Video: Dilma Rousseff’s Impeachment Trial Nears an End, Endangering Brazilian Democracy

Not only those commenters supporting the article have no idea about what is going on in Brazil they do not even understand the concept of impeachment.
Galactus (the most intelligent of all)

“…You are claiming that just because a “Legal” framework exists and was used to oust Dilma, that everything is fair and just, correct?

IF that is your argument, then how do you feel about the internment of Japanese citizens in the US during WWII? Or the extermination of 6M Jews during WWII?”

The Brazilian Congress and Senate used laws that was passed and accepted by PT itself. The Senate did not pass a special impeachment law targeted at PT. It used the law that already in the book.Most of the top judges chosen to enforce that constitution used to impeach Dilma were selected by PT itself!!

Calling you a lapdog is an understatement. You are equating Nazis who passed laws specifically designed to oppress the Jews with a Congress that used laws passed, accepted and enforced by the accused herself.

Mani: Some impeachable offenses ARE NOT EVEN CRIMES

Galactus “This statement of Yours just became the most stoopidest statement to date.”

Really?

Elizabeth Bazan legislative attorney for the American law division US Congress Research Services. Former Vice Chairperson Federal Association Administration of Justice
“…the precedent in this country.. reflect the fact that conduct which MAY NOT CONSTITUTE A CRIME, but which may still be serious misbehaviour…. may provide sufficient ground for impeachment ”
From “Impeachment an overview of constitutional provision”

The Constitutional Rights Foundation:
“…Since 1386 the English parliament had used high crimes and misdemeanours as one of the ground to impeach… Some of these charges were crimes. OTHERS WERE NOT. The one common denominator… was that the official had somehow abused the power of his office and was unfit to serve ”

I just wasted my time answering a lapdog. Lapdogs do not care about facts.

Some readers seem to be offended by the idea that PSDB is not a right wing party. PSDB created the first programs for cash handouts to the poor in Brazil in the presidency that preceded Lula. Right wing parties simply do not create such programs. Then Lula became president and the economic policy was very much inherited from the previous government. That shows that PT and PSDB are very close in practical ideology. Under Dilma, as the economic crisis hit, Dilma cut the budget for social programs – an indication that PT, while on the Left, is not too far from Center and uses orthodox economic policies. Then look at the 13 years PT has been in power. If it was focused on socialist policies, movements like MST would have disappeared, as all Brazilians who wanted land would have gotten it. But 13 years later, MST is as strong as ever. I would be pleased to see Glenn Greenwald respond and explain how PT can be Left and PSDB can be Right. Their ideology is very close.

#tchauquerida

Next step: Full prosecution on the gang members.

Well, they did it.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/31/dilma-rousseff-impeached-president-brazilian-senate-michel-temer

Mr. Greenwald not only are you wrong in saying this is a coup, you also purposefully mislead the non-Brazilian public. Remember you are not the only foreigner living in Brazil and that can speak Portuguese.
Also, why do you never mention your conflict of interest in that your partner, David Miranda, who also works for The Intercept (talk about nepotism), is currently a candidate for the pro-Dilma party, PSOL?

I suggest readers take a look at this article that unmasks your poorly made, misinformed assertions on this subject.

http://hubpages.com/politics/Sorry-Glenn-Greenwald-But-Youre-Wrong-About-Brazil

he link below the heading reads:

Glenn Greenwald no Democracy Now

Mr. Greenwald is announcing the end of Democracy and someone should write an eulogy for this peculiar form of government.

Democracy is not completely dead of course. The Swiss invented it and will probably still be practising it in their mountain retreats long after the rest of the world has moved on to more modern forms of government. Other counties will continue to label themselves as democracies, even though the brand has lost its marketing clout. But democracy is now in palliative care, and while it may appear to be a pitiable wreck, at one time it cut a fine figure and was widely admired.

The United States did much to popularize democracy in the eighteenth century. The theory of the founding fathers was that gentlemen farmers, with slaves to work their plantations, would have sufficient leisure time to educate themselves on public policy, and thus as informed voters, make choices which would help to guide and shape the government of their country. The idea of participation of citizens in the government which rules them has long been popular as a means to spread the guilt more widely and co-opt them into the government’s schemes. There is only one problem – staying informed is a time consuming process, and only a small number of citizens are sufficiently masochistic to dedicate their time this this task.

