs to be more open to popular outcry around forgiveness to the pockets involved in the attacks of January 8, without banning the debate or anticipating any declaration of unconstitutionality of a law on the subject.
Defenders of this assessment represent a still minority group in the Supreme, but evaluate to have room for the adhesion of new members of the Court in this thesis.
