RECORDNEWS — broadcast
20260915 150000 UTC
546 transcript segments
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking
Data courtesy of The GDELT Project (https://www.gdeltproject.org/), from the Internet Archive TV News Archive.
Machine transcription. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a verbatim quotation record.

[00:00:00] because that advocation was
[00:00:03] banned among us since the
[00:00:06] constitution, there is no vocation,
[00:00:10] vocation among equals, your
[00:00:12] Excellency's robe is equal to mine, your Excellency is the president, I am
[00:00:16] more modern, therefore, of lower symbolic
[00:00:19] hierarchy, but your Excellency's robe is
[00:00:21] equal, why is it equal? Because this is a court of
[00:00:25] equals, being a court of equals, we have to
[00:00:29] follow the... rule that governs the relationship between
[00:00:32] equals, what does this rule say?
[00:00:36] In no court in the country, none, it's
[00:00:39] not just in the supreme court, a president can dismiss a
[00:00:43] rapporteur,
[00:00:46] because if he does, Mr. President, look at the responsibility of
[00:00:49] those who wear robes and
[00:00:52] I know all sides, this is not a place for those who seek
[00:00:56] applause, this is not a place for those who seek...
[00:01:00] popularity, this is not a place, my friend Nelson
[00:01:03] Jobin used to say, to write biographies, this is a place to do
[00:01:07] justice, justice due process of
[00:01:10] law, if we accept avocacy,
[00:01:13] Mr. President, we will be opening an avenue of
[00:01:17] authoritarianism, of despotism, of tyranny
[00:01:19] in the courts that no one will
[00:01:23] control anymore, your Excellency is an
[00:01:27] purpose in the honest man, I have told you this many times and...
[00:01:30] here your Excellency is an honorable man, an honest man, well
[00:01:33] intentioned,
[00:01:35] but well-intentioned people also make mistakes, there is a famous song by
[00:01:39] Chico César about this, what
[00:01:42] protects us, your Excellency, me and everyone, the
[00:01:45] imperfect beings that we are, from error, the collegiate
[00:01:49] body, the law, imagine, Mr. President, if your
[00:01:53] Excellency is an honest man, I repeat, but if
[00:01:56] we admit avocacy, we
[00:01:59] will go to... who knows at this
[00:02:02] point with so much corruption, in fact, I have never seen so much corruption in the Brazilian
[00:02:06] justice system, I mean, it is the most
[00:02:08] corrupt moment in the history of the judiciary
[00:02:12] in Brazil, and I say this with the authority of someone who has exercised
[00:02:16] judicature since
[00:02:17] 1994,
[00:02:20] unfortunately, which proves that there are
[00:02:22] errors, because there is so much talk about corruption in
[00:02:26] Brazil, corruption only increases.
[00:02:30] happened the it's this, that, this
[00:02:33] other, corruption only increases, in politics
[00:02:37] too, Minister Toffle worked in
[00:02:41] Congress, he knows what parliamentary amendments were, what they are
[00:02:44] today, so in this era of corruption we have
[00:02:48] to be firm in fighting
[00:02:50] dismissed, but he wasn't, it's here on the corruption, firm within the terms of the law, what happens, if
[00:02:54] we admit avocacy, Mr. President, your
[00:02:57] Excellency and this court will open an avenue of
[00:03:00] corruption, an avenue of trade in the
[00:03:03] courts, here the president of the
[00:03:07] OAB, I have the greatest respect for the OAB and for your
[00:03:10] Excellency, just as there are
[00:03:13] dishonest judges, dishonest politicians, there are
[00:03:16] dishonest lawyers,
[00:03:19] there is no sale of sentences without a lawyer
[00:03:21] buying,
[00:03:24] there is no passive corruption without active corruption, and look, to
[00:03:28] be fair, I even saw one. who was the party that bought directly, but
[00:03:32] usually it's a lawyer in the middle, now, if a
[00:03:35] president of a court can dismiss a
[00:03:38] rapporteur at his
[00:03:41] discretion,
[00:03:43] besides being inappropriate in light of the constitution, of the
[00:03:47] loman, of the code of criminal procedure and of the rules, the
[00:03:51] result is a disaster,
[00:03:53] Hobbs, Mr. President, Hobbs, war of all
[00:03:57] against all, the rapporteur of the... of the
[00:04:01] INSS drawn is Minister André
[00:04:03] Mendonça, I even disagree with
[00:04:07] his conduct, as your Excellency said at the beginning, but
[00:04:10] I disagree in the records, I cannot take
[00:04:13] his process, neither I nor your Excellency, he is the
[00:04:17] rapporteur, natural judge, Mr. President,
[00:04:19] pre-constituted, it's in the constitution,
[00:04:23] so we have a principled question here, it's not a
[00:04:27] question of opportunity.