So the new model is the citizen as consumer, with the government dedicated to keeping them comfortable and entertained. Under this model, the citizen does not need to make decisions, although they may still vote as a means to show their brand preference. Some people still call this a democracy, as a voter still gets to choose between Coke and Pepsi. However, the hard work of producing the product is done outside the voter’s sphere of awareness, and the ‘choice’ is limited to the logo on the packaging.

Democracy was therefore a useful stepping stone to corporatism. Right now, people are disillusioned and can’t see any positive aspects to democracy. But eventually their attitudes will mellow and it will become wrapped up in nostalgia and even remembered fondly.

Thank you Glenn for keeping the beacon of true journalism alive and well heard.

My mind ia blown with the impartiality of the author, he’s somehow been put under the PT spell. The only gringo I know living in Brazil with these opinions.

Glenn – how did the members of the other party get in control of those key ministries?

The great irony in all this is that Dilma would today still be president if she had intervened in the Lava Jato & Oderbrecht corruption investigations in order to save the necks of powerful congressmen, some of whom were her own political allies. But she never did-she didn’t lift a finger to intervene to help herself or her allies. And for that reason, they turned on her and invented a pretext to impeach her.

At least she was impeached. In the Ukraine the elected president was overthrown by NGOs, deep state operatives, and Nazi Battalions. But of course the Intercept staff won’t talk about the coup in the Ukraine … it might upset the guy that writes their paychecks.

If any country want to be free of a Coup d’ Etat the first thing they have to do is to close the US Embassy and put all their staff, CIA included, in an airplane at the airport and say: “Good bye, MFs”. Especially Latino American countries.

Apple owes $14.5 billion in back taxes, European authorities say

Apple runs its European operations from Ireland, which has a 12.5 percent corporate tax rate. But its agreement with the Irish government allowed Apple to pay a tax rate of just 1 percent or even less — .0005 percent, in some years — according to the European Commission, which launched an investigation into Apple’s tax strategies in 2014.

…The Obama administration has repeatedly objected to these investigations, saying they unfairly targeted American companies. But it may not be able to stop them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/apple-owes-145-billion-in-back-taxes-european-authorities/2016/08/30/e7f6ed80-6ea2-11e6-9705-23e51a2f424d_story.html

Apple pays .0005 percent in tax….and Obama is going to bat for them. Ordinary Americans pay….slightly more than .0005 percent, and no sign of Obama coming to their rescue.

.

anything with the word righter in the headline is already a joke…lol

It’s just a return of Brazil to client state status within the so-called American sphere of influence; Brazil was in danger of becoming another China – development of a manufacturing sector, widespread education for all citizens, technological development, independent currency policies, etc. That’s threat’s been squelched, and Washington is pleased.

Unfortunately, Brazil, rather like Venezuela, over-relied on fossil fuel and commodity (in Brazil, soybean, beef, iron ore) exports for economic growth and so when commodity prices collapsed, the whole system of patronage fell apart. If they’d been tightly fiscally conservative, using all the oil money to move to a new economic system not so commodity-centric, they might have been able to survive the price collapse without so much economic disruption. However, the tightly elite-controlled media was able to manipulate that economic disruption into public anger; but the result will be worse living conditions for most of the Brazilian people.

But the problems are kind of glaring: why couldn’t Brazil build water-treatment plants, under Dilma and Lulu? Why can’t they prevent corporations from creating disasters like the iron ore dam collapse? It’s as if both sides are fighting over the who controls the cash, not thinking about the underlying issues.

This has been the problem with the traditional left-vs-right narrative: they argue over whether the fossil fuel money should go to the wealthy elites (right), or should the fossil fuel money go to raise living standards for the poor (left)? They never seem to stop and think that relying on fossil fuel for all your finances is itself a problem; this makes them vulnerable to external manipulation (see for example NSA spying on Petrobras, the role of Brazilian debt increases, aka the “Shock Doctrine” approach described by Naomi Klein, etc.)

