Rubio moves to strip US visas from eight Brazilian judges in Bolsonaro battle
Bolsonaro, a far-right populist with ties to Donald Trump's Maga movement, is on trial for allegedly masterminding a murderous plot to cling to power after losing the 2022 election to his leftwing rival, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Bolsonaro is expected to be convicted by the supreme court in the coming weeks and faces a jail sentence of up to 43 years.
As the day of judgment nears, Trump has been increasing pressure on the court and President Lula's administration. On 9 July, the US president announced he would impose 50% tariffs on all Brazilian imports as of 1 August, partly as a result of the supposed persecution of his ally. The move triggered an outpouring of nationalist anger in the South American country, with Lula describing it as 'unacceptable blackmail'.
On Friday, after federal police raided Bolsonaro's house and fitted him with an electronic tag to stop him absconding, Rubio announced further moves in support of the defendant, who he claimed was the victim of a 'political witch hunt'.
Writing on X, Rubio said he had ordered visa revocations for the judge leading the investigation into Bolsonaro, Alexandre de Moraes, as well as 'his allies on the court' and their family members. Rubio did not name his other targets but the Brazilian newspaper O Globo identified them as Luís Roberto Barroso, José Antonio Dias Toffoli, Cristiano Zanin, Flávio Dino, Cármen Lúcia Antunes Rocha, Luiz Edson Fachin and Gilmar Ferreira Mendes.
Two other judges who were nominated to the court during Bolsonaro's 2019-23 presidency, André Mendonça and Kassio Nunes Marques, reportedly avoided the sanction, as did a third judge, Luiz Fux.
Lula denounced what he called 'another arbitrary and completely groundless measure from the US government'.
'Interference in another country's justice system is unacceptable and offends the basic principles of national sovereignty and respect between nations,' the president said on Saturday, adding: 'I'm certain that no kind of intimidation or threat – from whoever it may be – will compromise the most important mission of our nation's powers and institutions, which is to act permanently to defend and safeguard the democratic rule of law.'
The Trump strategist Alex Bruesewitz welcomed Rubio's announcement, calling Bolsonaro's treatment 'sick and wrong'.
Bolsonaro's congressman son, Eduardo, thanked Rubio for his decision. 'Thank you very much for this fight in favor of free speech, we do believe in the same values,' tweeted Eduardo, who has been living in the US since February and has reportedly been lobbying officials there over his father's plight.
Trump's interventions have appalled millions of Brazilians who hope to see their former leader held responsible for the alleged coup attempt, which culminated in the 8 January riots in Brasília.
Lula's institutional relations minister, Gleisi Hoffmann, called the visa cancellations 'an aggressive and petty retaliation' and 'an affront to the Brazilian judiciary and national sovereignty'.
Even influential rightwing voices have criticised the US's attempt to meddle in one of the world's most populous democracies by imposing 50% tariffs.
On Saturday, the conservative Estado de São Paulo newspaper described Trump's behaviour as 'unacceptable external interference in Brazil's domestic matters'. 'Trump has not only attacked our national sovereignty … [but also] stained the history of diplomatic relations between the two largest democracies in the Americas,' the newspaper's editorial board wrote.
While the Bolsonaros have hailed Trump's actions, they also appear to have grasped how the announcement of tariffs has backfired, allowing Lula to pose as a nationalist defender of Brazilian interests and paint the Bolsonaro clan as self-serving 'traitors'.
Lula, who had been facing growing public disillusionment and an uphill battle to win re-election next year, has enjoyed a bounce in the polls since Trump launched his trade war, the brunt of which will be borne by coffee producers and cattle ranchers in Bolsonaro-voting regions, such as São Paulo.
Celso Rocha de Barros, a political columnist, said he suspected the Bolsonaros had been blindsided by the scale of Trump's attack.
'I think [Bolsonaro] wanted some kind of penalty - something he could use to say: 'Look, Brazil's being punished because of Bolsonaro's persecution. But [the tariffs] went far too far … [they] screwed Bolsonaro's base,' said Rocha de Barros, pointing to their potential impact on agribusiness.
