> You are dressing the events in your interpretation and stating them as truth.
That's how a discussion works. I state what I believe in, and people will either agree or post counterpoints. If I'm wrong then I won't be able to argue otherwise. Testing my ideas is the whole point.
Just for the record, even leftist columnists agree with me.
https://oglobo.globo.com/blogs/malu-gaspar/coluna/2025/11/de...
They admit that the supreme court is out of control. They just think it's okay because they're currently persecuting their political enemies. Now that the court has served its purpose, it's time for things to go back to normal. Just like that.
Their motives are transparent, as are their political maneuvers. It's the intellectual dishonesty that disgusts me.
The events you mention above are cherry-picked bits of information to support what you have said from the beginning.
For instance, in what you said above: you are quoting an excerpt of Barroso's comments from 2023 about democracy (not his exact words) without the actual context, something he even clarified later on as it was picked up by the media. Also, his resignation now, 2 years later, has nothing to do with any of this - looks like he was just tired.
I don't blame him. To be honest, now I'm tired as well.
Take care.