There’s a real push to bring these non-aligned South and Latin American economies back under Wall Street control these days; here’s another example, with Israel playing its usual adjunct role:
https://www.mintpressnews.com/israel-honduras-enter-new-blood-soaked-military-alliance-support-state-sponsored-terrorism/219887/

Israel and Honduras announced a new security agreement this month in which Israel will supply weapons and training to the Honduran military. . . The deal, inked on Aug. 20, would dramatically upgrade the Honduran regime’s offensive capabilities.

The elites in these countries are really something else – incompetent greedy tin-pot dictator types, more than willing to keep their countries as raw commodity suppliers instead of promoting real development, entering into ridiculous loan arrangements guaranteed to keep them in perpetual debt – the standard neocolonial model. A bunch of spoiled brats, undermining the future of their countries while kissing Wall Street’s ass.

“This isn’t a coup, it’s democracy in evolution,” claimed Senator José Medeiros, who blamed the current turmoil in Brazil on Rousseff’s government. “You call this process a coup? The supreme court presides over this session. Is the chief justice a coup-monger?” asked Ricardo Ferraço of the Social Democratic party of Brazil.

Rousseff is being impeached for window-dressing government accounts ahead of the last election, by issuing decrees on spending without congressional approval and waiting several months to reimburse a state-owned bank for a low-interest financing scheme for family farmers.

Senators have to judge whether this is a “crime of responsibility” that merits removal from office.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/29/brazil-president-dilma-rousseff-impeachment-trial

Is “coup” the right word? Probably not. Using it is an abuse of language. When people think “coup” they think tanks, they think swift, they think extra-legal. I think using “coup” is a stretch.

I understand the power of the word. I understand why supporters of Rousseff would use it. But I also understand why in the longer run, using it is counterproductive and will harm efforts to defend against a real coup.

If Rousseff did anything legally wrong, I agree it does sound minor, the Senate is being selective in its prosecution and disproportionate in its remedy.

But on the political side, I’m not entirely unhappy that budgetary shell games are being punished, even if this is not the motive of those doing the prosecution. It’s setting the bar high for future governments. And democracy is still in place, Rousseff’s party can run again, since….it’s not a coup.

PSDB is not a right wing party. There is pretty much no right wing in Brazil. The expectation of a large majority of the population is that the government is there to help them with everything. PSDB’s agenda is an Europe-style social democracy. And Temer is from PMDB and was elected as vice-president. Let’s not fuzzify facts. Then there is the question this article does not want to touch: Is Dilma guilty? Was her government using accounting tricks to hide a huge deficit? Yes.

Brazil is making progress. For the first time in its history, democracy was snuffed out by a political coup, not a military coup. Nobody is slated to be executed and the new government does not term itself a ‘junta’.

This is a shining example to the rest of the world that democracy can be ended peacefully. Too many people imagine that the end of democracy must be accompanied by protests in the street that are violently put down by the authorities. Brazilians, by simply shrugging their shoulders at the new state of affairs, have shown us an alternative.

Mr. Greenwald, below, has stated he does not believe Temer is now president for life. But the courts have banned him from participating in the next election, which virtually ensures there will be no next election. Brazilians may miss the excitement of elections, but then they will watch the horror show occurring in the United States and realize their good fortune.

I do not rule out the possibility, however, that if Brazilians demonstrate they can obediently vote for the lesser of two evils, their democracy may be returned to them.

I can’t say that I am well-informed on what’s going on in Brazil but, if her adversaries lost 4 elections, where is the 2/3+ senate supermajority that is likely to find her guilty coming from?

Seriously, I don’t believe I am well informed in this matter but I just read a CNN article stating that her current approval rating is around 10-15%. Is that true or is CNN lying? And, if it’s true, why is her approval this low?

@ Glenn

Thanks for the clarification below. Out of curiosity when is the next chance for the Brazilian people to throw these cranks out of office i.e. is it coterminous with the “end of Dilma’s term” regarding all the Senators that are behind this? Or just some? Or are elections staggered in some way for President and Senators (individual or otherwise)?

