Far Right Brazillian Populist Bolsonaro Plotted Coup in 2022

[BeaverFever]

The “Brazilian Trump” and one-time darling of the right, former President Jair Bolsonaro plotted a coup when he lost re-election. Shocker.  Birds of a feather  

 

Bolsonaro allies nearly launched military coup in 2022, police report says

Senior Brazil military figures backed plot to seize power after Bolsonaro’s election defeat, federal documents allege
 

Brazil came within a whisker of a far-right military coup and the assassination of a supreme court judge just days before President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva took power in January 2023, a federal police report has claimed.

The report about the alleged plot to help the rightwing populist Jair Bolsonaro cling to power was made public on Tuesday, and paints a chilling portrait of how close one of the world’s largest democracies came to being plunged back into authoritarian rule.

 

The 884-page document describes a complex, three-year conspiracy that investigators believe was designed to pave the way for a military power grab by using social media to disseminate false claims of electoral fraud that plotters hoped would justify such an intervention in the public eye.

…

The federal police report – which the Guardian has reviewed – claims the only reason Bolsonaro did not sign that decree blocking the transfer of power was because the plotters had failed to secure sufficient support from Brazil’s military top brass.

“The evidence [gathered] … shows that the commander of the navy, Adm Almir Garnier [Santos], and the defence minister, [Gen] Paulo Sérgio [Nogueira de Oliveira], adhered to the coup attempt. However, the [army] commander [Marco Antônio] Freire Gomes and [Carlos de Almeida] Baptista Júnior of the air force positioned themselves against any kind of measure that would cause an institutional rupture in the country,” the report alleges.

Federal police said the only thing that prevented the coup attempt taking place was “the unequivocal stance” of Freire Gomes, Baptista Junior and the majority of the army high command. It claimed those people “remained faithful to the values that govern the democratic rule of law state and did not cave in to coup-mongering pressure”.

Bolsonaro was last week formally accused of being one of 37 people involved in criminal conspiracy designed to obliterate Brazil’s democratic system through a rightwing coup d’état.

 

…

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/26/brazil-almost-suffered-far-right-military-coup-police-report-claims

[Radiorum]

Bolsonaro was not able to get enough loyalists in place. If Trump has his way, this won't be the case for him.

Trump and Hegseth declaring they want to get rid of the "woke" generals is only a pretext they present to the American people to justify their true corrupt plans.

Why does Trump call them "my generals?" What relationship does he feel it should be?

[BeaverFever]

12 hours ago, Radiorum said:

Bolsonaro was not able to get enough loyalists in place. If Trump has his way, this won't be the case for him.

Trump and Hegseth declaring they want to get rid of the "woke" generals is only a pretext they present to the American people to justify their true corrupt plans.

Why does Trump call them "my generals?" What relationship does he feel it should be?

Yep It’s not a coincidence that Trump had such affinity for Bolsonaro. Just like the right’s endless affection for Orban, another authoritarian Putin acolyte who has effectively become dictator of Hungary and the model which the right continues to praise. 

[User]

On 11/27/2024 at 9:38 PM, BeaverFever said:

The “Brazilian Trump” and one-time darling of the right, former President Jair Bolsonaro plotted a coup when he lost re-election. Shocker.  Birds of a feather  

Well, if Bolsonaro actually did any of this, it would have actually been an attempted coup, unlike anything Trump was allegedly involved in doing. 

 

[BeaverFever]

20 minutes ago, User said:

Well, if Bolsonaro actually did any of this, it would have actually been an attempted coup, unlike anything Trump was allegedly involved in doing. 

 

A coup attempt by any other name is still a coup attempt 

Edited November 29, 2024 by BeaverFever

[User]

11 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

A coup attempt by any other name is still a coup attempt 

Let me guess... you can't offer a meaningful definition of woman either... 

 

[BeaverFever]

2 hours ago, User said:

Let me guess... you can't offer a meaningful definition of woman either... 

 

Sure I can, not that MAGAs are sticklers for rules or definitions but here’s one for you: . “Woman” is a gender identity rather than biological sex therefore a woman is anyone whom society generally agrees is a woman.  It’s the same way with race if you think about it

Female is biological sex. 
 

