Aside
from showing the world the pulsating, deep-seated, still-metastasizing sickness
that lies at heart of Brazil’s political class – what kind of ruling
class decides to leave in place a President caught on tape endorsing
bribes? – yesterday’s vote also forever dropped the mask on the real
reasons why Rousseff was impeached.
Contrary
to the deceitful script created and relentlessly disseminated by the
highly-paid, glittery propagandists employed by the country’s incestuous,
oligarchical media, her impeachment had two, and only two, motives: 1)
protect Brazil’s political class from the corruption investigation by
empowering the capital’s most corrupt figures and letting them kill the
investigation, and 2) serve the interests of domestic plutocrats and
international finance by “reforming” social programs for the nation’s
poorest in the name of “austerity.”
Glen Greenwald
Just over a year ago, in Brasília, one of the most nauseating and
humiliating political spectacles I’ve ever seen took place over nine hours. In
Brazil’s lower House – a body where a majority of members are
implicated in corruption investigations – one dirty, shady
cretin after the next stood up in front of television cameras
and flamboyantly declared that their conscience, their
religion, their God, their children, their devotion to Jerusalem, the memory of
their mother, their pastor, the purity of their soul demanded that they
punish corruption by removing the elected President, Dilma Rousseff, from
office.
Just imagine the most extreme, primitive cartoon version of a gleefully
hypocritical moralizer – a preacher who leaves his weekly whorehouse orgy
to go directly to Sunday church to rail against hell-bound sinners – and you’ll
have a perfect vision of the majority faction that sanctimoniously paraded
itself that day. The slime that oozes from their pores is palpable. These
are the people who nullified a national election in, and are thus now
ruling over, the planet’s fifth most populous country.
With clarifying symbolism so perfect no screenwriter could imagine
it, that tawdry, vulgar sleazefest was presided over by House Speaker
Eduardo Cunha (pictured, right), an organized crime boss masquerading as
a legislator. Shortly after he engineered Rousseff’s removal –
which the nation’s major media elites unified to pretend was motivated by
earnest concern about corruption – Cunha was sent to prison,
accused of bribery, money laundering, witness intimidation, and
racketeering.
(...)
Para continuar a leitura, acesse
Glen Greenwald – 03.08.2017.
IN The Intercept.
Vitória 'custa' pelo menos R$ 13,2 bi
Na visão de Fabio Klein, da Tendências
Consultoria, "em meio à tamanha impopularidade e à necessidade de garantir
apoio legislativo contra o avanço da denúncia de corrupção", aumenta a
tentação do governo para "usar recursos de poder disponíveis, dentre eles
a liberação do orçamento".
Daniel Rittner e Fernando Torres
A vitória obtida ontem pelo presidente Michel Temer na Câmara dos
Deputados teve um custo alto para os cofres públicos e doerá no bolso do setor
privado. Apenas três iniciativas de um "pacote de bondades" recente
para agradar aos parlamentares - a liberação de emendas, o refinanciamento de
dívidas de produtores rurais e o aumento dos royalties da mineração - somam uma
conta de R$ 13,2 bilhões. O enfraquecimento político do governo também pode
gerar frustrações na arrecadação federal, com um atraso na reoneração da folha
de pagamento e mudanças no projeto do Refis.
Mais de 95% dos R$ 4,15 bilhões dos empenhos de emendas parlamentares ocorreram
entre junho e julho. O período coincide com as vésperas da votação da denúncia
apresentada pela Procuradoria-Geral da República (PGR) contra Temer na Comissão
de Constituição e Justiça (CCJ) e, logo em seguida, no plenário da Câmara. Nos
primeiros dois dias de agosto, o , o valor empenhado supera toda a liberação de
janeiro a março.
O empenho é a primeira etapa para a efetivação do gasto, quando esses
valores são "carimbados". Depois, ocorrem os pagamentos. No acumulado
do ano, os pagamentos somam R$ 2,04 bilhões.
(...)
Para continuar a leitura, acesse
Daniel Rittner e Fernando Torres – 03.08.2017.
In Valor Econômico.
