| > That's not what you said. You said "certain groups" are trying to undermine the non-existent impartiality of the supreme court. I said they were trying to "stamp political motivation on on the decisions of the upper judiciary". IOW, to label them as politically motivated. I wouldn't call it a conspiracy since these groups have been pretty vocal about it. By "certain groups" I meant "some political parties, politicians and associates", though I'm not comfortable defining it further since I don't have exact references ATM. > As you can see, there is absolutely nothing wrong with anything that was claimed. This is a different inquiry, check the numbers. > Whatever Bolsonaro plotted to do is mostly irrelevant when faced with this. If anything it'd be a counter-coup. I understand. Let's agree to disagree. |
You cannot possibly witness that and then continue believing in the so called impartiality of the court.
He's been regretting those words ever since for obvious reasons. He's even resigned from his position.
There's no need to debate this further. I could enumerate even more examples of impartiality and persecution, but if a judge publicly bragging about persecuting a political candidate fails to convince, what's the point?