On Friday night, Bolsonaro's senator son, Flávio, post on X, calling on Trump to suspend the tariffs and replace them with individual sanctions. Soon after, however, he deleted the post.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
25 minutes ago
- Telegraph
How Trump killed off woke ads
When Nike picked Colin Kaepernick to front its new campaign in 2018, it marked the high water mark for social justice advertising. Kaepernick, the former NFL star who began taking the knee in protest against racial injustice, was out of work and had accused the NFL of blacklisting him for his political protests on the field. Nike ran posters saying: 'Believe in something, even if it means sacrificing everything.' At the time, brands were racing to hitch their wagons to causes and crusades as 'purpose-driven' marketing took over adland. Seven years on, the backdrop could hardly be more different. 'Woke' adverts are fading from relevance in the US. Instead, an all-American, red-blooded spirit has taken hold – aimed squarely at the tastes of one Republican man. Donald Trump this week proclaimed that actor Sydney Sweeney had the ' hottest' advert in the world as he waded into a row over The White Lotus actor's new campaign for fashion brand American Eagle. Sweeney's statement that she had 'good jeans' has become a culture war flashpoint. It hasn't mattered – Sweeney's endorsement has helped American Eagle's stock soar, with Trump's comments only fuelling the rally. Nike, meanwhile, appears to have swapped advocating for the Black Lives Matter movement for a more conservative campaign promoting family values with golfer Scottie Scheffler. The growing reluctance of brands to take a campaigning stance on social justice issues comes as consumers tire of virtue-signalling and empty slogans. 'Advertising's role is not really to lead culture, but to reflect it,' says Richard Pinder, chief executive of creative agency The Hunger. 'And so as culture moves, it's kind of weird if advertising doesn't.' The most obvious signs of this culture shift has been the swing to the Right in the US that powered Trump to the White House. Yet the president is not just a reflection of culture, but a shaper of it too. Earlier this year, the president signed a string of executive orders clamping down on 'radical and wasteful' diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies. A number of major US companies – including Google, Amazon, Walmart and McDonald's – have rolled back their initiatives as a result. Trump has also taken aim at Jaguar following what he called a 'woke' marketing campaign that featured an eclectic cast of diverse models and a Barbie-pink aesthetic. 'Who wants to buy a Jaguar after looking at that disgraceful ad,' he fumed on Truth Social. The Sydney Sweeney controversy began after American Eagle released a new campaign that featured an image of the blonde-haired, blue-eyed actor dressed all in denim, accompanied by the slogan: 'Sydney Sweeney has great jeans.' The advert triggered discussions about beauty standards and even accusations that the company was promoting eugenics. American Eagle has insisted the ad 'is and always was about the jeans', adding: 'Great jeans look good on everyone.' The controversy appears to have done little to perturb Americans, suggesting the ad did not run counter to wider public opinion. Research by Kantar and industry magazine The Drum showed the majority of US consumers would still buy from American Eagle after the saga. Meanwhile, shares in the retailer surged 24pc following Trump's intervention – their biggest daily gain in 25 years. Whilst the US is leading the backlash against woke ads, there are signs that Britain is starting to follow suit. Many in London's adland acknowledge that Britons are growing tired of advertising campaigns that put virtue-signalling do-goodery and tokenism ahead of authentic messages. 'Audiences don't respect the companies that are jumping on a 'brand-wagon' and are fatigued by superficial virtue-signalling and generic manifestos,' says Ajaz Ahmed, founder of ad agency AKQA. 'Consumers want less preaching and a move towards more jokes and less woke, a more original point of view.' When soap brand Dove released a range of body-shaped bottles to reflect the 'one of a kind' body shapes of its customers, the company was mocked online. 'There's less room for ads that just associate themselves with a cause,' says one industry source. The most notorious recent example of public backlash was Jaguar's highly contentious rebrand, which many in the industry felt was cack-handed. 'Tonally, they seem to have missed the boat,' says Pinder. 'That was an idea that would have looked good three, four years earlier, but suddenly looked very, very much an outlier.' Value-led advertising can take on a more sinister bent, too. In 2022, an advert for Persil was banned for making unsubstantiated claims about the detergent's environmental benefits as part of a wider crackdown on greenwashing. 