The journalist and former senator Ana Amélia Lemos and the commentator José Eduardo Cardozo debated, on Tuesday (26), in The Great Debate (Monday to Friday, at 11pm), if the “photo with Trump stops Flávio’s wear and tear in the Master case?”
Senator and pre-candidate for President, Flávio Bolsonaro (PL-RJ), Flávio Bolsonaro met with the President of the United States, Donald Trump, at the White House. The visit took place days after the publication of conversations and audios in which Flávio had .
When asked if the meeting was intended to divert attention from the episode, . “In no way, it is the desperation of the Lula government. I have already said everything I had to say on this subject, I had absolutely nothing to hide,” he declared.
Debate about the real objectives of the trip
Ana Amélia Lemos stated that the visit clearly had the purpose of changing the agenda. “It is clear that this visit had the objective of changing the agenda, removing the case of the relationship with Vorcaro and the financing of the film (Dark Horse) from the news and trying to divert the focus of attention”, he said.
The journalist added that the meeting did not have an objective agenda and was scheduled at the last minute, at a time when the issue related to the issue continued to have repercussions in Brazil.
Lemos also highlighted that the visit may have served as a demonstration of access to the White House, compared to the visit that Lula had made to the same location a week earlier. According to her, while Lula would have achieved a positive agenda, Flávio’s visit generated memes with Trump in the center, flanked by the two Brazilian politicians.
“Artificial intelligence works miracles and it is exactly this image that is now causing the curiosity of the Brazilian electorate”, he commented. She also highlighted that right-wing leaders would be concerned about the lack of clarity in explanations about the episode, which would represent significant political strain for the pre-candidate.
Cardozo points out the fragility of the explanations
Commentator José Eduardo Cardozo was even more emphatic when assessing that the photo with Trump does not change in any way the need for Flávio to give explanations. “He can take a photo with whatever he wants at that moment. This won’t change anything from the point of view of the explanation he has to give in the Banco Master case,” he stated.
Cardozo raised the hypothesis that the trip to the United States could also have had the purpose of bringing together people involved in the case in person to align versions, since, according to him, the explanations given until then would be contradictory and incoherent.
Cardozo listed a series of points that, according to him, would remain without a satisfactory answer: the amount actually spent on the film, the destination of the money raised, the role of an NGO that would have received parliamentary amendments without a clear purpose, and the purchase of a property by a production company for Eduardo Bolsonaro. “How do you explain all this?” he asked.
For the commentator, the contradictions between the different versions presented by Flávio and his surroundings made it practically impossible to construct a coherent narrative. “It’s a disaster from the point of view of what they did and a disaster from the point of view of how they are trying to explain it,” he concluded.