[00:04:30] What do the rules say, Minister Gilmar just said I wrote to him,
[00:04:33] in a situation of
[00:04:36] conflict, Minister André told the
[00:04:40] PF director to leave, I
[00:04:43] had two operations underway, Dark Ross Congressman
[00:04:46] Sezinha Amadureira, and I considered
[00:04:49] in the
[00:04:52] records that these operations would be frustrated, if Minister André's
[00:04:55] provision were carried
[00:04:58] out. He made a decision. also another, your Excellency could
[00:05:02] have intervened, not only could, but should and did
[00:05:05] well, he said this in the presidency, because I don't have two faces, I only have
[00:05:09] one, but the situation we are
[00:05:13] in here is different, Mr. President, there are no conflicting
[00:05:16] decisions,
[00:05:18] there was a decision by your Excellency so broad that your
[00:05:22] Excellency paralyzed an administrative process in the
[00:05:25] Attorney General's Office,
[00:05:29] of external control of police activity that is up to the Public Ministry to be
[00:05:33] prevented,
[00:05:36] see the danger that this means, because your Excellency
[00:05:39] emanates examples of...
[00:05:42] jurisprudence, so let's imagine tomorrow a president
[00:05:46] of a court requested, let's be kind, at the
[00:05:49] request of a politician, a prosecutor
[00:05:53] from a district, initiates a proceeding, the
[00:05:57] president of the court cancels ex officio, without a
[00:06:00] request,
[00:06:04] I think, I am one of those who think that
[00:06:07] corruption does
[00:06:09] not justify - fighting corruption with
[00:06:13] corruption, and here I am not referring, I repeat, in the
[00:06:17] sense of improbity, but in the Aristotelian
[00:06:19] sense, corrupted forms of exercise of
[00:06:23] power, and that is the reason, Minister Gilmar, why I brought
[00:06:26] the
[00:06:28] point of order to your Excellency, with all conviction, nothing personal against your
[00:06:32] Excellency, your Excellency will pass, I too, your Excellency
[00:06:36] can be
[00:06:39] eh, judge for 50 years, will pass. "I can be
[00:06:43] judge for 60, I will pass, of course, but we have to look
[00:06:47] at the whole, the forest, because
[00:06:49] with anxieties disasters occur
[00:06:52] and with
[00:06:55] eh this principled reason why
[00:06:58] I emphasize this, we have a
[00:07:01] judgment that your Excellency grants a part of the party with the
[00:07:05] permission of the minister who was voting,
[00:07:08] Mr. President, of course, I just want to conclude my
[00:07:11] proposal." What is the proposal of the point of order? The proposal
[00:07:15] of the point of order that Minister Gilmar will address is not that
[00:07:19] we suspend the judgment, but that we comply with the
[00:07:22] rules. What do the rules say, Mr. President? The
[00:07:25] rules say that your Excellency, when
[00:07:28] supposedly invoking a case, let's call it that, has to
[00:07:31] redistribute, it's written in article 67 of the rules,
[00:07:34] it's there and the rules say that your Excellency does not
[00:07:38] participate in the distribution, it's written in the rules, it's written
[00:07:42] to exclude. and from the president,
[00:07:45] so there is no avocacy, there is no self-designation of
[00:07:48] rapporteur, there is redistribution, in fact, it's in the code of civil
[00:07:52] procedure that Minister Fux helped to write,
[00:07:55] distribution, there was no distribution, there is no published
[00:07:59] agenda, the rapporteur was
[00:08:02] agenda, rapporteur ALM, André Luís Menonsa, it's
[00:08:06] him, so, Mr. President, I think we
[00:08:09] should, eh, I will return of course, before... coming your Excellency,
[00:08:13] of course, eh, but I will return to Minister Gilmar, I think we have to
[00:08:17] consolidate these cases, because your Excellency
[00:08:20] said that the cases are connected, your
[00:08:23] Excellency said, it wasn't me, it was your Excellency, in the
[00:08:27] dispatch that your Excellency,
[00:08:31] in inverted commas, invoked, your Excellency uses as
[00:08:35] justification for the
[00:08:37] invocation, eh, the
[00:08:40] connection.