'Woke' advertising in Britain has at least in part been killed off by the cost of living crisis. A recent YouGov survey found that cost and quality were the most important factors for the vast majority of Britons when choosing what to buy. By contrast, just 5pc said social or ethical considerations were most important. Campaigning advertising is not entirely dead. The winner of the prestigious Grand Prix award at the Cannes Lions festival was French insurer AXA for a campaign highlighting how it had updated its home insurance policies to help women escape domestic violence. However, Mark Read, the outgoing chief executive of WPP, acknowledges that the amount of 'purpose-driven' advertising has declined over the last few years, with brands increasingly turning to humour instead. Regardless of what approach they take, it is clear that advertisers have to be more alert to potential backlashes in the age of social media pile-ons, boycotts and cancellations. 'With advertising, you used to be able to control your messaging,' says one industry source. 'Now you're almost like a conductor of trust in your brand as part of a bigger social conversation. As a brand, you're no longer in complete control.' Jaguar is a clear example of this phenomenon: public outcry was so great in large part because people had a clear idea of what the car company's brand should be about. The maxim that all publicity is good publicity, it seems, is a thing of the past. 'I think there is a general view across business leaders that they would like to stay more out of politics today than perhaps three or four years ago, and that's probably sensible,' says Read. Many advertisers are looking to take a more risk-averse approach. Brands are also increasingly turning to non-paid-for marketing – known as earned media – in a bid to sidestep controversy. The ultimate example of earned media? An endorsement from the Donald. 'Go get 'em Sydney!,' Trump wrote as American Eagle's stock soared.
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
‘The Home Office is forcing me to leave the UK and a job I love to go to a country I've never called home'
A British Airways cabin crew member was forced to abandon his dream career eight years after arriving in the UK when the Home Office told him to move to a country where he says he has never lived. Shady El Farra, a 28-year-old Egyptian national whose primary language is English, came to the UK to study in 2016, having grown up between the United States and Saudi Arabia due to his parents' jobs as academics. He was granted a two-year graduate visa in 2021 and started a career at British Airways as a cabin crew member. But he was forced to quit the jobafter an application for a private life visa, which allows people to stay based on strong personal ties to the UK, was rejected by the Home Office in November 2024. Home Office officials said Mr El Farra should be able to integrate into life in Egypt, despite the 28-year-old explaining that he left the country shortly after he was born and has never lived there as an adult. The country also requires mandatory military service for everyone under the age of 30. The initial refusal decision also told Mr El Farra that he would be able to 'fully support yourself in India' – despite his application having nothing to do with that country. He told The Independent: 'I've worked in the UK, studied in the UK, and now I'm being told I have no expectation of a future here.' Speaking about his visa refusal, he said: 'It's like a robot has written it. They can belittle it as errors, but it has a huge impact on a human being's life. 'It's been two years of not working, not being in the skies. It's been mentally very challenging. Throughout the whole process, they've not bothered to look into or consider the obstacles that I would have if I was sent to Egypt. 'I barely speak the language, I have no family there and there is conscription in Egypt'. Mr El Farra is relying on support from his parents but fears he will soon be unable to pay rent at his flat in London. He is unable to claim public funds due to his immigration status. Mr El Farra had to hand over his passport when he first applied for the private life visa in September 2023, meaning he was unable to fly internationally. BA let him work on domestic flights, but he was then moved to working as a staff trainer while he waited for the visa decision, he said. He received his refusal in November 2024 and had to leave the job he loved. 'I had a future at British Airways,' he said. 