Trump and Bolsonaro both attempted and failed to overturn a free and fair democratic election through undemocratic means 

[User]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

Sure I can, not that MAGAs are sticklers for rules or definitions but here’s one for you: . “Woman” is a gender identity rather than biological sex therefore a woman is anyone whom society generally agrees is a woman.  It’s the same way with race if you think about it

Female is biological sex. 

LOL. As I figured, you are defining the term with the term. A woman is whatever we say a woman is. That is meaningless, you didn't actually offer a definition. 

As I said, this is why you can't figure out what "coup" means either. 

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

Trump and Bolsonaro both attempted and failed to overturn a free and fair democratic election through undemocratic means 

As you have already run away from several other discussions now... once again, Trump no more tried to overturn a free and fair democratic election through undemocratic means than Gore did. 

Tell me, did you support removing Trump from the ballot like Colorado and Maine tried to do? Like many others on the left cheered on?

 

Edited November 30, 2024 by User

[BeaverFever]

On 11/29/2024 at 7:02 PM, User said:

LOL. As I figured, you are defining the term with the term. A woman is whatever we say a woman is. That is meaningless, you didn't actually offer a definition. 

As I said, this is why you can't figure out what "coup" means either. 

As you have already run away from several other discussions now... once again, Trump no more tried to overturn a free and fair democratic election through undemocratic means than Gore did. 

Tell me, did you support removing Trump from the ballot like Colorado and Maine tried to do? Like many others on the left cheered on?

 

I am not defining a term with a term. Identities are different from biology.  Identities can be assigned or claimed, they are not empirical facts

“Female” is biological sex, empirically proven

“Woman” is an identity 

Hedonistic vulgar MAGA Trump supporters identify as conservatives. So do pious religious right bible thumpers, so do Never-Trumpers. They all assign the conservative identity to themselves despite being very different. Half-black people who look black are told they are black and are treated as if they are black no matter how much they try to convince people they are half white and how much they may assign a white or half-white identity to themselves. 
 

Why is that so hard to understand?

 

And I can’t believe you’re still beating that ridiculous Al Gore hobby horse no matter how many times it’s been debunked. AL Gore exercised his explicit legal right to request a hand recount as specifically stated in Florida election law and the Florida court agreed with him when Jeb Bush refused to follow the law.   And you hayet to explain how asking for the count to he confirmed changes an election result. Trump meanwhile tried extra-legal means to change the election result including pressuring election officials to falsify their vote counts, filing 60+ frivolous lawsuits that had no basis in legal concepts or in facts, and contained on fabricated claims, forging false elector certificates, pressuring state and federal lawmakers to not certify the legitimate election results, and a deliberate public disinformation campaign to mislead the general public and weaponize his base of mindless followers who threatened and intimidated officials.

 

In summary

1)Gore exercised explicitly described rights within the law and followed established rules norms and procedures, while Trump did the exact opposite 

2)Gore exercised a right to CONFIRM election results while Trump attempted to undermine rights and ALTER the election results. 

[User]

32 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

I am not defining a term with a term.

LOL, you dug up this thread for this?

Here you go, here is you literally defining the term with the term:

"“Woman” is a gender identity rather than biological sex therefore a woman is anyone whom society generally agrees is a woman."

Nowhere did you define what a woman is. 

 

[BeaverFever]

24 minutes ago, User said:

LOL, you dug up this thread for this?

Here you go, here is you literally defining the term with the term:

"“Woman” is a gender identity rather than biological sex therefore a woman is anyone whom society generally agrees is a woman."

Nowhere did you define what a woman is. 

 

I literally just explained that: identities don’t have objective definitions, they are inherently subjective.

Biological sex is not an identity and can be defined: “two X chromosomes, no tallywhacker” to quote a now defunct failed Republican congressman. 

[User]

51 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

I literally just explained that: identities don’t have objective definitions, they are inherently subjective.

Biological sex is not an identity and can be defined: “two X chromosomes, no tallywhacker” to quote a now defunct failed Republican congressman. 

