A Closer Look at Alexandre de Moraes, Brazil’s Top Election Official

Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro’s peaceful transfer of power to Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, following his election loss, is thanks in large part to one man: top Supreme Court judge Alexandre de Moraes.

The judge has been praised for his dogged campaign to rein in the outgoing far-right leader. But many analysts worry that Moraes has overstepped the boundaries of his role, and risks denting the high court’s legitimacy in the long run.

Bolsonaro, a firmly anti-establishment figure, and Moraes, a stalwart of Brazilian political institutions, have feuded bitterly over the past few years. Moraes, who was appointed by Bolsonaro’s predecessor, has launched multiple criminal probes into the now former president and arrested some of his main allies.

Moraes is also investigating the source of lies and death and rape threats against the Supreme Court justices and their families, as well as an alleged online network of businessmen, political advisors, and bots spreading pro-Bolsonaro disinformation.

Michael Mohallem, a professor at the Law Institute of the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, warned that the court’s casting of itself as both victim and judge could come back to bite it. “Once you cross that line, you have extra work to say why that same precedent doesn’t apply again,” he told Bloomberg News in June.

Bolsonaro, for his part, has lashed out repeatedly at Moraes. The former army captain has said he does not recognize Moraes’ power and praised the former military dictatorship.

In the run-up to the election, Bolsonaro repeatedly sought to cast doubt on Brazil’s electronic voting system, saying it was susceptible to fraud. Many worried that he would refuse to accept the results if he lost and try to overturn the election, in the manner of Donald Trump. Bolsonaro is an outspoken admirer of the former U.S. president, and vice versa.

Bolsonaro has yet to formally acknowledge his defeat, but he has not contested the results. His office has said it has begun the transfer of power to Lula.

Moraes, who was appointed the chief election official, was given unilateral power in the last few weeks before the election to moderate what was posted online in Brazil.

He was able to order tech companies to remove any posts that contained false information. Bolsonaro’s supporters decried the move, but so did many internet law and civil rights experts, who said it risked tipping into authoritarianism.

Lindsey Graham will have to testify about alleged efforts to overturn 2020 election results after all, after the Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected his request to block a subpoena ordering him to appear in front of a grand jury.

A Georgia prosecutor is investigating phone calls Graham made to election officials in the state, which went for President Joe Biden during the election in a major upset. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously denied the South Carolina senator’s claim of constitutional immunity from the investigation.

Graham had argued the Constitution’s speech and debate clause, which grants members of Congress protections while performing their duties, shielded his actions surrounding the election.

The senator filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court, and on October 24, Justice Clarence Thomas did Graham a solid, issuing a temporary stay on the subpoena. (Meanwhile, Thomas’ wife Ginni Thomas is also being investigated for allegedly trying to reject the election results.)

But on Tuesday, the Supreme Court sided with the lower courts and overturned Thomas’ stay, in a win for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who is investigating Graham’s calls.

The Fulton County investigation began in February 2021, spurred in part by former President Donald Trump’s plea to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find 11,780 votes,” the number of votes Trump needed to win Georgia.

The probe has since investigated and subpoenaed dozens of witnesses including Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich, and Michael Flynn. Giuliani, along with 16 Republicans who falsely claimed to be Georgia electors, could face criminal charges.

In a win for those who realize the 2020 election was not rigged, a federal judge on Tuesday also threw out former White House Chief of Staff Meadows’ challenge to a subpoena from the House committee investigating the January 6 attack.

The Supreme Court’s decision is a relief considering it has issued several temporary stays seemingly in favor of former Team Trump in the past week.

Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily halted the release of Trump’s tax returns earlier Tuesday, and Justice Elena Kagan last week temporarily blocked a subpoena from the House January 6 investigative committee for phone and text records of Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward.

Elon Musk has owned Twitter for less than a week, and already the company is bleeding money.

Since the billionaire’s purchase of Twitter, dozens of celebrities and advertisers have said they’re not sure they’ll remain on the social media platform—leading Musk to propose a bizarre new plan for users to pay for verification badges.

“We need to pay the bills somehow! Twitter cannot rely entirely on advertisers,” Musk tweeted Monday after novelist Stephen King dismissed the notion of paying for Twitter verification. “How about $8 [a month]?” Musk asked, seemingly bartering a paid contract in a tweet.

The truth is Twitter is a financial time-bomb.

Musk’s $44 billion deal placed about $13 billion worth of debt onto Twitter. Any cash will likely need to help service that debt, but that cash is looking less and less available.

On Tuesday, advertising giant Interpublic Group recommended its clients (including Coca-Cola, Johnson & Johnson, and Spotify) to temporarily pause activity on Twitter. That recommendation follows an announcement from General Motors last week that it would be suspending advertising until it gets a better idea what direction Twitter is going in.