[00:08:42] And to my surprise, your Excellency applies the institute of
[00:08:46] connection and does not apply the institute of
[00:08:48] connection, in the terms of the code of criminal procedure, it's
[00:08:52] there, 76, 77, 78, 79, just
[00:08:56] look at 79, the connection implies unity of process and
[00:08:59] judgment, comma, except, it's
[00:09:03] there, so if your Excellency
[00:09:06] split without justification and without being the judge
[00:09:09] of the case, we have to... and this is the
[00:09:13] objective of the point of order, to consolidate the cases for the 23rd,
[00:09:16] your Excellency did not schedule for the 23rd to judge Minister
[00:09:19] André, eh, so we
[00:09:22] consolidate in the terms of the code of criminal procedure, in the
[00:09:26] rules, your Excellency redistributes, because it's in the
[00:09:29] rules, your Excellency redistributes the cases, applies the
[00:09:32] rules, redistributes and we appreciate them together, next
[00:09:36] week, because I repeat, if we admit these
[00:09:40] practices, Mr. President, it's...
[00:09:42] one of the biggest mistakes in the history of the judiciary in Brazil,
[00:09:46] the return of avocacy,
[00:09:48] the power of eh monocratic, I'll call it that, of the president
[00:09:52] to self-designate rapporteur, something that
[00:09:55] jurisdictionally does not exist, and this here is jurisdictional matter, it is not administrative
[00:09:59] matter, but I listen Mr. President and I thank your kindness
[00:10:03] then of course I return to Minister, thank you very much Minister Dino, let's
[00:10:06] debate this topic and I believe
[00:10:09] that we have some questions. of
[00:10:12] points of view that are common your Excellency who
[00:10:16] is much younger than me, I was a young boy in
[00:10:19] 1978
[00:10:21] when I attended a conference.
[00:10:25] at the seventh national conference of the OAB on the rule of
[00:10:28] law by Minister
[00:10:31] Evandro who argued
[00:10:35] precisely this, with which we agree:
[00:10:38] avocacy is indeed an instrument of
[00:10:41] authoritarian and arbitrary regimes,
[00:10:44] therefore eh, even because of my
[00:10:48] trajectory,
[00:10:51] I would recommend some caution in qualifying...
[00:10:55] an act as an avocacy, there
[00:10:57] is no decision whatsoever on my part
[00:11:01] invoking the records, the records were forwarded
[00:11:04] and I read in the report, your Excellency heard from the
[00:11:08] rapporteur minister to the presidency, and
[00:11:11] why did I conclude, and I may be mistaken,
[00:11:15] because the natural judge to judge this matter is the plenary
[00:11:19] and it is being charged
[00:11:23] and we are going to... decide this, if we can
[00:11:27] get there, eh, I hope we do, we are going to decide if
[00:11:30] what Minister André did
[00:11:34] by requesting that report from the police is correct or not
[00:11:38] correct, therefore,
[00:11:41] your Excellency refers it to the presidency so that the natural
[00:11:45] judge can report on this matter
[00:11:48] which obviously has in the terms of item
[00:11:52] one of article 5, the plenary as its...
[00:11:55] natural, therefore, Minister Dino, if we agree
[00:11:58] that it is necessary to follow the rules, as
[00:12:02] Stephen Holmes wrote, in a study that
[00:12:05] was successful at the time of the pandemic, the protocols
[00:12:07] save, the method saves, in this we agree,
[00:12:11] I just don't have the same
[00:12:14] perception as your Excellency of
[00:12:17] doing, I'm not saying your Excellency did, but doing an
[00:12:20] ad hoc hermeneutics, because I at
[00:12:25] no point designated
[00:12:28] any rapporteur, your Excellency assumes that I
[00:12:32] invoked the maximum rapporteurships of the cases, well, for us to understand this rapporteurship issue better, I'll talk now
[00:12:35] with the lawyer, I'll talk again, right, with the
[00:12:39] specialist lawyer in higher courts, Max
[00:12:42] Telesca, Doctor, this rapporteurship issue that
[00:12:46] Minister Flávio Dino just pointed out, for us to understand
[00:12:50] better, could it stay with the president of the court
[00:12:53] or not, would it have to have
[00:12:55] redistribution?
