> Ok, now you need to prove that the conditions are not being met. As the prosecutors in each case will present the proofs for each case when the inquiry becomes a criminal case.

If a crime was committed, why wasn't it disclosed?

Right now we’ve had requests for accounts of congressman and journalists to be blocked. Notice this isn’t content being taken down. They were forbidden to express themselves in the social network platforms. Even if you make the case they posted “illegal content” (still waiting for the definition of this), it’s not that this content was removed. The state asked the platforms to block every future content they may post. Is that future content also illegal? What is this, Minority Report?

Moreover, no reason was specified for the blocking. The platforms were requested to comply with removal of content in under 2 hours and to pretend it was being done due to violation of their terms of service.

They even notified Rumble, which has no office in Brazil. Does the Brazilian Supreme Court jurisdiction cover the whole world?

> Perhaps, the secret for not being condemned is not commit crimes...?

What crimes? You still have not listed a single one. And you can’t, because the political actions of the court are being done under secrecy. In fact, even the defense attorneys do not know, because the case files are being kept from them. Is this what you call rule of law?

> Is the left also trying a coup

The left has practiced similar acts of vandalism multiple times, but when the left does it it’s not a coup attempt, it’s a “fight for rights and democracy” (example: [1] — notice: with the direct participation of a far-left politician that is now a candidate for mayor of São Paulo).

You keep forgetting that this inquiry preceded the events of January 8th, so by simple logic, those events cannot be used as justification for the inquiry.

> or created digital militias to spread disinformation and threats like the far right...?

Uhm, yes. [2,3,4,5,6]

> The court interpretation was not challenged by AGU and PGR

Your own link says they have required “clear parameters”.

“We just need markers so that the object is not changing [variable]”, argued Aras. The PGR asked the Supreme Court “so that the object [of the investigation] is carried out in a delimited manner and that invasive measures are previously submitted to the accusatory system and that the Public Prosecution Service can receive the attention of rapporteur Alexandre de Moraes and other rapporteurs in other inquiries.”

Have the requested boundaries been implemented? No. The Public Prosecution Service request was once again ignored, just as in 2019 when the Attorney General requested the archival of the inquiry due to its unconstitutionality.

> Trying to abolish the rule of law, armed criminal association, vandalism, destruction of historical items are not serious accusations enough...?

Some people were arrested far away from the vandalism site, while peacefully protesting, with no formal accusation and are still in jail. Uber drivers who were taking people to the protests were arrested. Street sellers who were selling Brazilian flags at the day were arrested. Children were sent to jail with their parents. Even fucking dogs were sent to prison.

How many people were sent to jail after the far-left attack on government buildings in 2015? Zero.

The rule of law in Brazil has already been abolished, but not by who you think.

[1]https://m.folha.uol.com.br/poder/2015/09/1685307-mtst-invade...

[2]https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/fsp/poder/po1810201110.htm

[3]https://veja.abril.com.br/politica/milicia-digital-do-pt-gan...

[4]https://www.gazetadopovo.com.br/republica/milicias-digitais-...

[5]https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/amp/poder/2023/05/grupo-de-inf...

[6]https://oglobo.globo.com/google/amp/politica/noticia/2023/10...