No, you tried to define the term... with the term and then claimed you did not. 

I pointed out what you did, again. 

You claiming the term is subjective doesn't change the point that you are defining the term, with the term. Now you are just trying to say the term woman is meaningless... which is exactly the point I have been making for what you guys are doing. LOL 

Remember, I asked if you could define woman in any meaningful way... now you are just admitting you can't after you got caught failing. Point, proven. 

No, identities do have objective meaning.

Yes, biological sex is in fact an identity. Now you don't even know the meaning of the term "identity"

The amount of pretzel logic and lies you guys will engage in to justify some dude calling himself a woman when he isn't one is just astounding. 

 

Edited February 25 by User

[BeaverFever]

24 minutes ago, User said:

No, you tried to define the term... with the term and then claimed you did not. 

I pointed out what you did, again. 

You claiming the term is subjective doesn't change the point that you are defining the term, with the term. Now you are just trying to say the term woman is meaningless... which is exactly the point I have been making for what you guys are doing. LOL 

Remember, I asked if you could define woman in any meaningful way... now you are just admitting you can't after you got caught failing. Point, proven. 

No, identities do have objective meaning.

Yes, biological sex is in fact an identity. Now you don't even know the meaning of the term "identity"

The amount of pretzel logic and lies you guys will engage in to justify some dude calling himself a woman when he isn't one is just astounding. 

 

Boy you just keep hammering the same dumb arguments over and over The very fact people disagree about who can or can’t call themselves a woman proves it’s subjective. 

I didn’t try to define the term I tried to explain to you that it has no definition but just so goddam dense you don’t get it. 

Biological sex is not an identity.  Identities are perceptions based upon social constructs and self-image.  

A guy can call himself a woman all he wants Some will also consider him a woman while others will not   This is just a fact of existence. You probably don’t see yourself the same way as others see you and different people see you differently.  Identity is subjective and relative. 
 

You CLEARLY don’t understand the meaning of “identity”. Countless volumes have been written about the topic over the ages going back to ancient times. Why don’t you try looking something up for once instead of spouting your grossly uninformed BS? 

[User]

9 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Boy you just keep hammering the same dumb arguments over and over

You drug this back up, trying to claim you did not do something you did. 

9 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

The very fact people disagree about who can or can’t call themselves a woman proves it’s subjective. 

More pretzel logic. No, disagreement doesn't change the definition of something. Otherwise, there is no meaning to any word. 

9 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

I didn’t try to define the term I tried to explain to you that it has no definition but just so goddam dense you don’t get it. 

No, you clearly tried to define it. You just did so the same dumb dishonest way other leftists like you have been doing so you can justify calling a dude who thinks he is a woman, a woman. 

9 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Biological sex is not an identity.  Identities are perceptions based upon social constructs and self-image.  

Yes, biological sex is an identity too! Once again, words have meanings. Identities can also be some imaginary thing you claim to be... but to the point here, that doesn't actually make you that thing. 

10 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

A guy can call himself a woman all he wants Some will also consider him a woman while others will not   This is just a fact of existence. You probably don’t see yourself the same way as others see you and different people see you differently.  Identity is subjective and relative. 

Yes, a dude can call himself a woman... but it doesn't make him a woman. 

Lets play. 

What if a white male dude claims he is a Native American woman? Does that mean he, er... I mean she, gets minority status and can put that down on official paperwork? Can he, er... I mean, she go join up with one of the local tribes? 

10 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

You CLEARLY don’t understand the meaning of “identity”. Countless volumes have been written about the topic over the ages going back to ancient times. Why don’t you try looking something up for once instead of spouting your grossly uninformed BS? 

I understand the dishonest game you are playing just fine. 

You see, you guys are not just saying someone can claim to be something they are not... no, you are pushing that not only is that their identity, but yeah, that dude should get to use the woman's locker room, beat up women in sports, and have that put on their drivers license... 

No, you are trying to play this dishonest game of subjective identity while also pushing objective results where you are in fact treating the "identity" of woman as female. 

Again, just dishonest pretzel logic so you can support dudes claiming to be women when they are not.