'I was going to be a senior trainer and they just upended that... for what? How is it a benefit to the UK for me to be sitting here unable to contribute anything?' He then submitted an appeal of the decision to the immigration tribunal, and is now allowed to look for work while the court proceedings are ongoing. International students have been one of the main drivers of net migration in recent years, along with Ukrainian refugees and people coming to work on health and social care visas. Since Brexit, more international students have stayed in the UK following the conclusion of their studies, and the Labour government has recently introduced measures to restrict this – shortening the post-study graduate visa from two years to 18 months. Though Mr El Farra has gone through training and security checks to work as cabin crew, he would need a salary of at least £41,700 to be sponsored for a skilled worker visa to stay in the UK. Referring to the initial error in the Home Office letter, said: 'The rejection said I should go back to India, which obviously doesn't make any sense. They said I should not have had any expectations for staying in the UK. But the graduate visa enables you to find a job in the UK and become a taxpayer so I think that gives people some expectation that they might stay.' The Home Office's refusal was upheld on review and Mr El Farra is now waiting for a tribunal hearing to consider his case. His father, Dr Ehab el Farra, a professor of hospitality management in Saudi Arabia, said his son loved the UK and the family was 'astonished' by the initial Home Office response. 'The UK should take talented people, use them, and keep them in the system. I used to live in the States, where we have lots of nationalities who live there and that's one of the reasons why America is very prosperous. 'He is fighting to stay in the UK because he loves Britain and wants to make a good life there'. His mother, Molly, also an academic, added: 'It's a big puzzle for us. He's not allowed to live in Saudi Arabia with us unless he is a student or worker here. He cannot live with us because he is over 18. We are in this vicious cycle'. A Home Office spokesperson said: 'It is our longstanding policy not to comment on individual cases.'
BBC News
4 hours ago
- BBC News
Transport of London staff face deportation under new visa rules
Scores of foreign Transport for London (TfL) staff could be deported because of rule changes which mean they no longer qualify for visa than 60 employees who came to the UK on skilled worker visas may have to leave because salary thresholds have gone up and key transport roles have been taken off the eligible said it was "working with all colleagues affected by the changes... to understand whether they have other routes to work in the UK available to them and to support them where possible".Some London Assembly members called the move "unfair and short-sighted", but the Home Office said its immigration white paper was designed to "restore order" to immigration. It added: "Under this approach, every sector will be required to implement a workforce strategy focused on training British workers, or risk losing access to the immigration system, as part of wider efforts to reinforce the integrity of the points-based system and end dependence on lower-skilled international recruitment."TfL is obliged to comply with the changes, which took effect on 22 July and will remain until at least the end of 2026. It is believed many of the workers took jobs on two-year graduate visa schemes thinking they could later move into skilled worker positions, according to the RMT transport body currently pays a £31,000 starting salary for graduates and advises candidates who need sponsorship to see if they can get this before station staff are believed to earn between £35,300 and £41,800, the latter of which is only £100 above the new £41,700 per year minimum salary general secretary, Eddie Dempsey, said: "Our members took these jobs in good faith, on the understanding that they could progress and continue building their futures here."Now the new government rules risk shattering these workers' lives and leaving gaps in employment for London Underground." According to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, an anonymous at-risk employee said they just wanted a fair chance to work and loved their added: "What did I do wrong? What did any of my 60 colleagues facing the same fate, do wrong? I have seen them go above and beyond their normal work duties, even preventing vulnerable members of the travelling public from committing suicide on the network."Getting the news that my job was now not on a list which would make me eligible to stay in the country, has taken an enormous toll on me and my family. It was like a nuclear bomb going off in our household."The leader of London Assembly's Liberal Democrat group, Hina Bokhari, said: "Deporting vital Tube staff because of sudden last-minute rule changes is unfair and short-sighted."London relies on the skills and commitment of these people."Green Party Assembly member Caroline Russell said: "The government should withdraw these cruel changes that are going to ruin lives by sending away the workers London depends upon."
