Brazil police accuse Bolsonaro of planning to flee to Argentina to seek asylum
The far-right populist is facing a jail term of over 40 years when Brazil's supreme court convenes next month to decide whether he is guilty of conspiring to overturn the result of the 2022 presidential election, which Bolsonaro lost to his leftwing opponent Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.
Bolsonaro denies the charges but some legal and political experts believe the weight of evidence means his conviction and a heavy sentence are virtually guaranteed.
On Wednesday, Brazilian media reported that federal police investigators had filed a report in the supreme court matter claiming to have found a document that was saved on the ex-president's phone in February 2024 – two days after his passport was seized as a result of the coup investigation – which indicated he was planning to seek political asylum in Argentina, which is governed by his far-right ally Javier Milei.
'In my country of origin I am being persecuted for essentially political reasons and crimes,' Bolsonaro's alleged draft asylum request reportedly claims, describing the former president as 'a politically persecuted person'.
The undated letter was reportedly addressed to 'the most excellent president of Argentina Javier Gerardo Miliei [sic]'.
In their report to the supreme court, federal police alleged the letter indicated that Bolsonaro had 'planned to flee the country, in order to prevent the law being enforced'.
More to follow …
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Skint SNP has lost thousands more members
The SNP has suffered a £1.1million collapse in finances and membership has fallen to below half its peak level. The party's annual accounts revealed a dramatic swing in the beleaguered party's fortunes as it prepares to fight next year's Holyrood election. Last night rivals warned that a party which couldn't even manage its own finances shouldn't be trusted with the nation's money. Scottish Labour deputy leader Dame Jackie Baillie said: 'Eyebrows will be raised about the financial sustainability of the SNP when they have such a deep deficit. People are deserting the SNP. They're skint.' The SNP accounts for the year to December 31 reveal: Membership fell from 64,525 to 56,011 in the year to June, representing a 55.4 per cent slump since the 2019 peak of 125,691 under Nicola Sturgeon SNP income fell by £247,838 to £4.5million, while spending rose £870,062 to £5million Membership income was down £260,928 to £1.8million but donations were up £567,859 to a seven-year high of £937,167 because of bequests The SNP ended 2024 with a £455,254 deficit, after a £661,568 surplus in 2023 Auditors put a 'qualified opinion' on the accounts for a second year as missing paperwork before July 2023 created 'inherent uncertainty' about levels of reserves The value of the infamous SNP motorhome impounded by police has fallen from over £100,000 to £41,284 and the party 'expects its future release' Former chief executive Peter Murrell, who was charged with embezzlement in March, has not asked for the return of £60,000 he loaned the party in 2021 and the money could be 'waived or written off' amid the 'uncertainty' The accounts showed a dramatic swing from a surplus of £660,000 in 2023 to the deficit of £455,000 in 2024. On paper, SNP reserves were £13,315 in the red, down from £441,939 in the black. The slump was driven by 8,514 members leaving and membership income falling £250,000, as well as a £276,000 'restructuring' exercise at SNP HQ to cut jobs and save cash. The Nationalists also spent £800,000 on a disastrous general election campaign under John Swinney in which they lost 39 of their 48 MPs. With the Holyrood election looming, SNP treasurer Stuart McDonald admitted funds to fight it were 'not in the same ballpark' as past years, but said finances were stable. The SNP spent £1.47million on the 2021 Holyrood election – more than any of its rivals – but its weak finances saw it outspent by both Scottish Labour and the Scottish Tories last year. Tory finance spokesman Craig Hoy said: 'Financial incompetence is clearly the SNP's speciality. It is not surprising they are presiding over a growing black hole in Scotland's finances when they cannot get a grip of their own.' He said it was 'remarkable' that the party appeared to be making no effort to repay the money it owed to Mr Murrell. The accounts are more transparent than in past years, including over the impact of Operation Branchform, the police probe into fundraising which saw the estranged husband of Nicola Sturgeon, charged. In his report, Mr McDonald states: 'While we remain by far and away Scotland's largest political party – with 56,011 members as at 1st June 2025 – we continue to face the challenge of membership numbers declining from historic and extraordinary highs.' He said 'very difficult but important changes were required to improve the party's finances' including one to 'downsize our HQ team' from 26 to 19. Redundancies and restructuring had contributed to the deficit but would 'realise significant spending reductions in the months ahead'. 'These steps, though difficult, have stabilised our finances,' he said. The accounts show SNP HQ stayed afloat thanks to borrowing from its branches. These were owed £459,201 last year, more than £100,000 up on 2023. The SNP Westminster group, which produces separate accounts, saw its deficit grow from £87,991 to £155,803 after the general election rout. Scottish Labour doubled its income to £2.1million thanks to a £545,000 boost from UK HQ to fight the election. Dame Jackie said: 'Eyebrows will be raised about the financial sustainability of the SNP when they have such a deep deficit. 'The public will also ask why the party's former chief executive Peter Murrell is set to be given legal aid at the expense of the taxpayer when he has seemingly made no request to the SNP for the outstanding £60,000 he loaned them to be repaid – and that this could now be waived or written off.' An SNP spokesman said: 'The SNP is the largest political party in Scotland by far and it is very encouraging to see extraordinary levels of donations over the course of last year – the highest since 2017.'
