Bricklayer: FHC joins the wave of stopping the bleeding of Lava Jato

By Fernando Brito, editor of brick

In your today's article In Estadão, for those who understand, Fernando Henrique joins the group that believes "we need to stop this bleeding" from Operation Lava Jato.

"I've been saying for a long time that the current political system (electoral and party-based) is "rotten." I support the Lava Jato operation and I know that without it, it would be more difficult to improve things. But let's not fool ourselves: without some form of political institution and without politicians to manage it, putting corrupt people in jail won't be enough to purge the errors in the management of the economy and politics. Those responsible should be imprisoned, but let's not confuse everything: not all politicians based their careers on transgression, nor were all those who financed politics, as well as those who received financial aid, donors or recipients of "bribes." If we don't distinguish between legal campaign donations and "slush funds," and between that and criminal arrangements between the government, parties, officials, and businesspeople, we'll be playing the game of "everyone being the same."

If they were, what way out would there be? It's time to unite the forces uncompromised by crime – and they exist in various sectors of the political spectrum – so that common sense prevails again and so that we can recreate institutions, understanding that in the contemporary world transparency is not a virtue, but an imperative and, on the other hand, that if there are no institutional means to decide and legitimize what we want, we will not escape disillusionment and perplexity.

Now is not just a time for accusations; it's also a time for seeking common ground.

But wait a minute, Fernando Henrique… Wasn't that the discourse being used, and which was accused of being a cover for a desire to "stop Lava Jato"? When it was said that things were being conducted in a way that would break the Brazilian economy, paralyze the country, and cause unemployment to explode, weren't we accused of being "complicit" with the construction companies?

Now that the elected government has been overthrown, is it "time to seek convergence"?

Do you think it's possible to "unite forces uncommitted to crime" by impeaching precisely someone who isn't accused of any crime other than "fiscal maneuvers" that have already been discredited by expert analysis and vague allegations that budget decrees were inconsistent with fiscal targets, which, in the unimpeachable words of Elio Gaspari, "would bring down all rulers, from Michel Temer to Tomé de Sousa"?

And it is reasonable to assume that you intend for the PSDB to be among these forces, whose national president, your protégé Aécio Neves, is already facing more than a dozen accusations from whistleblowers, ranging from Furnas to the construction of the administrative center of Minas Gerais.

How can one believe in the honesty of someone who points the finger at others? “There are those responsible, but it’s not relevant to accuse them. Probably some of them, if they are intellectually honest, are wondering: why didn’t I see sooner that irresponsibly indebting the country, even under the pretext of momentarily increasing the well-being of the people and creating illusions of economic growth, is something ruinous that future generations will pay for?” – if your own government did this on a stratospheric scale and increased the public debt from 28,4% in 1995 to 55,9% at the end of 2002?

What a nerve!

That's why Fernando Henrique is dismantled by Mehdi Hasan, an English journalist from Al Jazeera, in an interview that, unfortunately, is not yet subtitled online. But you can see the disaster by watching the video (at the end of the post) and reading the commented translation by Pablo Villaça on Facebook. It's an embarrassing situation for someone who is almost incoherent from beginning to end.

Accustomed to interviews with Brazilian journalists, who simply set him up for rehearsed counter-attacks, FHC had his positions challenged by an Al Jazeera anchor (…)

In the space of just ten minutes, the former president repeatedly stumbles, even contradicting the narrative that his coup-plotting accomplices have been insisting on when talking about "impeachment."

Moreover, FHC opens the interview by admitting that Dilma did NOT commit a crime "in the penal sense." And he added, "she committed a POLITICAL crime." Which is quite interesting, since there is nothing in the Constitution that defines "political crime" or impeachment as a punishment.

Then the interviewer points out that FHC was spending 300 million PER YEAR on fiscal irresponsibility, prompting the following unbelievable response: “In my case, it was different. We were adjusting.”

Next, the anchor points out how Cunha, Temer, and other accomplices are accused of corruption and asks if FHC doesn't see the irony in them leading the "impeachment." The former president begins to stammer, murmurs something about "it was the 'people' who led" and says that perhaps Temer/Cunha are opportunists. It is then that the interviewer interrupts him and says: "Okay, so you accept opportunism" and changes the subject.

TOIM.

What comes next is the best bait. "You said the impeachment was because of the people. 58% of the people want Temer out. So you support Temer's impeachment?"

FHC starts to stutter and tries to lie about the poll. The interviewer cuts him off and corrects him. The following dialogue takes place:

FHC: "I am not familiar with this research."

"I'm informing you now."

"You need more information."

"The LORD was unaware of the research!"

But the best moment: the journalist points out that Lava Jato revealed corruption at Petrobras during the FHC government, and the latter goes crazy:

"No, no, no. I protest!" And he says it was a "political" denunciation.

And he throws a tantrum you wouldn't believe. You have to see it to believe it.

Next, the interviewer talks about the recording of Jucá saying that they need to remove Dilma and put Temer in place to stop the bleeding of Lava Jato. FHC first tries to change the subject; the interviewer insists. The politician then says (I swear): "What was the result (of the conversation)? Zero."

“ZERO”?! The result was EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE DISCUSSING IN THE RECORDING!

Finally, the interviewer mentions the investigation into the allegation that FHC used Brasif to pay his former lover in France monthly.

FHC: "That's a lie."

"So why is there an investigation?"

"Because the PMDB politically pressured the Ministry of Justice!"

In other words: FHC's brain stops working under pressure.

What a DISASTROUS interview. In short: he admitted there's no criminal reason for impeachment; that the issue is purely political; …that all the accusations against Dilma are true, but against him they are politically motivated, and he even stammered, threw a tantrum, and couldn't answer.”