4 ms·

Oh I understood your comment perfectly. Sorry if mine didn't reflect that. > I'm arguing that according to common sense, he is guilty of corruption. And I arg

Oh I understood your comment perfectly. Sorry if mine didn't reflect that. > I'm arguing that according to common sense, he is guilty of corruption. And I argue that it's a good thing that _common sense_ is not a criterion for convicting someone - in theory. Which clearly you agree with. > But I also said why vote for someone who's implicated in so many corruption scandals? The pile of evidence is astounding. Is it really? Evidence that implicates him as a person, showing that he used his political influence for personal gain? Evidence other than people who had already been convicted themselves and were facing an option of either saying what the courts wanted to hear and get lenience, or facing life or near-life sentences? (Not in the technical sense, since Brazil doesn't have life sentences, but for all practical purposes yes) Evidence other than unsigned contracts? A visit to a flat that was actually sold to a third party, not involved in any of this? Evidence other than a paddleboat in a country house of a friend of his family? Evidence other than words like "I don't have proof but I have the conviction" from the judge who condemned him? Real evidence that would justify putting him in prison? Note that I'm not saying he hasn't committed any crimes but what I do know is that other than through a lot of undue process and fabrications they managed to condemn him. I believe in fair justice, and the only logical conclusion from these processes is that he is innocent. They turned his life around for years and still had to resort to a process fraught with illegalities and wrongdoing to condemn him. That's not fair, and in fact it's downright criminal, so he's not guilty. Since he's innocent until proven guilty, which he wasn't, the only possible conclusion is his innocence. In any case, according to _common sense_ he should be in office. That's what elections are for. Which he now is and, in my opinion, both Brazil and the rest of the world are better off for it. You're very welcome to disagree, of course.

matheusmoreira 4y ago
Are you seriously claiming the entire corruption case against him is fabrication? If that's true, why would they throw out the case based on some "jurisdiction" nonsense?
- cassianoleal 4y ago
  It’s not nonsense. In any case, I thought I’d made my point. If you have specifics you want to ask about, please do.
  - matheusmoreira 4y ago
    It is absolute nonsense compared to everything you're claiming. You're saying that the judges who sentenced him are corrupt and biased, that every piece of evidence and testimony incriminating him was fabricated or produced under duress. That's a much better reason to throw out a case compared to "he should have been tried in Brasília". It's hilarious to watch a supreme court judge who's just a lawyer appointed by politicial connections say that actual judges aren't "competent" to try Lula's case.
    - cassianoleal 4y ago
      You seem to be confused about a couple things, so... > That's a much better reason to throw out a case compared to "he should have been tried in Brasília". I agree. That said, the matter of jurisdiction comes first. The justice acted correctly and fixed the overarching vice in the process by sending it to Brasília. It should never have been tried in Curitiba, and if you think he's guilty of all those crimes, you should have joined the chorus of the crowd who just wanted justice to run its course in the right way and pushed for his case to be sent to Brasília in the first place. He was politically tried in Curitiba against due process, on top of all the other vices. Brasília should have been where they would then review everything else, but alas now it's too late. Ironically, Lula, his lawyers and his supporters have been all along the ones pushing for him to actually face justice. > It's hilarious to watch a supreme court judge (...) say that actual judges aren't "competent" to try Lula's case. You also seem to be confused about what _competence_ means in this context. What they said is not that Moro is an incompetent judge. This has nothing to do with his ability to do his job. _Competence_, in this case, means that his court was not the correct jurisdiction for the trial. Nothing more, nothing less.
airstrike 4y ago
> Real evidence that would justify putting him in prison? The bar for putting someone in prison is higher than the one for not voting in that person. Not sure why you keep conflating the two. Thinking Lula is a great or even serviceable candidate is unfathomable to me.
- matheusmoreira 4y ago
  > Thinking Lula is a great or even serviceable candidate is unfathomable to me. Agreed. That this man was not only allowed to run for presidency but actually won is probably the greatest humiliation ever imposed on the people of Brazil. I barely have words to describe how it felt to watch this guy be sworn into power yesterday.
  - cassianoleal 4y ago
    > is probably the greatest humiliation ever imposed on the people of Brazil I find having a science denier with fascist overtones to be worse, but alas I'm not trying to say how I feel is how all the people of Brazil feel. > I barely have words to describe how it felt to watch this guy be sworn into power yesterday. Me neither, but probably for the opposite reason. I do have Bolsonaro and Mourão to thank for the beautiful ceremony where populars representing all background passed the Presidential sash to Lula though. Had they not been so cowardly and vindicative, one of them might have been there in place of all those beautiful people. That was a ceremony which is going to appear in history books for decades or centuries to come!
    - matheusmoreira 4y ago
      > Had they not been so cowardly and vindicative I'll end this pointless argument by agreeing with you on this. Those bastards are cowards. Seeing Bolsonaro run away like a rat was just as humiliating to the people who supported him and the brazilian right in general.
- cassianoleal 4y ago
  > Not sure why you keep conflating the two. I didn't. I merely said that _common sense_ doesn't say that Lula should be in prison, and it never should - as you rightfully said, the bar for putting someone in prison is higher than popular vote. I then proceeded to say that common sense does say he should be in office. He was, after all, voted in.