[00:13:01] In my understanding, Minister Faquim, he
[00:13:03] can, yes, eh, they are using a word called
[00:13:07] avocacy, which is an old action that was used in the Supreme Federal Court
[00:13:11] before the 1988 Constitution, which was considered an arbitrary
[00:13:15] instrument, a an
[00:13:18] undemocratic instrument, because
[00:13:21] it caused the president to interfere with the competence
[00:13:25] of another judge, but it is not about that, in my understanding,
[00:13:29] in my understanding, Minister eh Edson
[00:13:32] Faquin, due to the internal rules
[00:13:35] providing that the allegation of suspicion
[00:13:38] against a minister is reported by the
[00:13:42] president, as well as any
[00:13:45] unlawful act in the presidency in criminal
[00:13:49] matters that may have occurred,
[00:13:53] if there is a suspicion that the
[00:13:56] infringement of criminal law may have
[00:14:00] occurred in the Supreme Federal Court, it is also up to the
[00:14:03] presidency to open an inquiry
[00:14:06] into this matter, so
[00:14:09] I believe that, yes, Minister Faquim did not use
[00:14:13] an undemocratic
[00:14:16] instrument, he is within his own
[00:14:19] competence and he did so, now it is a question to
[00:14:23] be resolved, an important question that Minister Flávio Dino
[00:14:27] and Minister Gilmar Mendes are raising, they are important
[00:14:29] jurists with with a lot of knowledge,
[00:14:33] but I believe that Faquim is acting within his own
[00:14:37] competence. Doctor, at this moment, Minister André
[00:14:40] Mendonça speaks, let's listen for a bit, then we'll come back to analyze
[00:14:43] here with Doctor the quality of rapporteur, upon
[00:14:46] identifying that the messages among them referred
[00:14:50] to a minister of the court, I understood
[00:14:54] that neither. this moment was more at stake the court's own
[00:14:58] prerogative, in second place, based
[00:15:02] on article
[00:15:04] 43 of the
[00:15:07] rules,
[00:15:11] because this court has understood over the last few years
[00:15:14] that not necessarily eventual
[00:15:17] practice of an illicit act that
[00:15:21] affects the court does not necessarily within the...
[00:15:25] it is not up to the president, article
[00:15:28] 43 says: if a criminal offense occurs at the court's headquarters or
[00:15:32] premises, the president shall initiate an inquiry, so I understood
[00:15:35] that in light of the... action that had been
[00:15:38] taken until this moment in the
[00:15:41] court that other issues that directly
[00:15:45] impacted the court,
[00:15:47] could have a connotation of criminal
[00:15:50] offense, it would be up to the
[00:15:52] president, this one by himself, or
[00:15:56] delegating to another minister, just to clarify
[00:15:59] the reasons also to make here a defense in relation to
[00:16:03] Your Excellency. I conclude the gentle part.
[00:16:07] which with the acquiescence of Minister Gilmar, Minister Dino
[00:16:11] granted me, please, therefore,
[00:16:14] eh, to make this precision in terms of the
[00:16:18] facts, your Excellency was also loyal regarding
[00:16:21] the fact that
[00:16:24] Minister André Mendonça had decided something
[00:16:28] in relation to the position of the Director General of the Federal
[00:16:31] Police and your Excellency had decided the
[00:16:35] opposite. Therefore,
[00:16:39] in this area there were indeed conflicting decisions by
[00:16:42] two ministers and in the specific area that
[00:16:45] we are trying to start to
[00:16:48] examine, God knows if we will be able to
[00:16:51] advance, but we are trying to just examine, doctor,
[00:16:55] I would like your assessment now on the following, at this
[00:16:58] point in the championship, is it possible that the
[00:17:02] rapporteurship eh on the case that is being
[00:17:05] considered today in relation, for example.