What I’m really getting at is what these individual Senators have done going to be difficult to undue electorally regarding both the “interim” soon to be “permanent” government until the end of Dilma’s term, and regarding individual Senatorial elections? Or will the Brazilian people have a chance to replace all the culprits all at once or just piecemeal as there individual Senator terms expire? And if it’s the latter, what’s that cycle look like for those involved?

We are about to get rid of over a decade of corruption and incompetence in our government, although the “bill” of it all we be paid by us for the next 20 years. This was a terrorist (which is what the text says in other words) elected will with money from a Brazilian company that is now bankrupt, bribery schemes, and the like. She also got the support of the criminal Luis Inacio Lula da Silva that was the biggest scam in our history during my life time. This text as well as this video is biased and it overlooks what is happening here.

US State Dept. has now met twice with the opposition/temporary government.

First on April 20, 2016 in D.C. b/w Brazilian Senator Aloysio Nunes & US State Undersecretary Thomas Shannon. This was a really low blow, especially since Brazilian Senate had yet to even officially suspend Dilma.

Second meeting came after Dilma’s suspension on August 5, 2016 between US State Sec. John Kerry & Jose Serra, Brazil’s temporary Foreign Minister. This meeting basically confirmed US Support for Temer.

While I understand low-level day-to-day operational meetings between nations are necessary, these 2 high-level meetings were absolutely unnecessary.

Iran is visiting Latin America but skipped Brazil because it’s waiting for this impeachment process to finish. This is exactly what the US should have done – waited until the impeachment process is over before holding high-level meetings. The USA is also the most powerful nation on Earth – and maybe in the history of civilization – so let’s not downplay these meetings.

I’m still highly skeptical & perplexed about Bernie’s ninth-inning commentary on the impeachment, but I’ll try now to give him the benefit of the doubt that his heart is in the right place. However, I wish he’d criticize both State Dept. as well as Madeleine Albright for her April 19th meeting with Nunes.

That’s what we need Bernie to do: burn up the US State Dept. & Clintonites for their meetings. He can still protect Hillary, as we know he doesn’t want Trump to win, but he needs to put her & Obama in their place now rather than later. He likely won’t, but he’d probably turn into rock star overnight in Latin America if he did such a bold act.

Besides Glenn & Amy, I find Mark Weisbrot (great article below) to be another solid voice on this circus of an impeachment….an impeachment that’s led by Brazilians, but that’s surely ‘indirectly assisted’ by the red, white & blue

http://cepr.net/publications/op-eds-columns/kerry-s-meeting-with-brazilian-official-shows-support-for-illegitimate-government

This must be awful for you to have to witness. Your impersonation of Paul Glastris was damn funny and illustrated you’re taking all this somewhat in stride, which was nice to see. But it can’t be easy being immersed in politics and seeing how increasingly unreasonable establishmentarians seem to be in such concentrated ways in both Brazil and the US right now. Your simple point that sensibly dreading Trump doesn’t preclude scrutinizing and firmly criticizing Clinton is so needed these days – but the stunning power of the press in many nations now to reduce (itself and) the populace to childlike levels of mendacious, self-censoring defense of an oligarchic establishment is really quite astonishing.

Your writing is always refreshingly direct, so thanks for using the oh-so persuasive press to make engaged thinking appealing, and all the best to you as this sad spectacle in Brazil unfolds.

Did Soros buy Temer “on sale”?

@Glenn,

You/The Intercept need(s) to call for the Brazilian people who voted for Rouseff to march to the senate and protest in demostrations. That sort of political power cannot be simply ignored by those would vote on impeachment.

Thankyouverymuch for keeping us apprised of the situation.
Dilma is a blessed soul and a true spirit of life, freedom, courage and people.
God bless Dilma Rousseff.

As a result, the unelected government now about to take power permanently is preparing a series of policies . . . .

@ Glenn

Glenn not sure I understand the use of “permanently” in the above sentence. Are these Brazilian usurpers going to suspend elections in the future? If not, won’t the Brazilian people have a chance to throw out this fraudulent government in the next Brazilian series of democratic elections?

I mean this whole things stinks to high heaven, but aren’t the Brazilian people going to have big incentives to purge these fools the next electoral go around? And if so, when are the next elections schedule for in Brazil?