HBO, among Twitter’s top five advertisers this year, “will be assessing the platform under its new leadership,” before determining next steps. About a dozen clients of advertising agency GroupM threaten to pause all their Twitter ads if former President Donald Trump’s account is reinstated, as some fear Musk may allow.

Given that about 90 percent of Twitter’s revenue comes from advertising, Musk is now haphazardly pushing to make Twitter a subscription service.

On Monday, he tweeted details of his vision. Along with gaining verification, paying $8 per month would apparently show users half as many ads. Again, ads are the biggest source of Twitter’s revenue. A service only a select few would subscribe to—and cutting ad revenue generated by those users in half—wouldn’t balance potential losses if the plan goes awry and disillusions advertisers.

Meanwhile, Musk’s own actions are betraying his statement that Twitter will be “warm and welcoming to all.”

On Tuesday, Musk unilaterally unbanned far-right conspiracy theorist Mark Finchem to appease complaints from online right-wingers. Finchem, who has disputed the 2020 election results and is running to oversee voting in Arizona, is a proud member of the Oath Keepers.

Liz Cheney endorsed Democratic Ohio Senate candidate Tim Ryan on Tuesday, her second time crossing the aisle ahead of the contentious midterm elections.

Cheney, who lost the Wyoming Republican representative primary after four terms, has now backed both Ryan and Democratic Michigan Representative Elissa Slotkin.

In an interview with PBS’ Judy Woodruff on Tuesday, during an event in Ohio, Cheney said, “I would not vote for J.D. Vance,” the MAGA Republican candidate.

“So if you were a Buckeye State voter, you’d be voting for Tim Ryan?” Woodruff asked.

“I would,” Cheney replied.

Ryan has sought to cast himself as more of an independent on the campaign trail. He agreed with former President Donald Trump on trade but supports legislation such as increased environmental policy and affordable health care.

Vance rose to prominence with the publication of his bestselling memoir Hillbilly Elegy in 2016. At the time, he was a conservative Trump-skeptic.

Since hitting the campaign trail, Vance has made a stark and unexpected shift to the right, endorsing QAnon conspiracy theories and the lie that the 2020 election was stolen.

Cheney has been widely censured by her own party over her decision to certify the election of President Joe Biden and impeach Trump for a historic second time over the January 6 riot. She was stripped of her committee positions and primaried out of her office, but she currently serves as vice-chair of the House committee investigating the insurrection. She has called her work on the Jan. 6 panel “probably the most important thing” she’s done professionally.

Cheney stands to make a real impact on the race in Ohio, a state crucial for Democrats maintaining their slim hold on Congress. If enough Ohio Republicans and right-leaning independents are anti-MAGA, Cheney’s endorsement of Ryan could push the vote his way.

But her opinion has also sent far-right voters running the other way. On Friday, Cheney released an ad in Arizona attacking the Republican nominees for governor and secretary of state, Kari Lake and Mark Finchem respectively, both of whom are election deniers and conspiracy theorists.

Lake released a statement later that day mockingly thanking Cheney for the “anti-endorsement.”

Lake said that since the ad aired, “our campaign donations are skyrocketing and our website nearly crashed from traffic.”

David DePape’s intrusion into the Pelosi home and violent assault on Paul Pelosi was bad enough. But the attack was just one piece of a larger plan.

In an interview with the San Francisco Police Department, DePape, who now faces two felony charges, said he invaded Nancy Pelosi’s home in the hopes of holding the speaker of the House hostage. Describing Pelosi as the “leader of the pack” of lies told by the Democrats, DePape threatened to break her kneecaps to warn other members of Congress.

But one disturbing detail deserves more attention: DePape wanted to use Pelosi as bait to lure in another individual.

Documents detailing DePape’s interviews do not specify who the individual is. Regardless, this one detail shows the magnitude of the threat. This attack was not just about the woman second in line to the presidency after the vice president, or about her family.

The direct insight into DePape’s motivations also cuts through the baseless conspiracy and lies being peddled by prominent Republicans. No, this attack was not a random crime indicative of the dangers of so-called urban America; nor was it carried out by some left-wing radical, or a gay prostitute.

All signs of DePape’s online activity—conspiracy theories surrounding Covid-19 and the 2020 election, antisemitic posts, concerns with gender identity and anti-white racism—reveal what radical bubbles he settled in. Now, his interviews reveal how the attack could have escalated into something far worse.

DePape has clearly said what motivated him: the desire to capture Nancy Pelosi, harm her to threaten other members of Congress, and use her to lure others into his dangerous hands too. We should take his word for it.