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Trump abruptly nixes signing of executive order to punish American flag burners sparking White House confusion
President Donald Trump is apparently torn over whether to ignite a tinderbox over a plan to throw the book at American flag burners. Trump abruptly cancelled the signing of an executive order on Thursday seeking to punish Americans for burning the U.S. flag. According to multiple reports, Trump planned to sign an executive order directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to bring charges against individuals who burn the stars and stripes. In 1989, the Supreme Court ruled that burning the American flag during a protest is a protected form of free speech. Under Trump's order that's now on hold, the DOJ would review already existing cases of flag burning to see if other charges unrelated to the flag burning could be brought forward. For example, the order reportedly directed the DOJ to prosecute protesters for crimes such as public nuisance or disorderly conduct laws, according to a report from NewsNation. It is not clear if Trump plans to sign the executive order at a later date, or if it's being cancelled permanently. The Daily Mail reached out to the White House for comment. Since the start of his career in politics, Trump has advocated for imposing legal penalties on protesters who destroy the American flag despite the Supreme Court's prior ruling. In the past, the president has called for stripping the citizenship from naturalized American citizens who burn the flag and advocated for jail time as a punishment. Trump during the 2024 campaign season even floated the idea of introducing a constitutional amendment to ban flag burning as a form of protected protest. Amid the anti-ICE protests in LA, Trump called for throwing demonstrators in jail for a year for setting the flag on fire. 'These are animals, but they proudly carry the flags of other countries. They don't carry the American flag,' Trump told a crowd of servicemembers at Fort Bragg. 'They only burn it. Did you see a lot of the flags being burned?" He added, 'They weren't being burned by people from our country, or from people that love our country. People that burn the American flag should go to jail for one year.' Trump then claimed that he's working with lawmakers in DC to push through legislation outlawing flag burning. 'We'll see if we can get that done. We're going to try and get that done. We're working with some of your senators.'
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
US Supreme Court lets Trump cut diversity-related NIH grants
Aug 21 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court let President Donald Trump's administration on Thursday proceed with sweeping cuts to National Institutes of Health grants for research related to racial minorities or LGBT people, part of his crackdown on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and transgender identity. The justices granted the Justice Department's request to lift Boston-based U.S. District Judge William Young's decision in June that the grant terminations violated federal law, while a legal challenge brought by researchers and 16 U.S. states plays out in a lower court. The NIH is the world's largest funder of biomedical research. The cuts are part of Trump's wide-ranging actions to reshape the U.S. government, slash federal spending and end government support for programs aimed at promoting diversity or "gender ideology" that the administration opposes. The administration said Young's ruling required the NIH to continue paying $783 million in grants that run counter to its priorities. The administration repeatedly has sought the Supreme Court's intervention to allow implementation of Trump policies impeded by lower courts. The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has sided with the administration in almost every case that it has been called upon to review since Trump returned to the presidency in January. After Trump signed executive orders in January targeting DEI and gender ideology, NIH instructed staff to terminate grant funding for "low-value and off-mission" studies deemed related to these concepts, as well as COVID-19 and ways to curb vaccine hesitancy. Young's ruling came in two lawsuits challenging the cuts. One was filed by the American Public Health Association, individual researchers and other plaintiffs who called the cuts an "ongoing ideological purge" targeting projects based on "vague, now-forbidden language." The other was filed by the states, most of them Democratic-led. The plaintiffs said the terminated grants included projects on breast cancer, Alzheimer's disease, HIV prevention, suicide, depression and other conditions that often disproportionately burden minority communities, as well as grants mandated by Congress to train and support a diverse group of scientists in biomedical research. Young, an appointee of Republican former President Ronald Reagan, invalidated the grant terminations in June. In a written ruling, the judge said they were "breathtakingly arbitrary and capricious," violating a federal law governing the actions of agencies. During a June hearing in the case, Young rebuked the administration for what he called a "darker aspect" to the case that the cuts represent "racial discrimination and discrimination against America's LGBTQ community." "I've never seen a record where racial discrimination was so palpable," the judge said. Young also said the cuts were designed to stop research that bears on the health of the LGBT community. "That's appalling," the judge said. The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on July 18 denied the administration's request to put Young's decision on hold. The administration has argued that the litigation should have been brought in a different judicial body, the Washington-based Court of Federal Claims, which specializes in money damages claims against the U.S. government. That reasoning was also the basis for the Supreme Court's decision in April that let Trump's administration proceed with millions of dollars of cuts to teacher training grants also targeted under the DEI crackdown.
