The senator (-PI) is the biggest, but he shouldn’t be the only fish in Congress to fall into the net. He himself confirmed in statements and cell phone messages how broad his influence was in the political world.
It is only a matter of time, therefore, before others appear to create partisan embarrassments. And, perhaps, non-partisan. The more people are involved, the more ideologically ecumenical the reach of those affected, the less chance that this or that political field in dispute will suffer losses in the election.
This could be the calculation that the government and opposition make when they go out to take the Master scandal to the Parliament arena.
Regardless of who signed or failed to sign the various requests before the police arrived at one of the black capes in the center, no one really wanted to go deeper into the matter. So much so that there was an agreement for the president to hold a session of presidential vetoes without the regulatory requirement of reading a request for the creation of a commission.
Suddenly, not only interest arose but a dispute for each force to show more commitment to defending the parliamentary inquiry.
There are two possibilities for such commitment. One, that it is just a way of putting on an ethical pose for the electorate, trusting in the esprit de corps of (União-AP) to curb investigative impulses. Another, the intention explained above, that the more the mud spreads, the greater the chance of the account ending up in zero sum.
In the field of more or less hidden intentions, congressmen’s confidence in restrictions imposed by the Federal Supreme Court on recent commissions of inquiry is also included. In the loss of powers, the CPIs are emptied in practice to the delight and safety of pragmatists who make the defense of ethics a useful electoral figuration.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