matheusmoreira 4y ago

Are you seriously claiming the entire corruption case against him is fabrication? If that's true, why would they throw out the case based on some "jurisdiction" nonsense?

cassianoleal 4y ago
It’s not nonsense. In any case, I thought I’d made my point. If you have specifics you want to ask about, please do.
- matheusmoreira 4y ago
  It is absolute nonsense compared to everything you're claiming. You're saying that the judges who sentenced him are corrupt and biased, that every piece of evidence and testimony incriminating him was fabricated or produced under duress. That's a much better reason to throw out a case compared to "he should have been tried in Brasília". It's hilarious to watch a supreme court judge who's just a lawyer appointed by politicial connections say that actual judges aren't "competent" to try Lula's case.
  - cassianoleal 4y ago
    You seem to be confused about a couple things, so... > That's a much better reason to throw out a case compared to "he should have been tried in Brasília". I agree. That said, the matter of jurisdiction comes first. The justice acted correctly and fixed the overarching vice in the process by sending it to Brasília. It should never have been tried in Curitiba, and if you think he's guilty of all those crimes, you should have joined the chorus of the crowd who just wanted justice to run its course in the right way and pushed for his case to be sent to Brasília in the first place. He was politically tried in Curitiba against due process, on top of all the other vices. Brasília should have been where they would then review everything else, but alas now it's too late. Ironically, Lula, his lawyers and his supporters have been all along the ones pushing for him to actually face justice. > It's hilarious to watch a supreme court judge (...) say that actual judges aren't "competent" to try Lula's case. You also seem to be confused about what _competence_ means in this context. What they said is not that Moro is an incompetent judge. This has nothing to do with his ability to do his job. _Competence_, in this case, means that his court was not the correct jurisdiction for the trial. Nothing more, nothing less.

airstrike 4y ago

> Real evidence that would justify putting him in prison? The bar for putting someone in prison is higher than the one for not voting in that person. Not sure why you keep conflating the two. Thinking Lula is a great or even serviceable candidate is unfathomable to me.

matheusmoreira 4y ago
> Thinking Lula is a great or even serviceable candidate is unfathomable to me. Agreed. That this man was not only allowed to run for presidency but actually won is probably the greatest humiliation ever imposed on the people of Brazil. I barely have words to describe how it felt to watch this guy be sworn into power yesterday.
- cassianoleal 4y ago
  > is probably the greatest humiliation ever imposed on the people of Brazil I find having a science denier with fascist overtones to be worse, but alas I'm not trying to say how I feel is how all the people of Brazil feel. > I barely have words to describe how it felt to watch this guy be sworn into power yesterday. Me neither, but probably for the opposite reason. I do have Bolsonaro and Mourão to thank for the beautiful ceremony where populars representing all background passed the Presidential sash to Lula though. Had they not been so cowardly and vindicative, one of them might have been there in place of all those beautiful people. That was a ceremony which is going to appear in history books for decades or centuries to come!
  - matheusmoreira 4y ago
    > Had they not been so cowardly and vindicative I'll end this pointless argument by agreeing with you on this. Those bastards are cowards. Seeing Bolsonaro run away like a rat was just as humiliating to the people who supported him and the brazilian right in general.
cassianoleal 4y ago
> Not sure why you keep conflating the two. I didn't. I merely said that _common sense_ doesn't say that Lula should be in prison, and it never should - as you rightfully said, the bar for putting someone in prison is higher than popular vote. I then proceeded to say that common sense does say he should be in office. He was, after all, voted in.