SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) reports via Common Dreams
The current attempt to remove President Dilma Rousseff of Brazil bears many resemblances to the [Bill] Clinton impeachment episode. It is led by a group of politicians who seek to overturn the results of national elections and steer the nation in a different, right-wing direction; and the elected president has not committed an impeachable offense.
[...] Most importantly, a crime is missing; even Bill Clinton's enemies could at least come up with the alleged crimes of perjury and obstruction of justice. But Dilma Rousseff's impeachers have no such criminal violation to even allege. This was the conclusion[PDF] [the week of July 11 by] the federal prosecutor, Ivan Claudio Marx, who was assigned to investigate the offenses for which Dilma is about to stand trial in Brazil's Senate.
He determined that Dilma did not break the law in her handling of the public budget. The impeachment centers around her decision to delay payments to the state banks, which allowed the government to maintain the appearance of staying within a targeted fiscal balance in its accounts. Marx determined that this was not a crime, because it was not a "credit transaction" that would require congressional approval.
In a society where the rule of law is in effect, that would spell the end of the effort to remove the elected president. But press reports--inasmuch as they even bothered to report on the prosecutor's conclusion--seem to indicate that pro-impeachment forces are acting as though the law, and the prosecutor's statement, are irrelevant. They are pressing full steam ahead for the Senate to reverse the results of the October 2014 presidential elections. And as we now know from leaked transcripts of phone conversations, some of the leaders are doing it to prevent further investigation of their own alleged corruption.
Previous: Brazil's Dilma Rousseff to Face Impeachment Trial
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 23 2016, @02:12PM
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Saturday July 23 2016, @02:51PM
And that's all you need to know. This is a coup.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Saturday July 23 2016, @03:00PM
So what it sounds like you are saying is that what you'd really like is an election right now, but because her term isn't up they're impeaching her instead. And there's not much question about her badly mismanaging stuff like the Olympics.
Why did Brazilians decide this was a better route than (1) use the fact that the opposition controls the legislature to stop her from doing what she wanted, followed by (2) elect somebody else when her term is up?
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 23 2016, @10:49PM
Another Brazilian here: sorry but this is just a cynical political exercise. How many more tapes and testimonies of ministers and politicians colluding to bring Dilma down in order to take attention away from their own corruption do you need to accept this? Cunha, Neves, Temer and his cabinet and scores more have coopted legitimate frustration over scandals and a weak economy for political benefit. Allegations are allegations until there is solid proof and due process is carried out. If a federal prosecutor says that no crimes were committed, then that's that. The 90s republican witch hunt is an apt comparison.
What this is is a worrisome precedent for a democratic nation. Leaders should be changed through the ballot box, not by political maneuvering that has every reason to want to inflame public opinion. Or are you going to argue that just because some mobs have rejected some politicians some of the time from physically being there that somehow excuses the circus that is the media and congress? I don't know if you were watching, but the political grandstanding in the lower house during the procedural vote shows that politicians are plenty media savvy. And plenty more rallies have been held with politicians of all stripes also taking to the streets.
As for 'the whole fscking country wants her out': I don't and the massive counter protests and rallies show that there are millions of others like me that agree with me. And I say that despite thinking that she's done a terrible job in her second term (especially with all the austerity). I want rule of law, not more politicians covering their asses and mob rule.
(Score: 2) by purple_cobra on Sunday July 24 2016, @09:45AM
Classic misdirection: "But what I did was nothing compared to what she did!"
Meanwhile, in the UK: we got rid of our pig-poker and now we have Attila the Hen, while the main opposition party repeatedly shoots itself in every available limb.
These politicians speak different languages but are mostly the same: greedy, venal arseholes who would throw anyone to the wolves if it meant they could stay on the gravy train a little longer.