[00:17:16] it will only return to Minister André Mendonça if there is the
[00:17:20] acceptance of the point of order, notice that Minister André
[00:17:24] Mendonça just commented exactly what I said
[00:17:26] earlier, that since there is the infringement, the
[00:17:30] possible infringement of criminal law, that is,
[00:17:33] the basis of the fake news inquiry is precisely this,
[00:17:37] there was an... expansion in that case so that
[00:17:40] there would be eh the appointment of a
[00:17:42] rapporteur and not the free distribution,
[00:17:46] in this case there is no need for an expansion
[00:17:50] of the norm that exists within the internal regulations, but
[00:17:53] the application of the norm itself, that is, there is a
[00:17:57] suspicion that an infringement of criminal
[00:18:00] law may have occurred in the Supreme Federal
[00:18:04] Court, therefore the competence belongs to the president of the
[00:18:08] Supreme Federal Court, based precisely on
[00:18:11] the article that gave Minister Toffle the possibility to
[00:18:15] appoint Minister Alexandre de Moraes as rapporteur for
[00:18:18] the fake news inquiry. So, doctor, for us to always translate for those who are
[00:18:22] watching at home, who often don't understand, right,
[00:18:26] these legal procedures, what is being discussed at this moment is a
[00:18:30] point of order from the minister raised by Minister
[00:18:34] Flávio Dino about today's rapporteurship, if it is appropriate.
[00:18:43] there are many legal concepts, we are talking here
[00:18:47] about competence, we are talking about jurisdiction, we
[00:18:51] are talking about an old action called
[00:18:54] avocacy that was and was eradicated, it
[00:18:58] no longer exists in the Brazilian legal system, but what is important for
[00:19:02] our eh viewer to understand is that
[00:19:06] the competence is being defined... who has the competence to judge
[00:19:10] the master bank and
[00:19:12] specifically, that is the point, who has the
[00:19:16] competence to judge the
[00:19:18] request for an investigation of a minister of the
[00:19:22] Supreme Federal Court also the allegation of
[00:19:25] suspicion of another minister of the Supreme Federal Court,
[00:19:28] that is what is being decided at this moment, a point of order, the point
[00:19:32] of order precedes the debate, it
[00:19:35] precedes, it needs to be a... preliminary, it, it, it needs to be
[00:19:39] decided, the point of order needs to be decided before the merits
[00:19:43] of the question are judged, which is the removal or not eh, of a
[00:19:46] minister. And who speaks at this moment is Minister Gilmar Mendes.
[00:19:50] Let's hear a snippet.
[00:19:54] Director of the Federal Police.
[00:19:57] Case placed at 10 am for
[00:20:00] judgment. Asked for a view at 10
[00:20:03] and 1.
[00:20:07] Unless I'm mistaken, at 10:04 Minister
[00:20:10] Castro had already voted, it was 22 pages of
[00:20:13] reasoning, at 10:06 Minister Fux had already
[00:20:16] voted,
[00:20:21] no problem, with the
[00:20:24] experience of a seasoned magistrate of so many years
[00:20:28] I knew something would happen
[00:20:32] that this could not happen, that it was even
[00:20:36] because any citizen who has a minimum
[00:20:39] notion of what the Federal
[00:20:43] Police means, which is an armed body, subject to
[00:20:46] hierarchy, would not remove
[00:20:50] a general director of the police, it's like removing the director, the president
[00:20:54] of
[00:20:54] NASA,
[00:20:59] or
[00:21:01] removing the commander of the army, it's not
[00:21:05] done, the person has to handcuff themselves
[00:21:09] before doing this kind of thing, when they have
[00:21:12] temptation, they have to ask God to intercede
[00:21:15] and not
[00:21:16] do it,
[00:21:19] because in... in fact to subject an institution
[00:21:23] that already lives all the problems it
[00:21:26] has,
[00:21:31] to this kind of shame is a lack of
[00:21:35] understanding of a
[00:21:37] seriousness that I have never seen,
[00:21:40] but let's proceed, let's proceed,
[00:21:44] regarding your Excellency, allow me a
[00:21:46] moment, please, I am the president of the second... of the panel,
[00:21:50] first to greet your Excellency, to greet your
[00:21:54] Excellency, our senior judge, to greet our
[00:21:58] senior judge, Minister Camin Luça, to greet,
[00:22:01] to greet the Prosecutor General of the Republic, the other
[00:22:04] members of the court, Mr. President
[00:22:08] eh the second panel
[00:22:12] perceived a series of deviations
[00:22:15] of
[00:22:17] actions of the director.
[00:22:20] of the federal police, this is even part of a very
[00:22:23] expressive passage of our manifestation.
[00:22:27] At that time, then, it was verified
[00:22:31] that we have the greatest admiration for the Federal Police. Your
[00:22:35] Honor has been a judge for 50 years. The federal justice has always worked
[00:22:38] in favor of the judiciary. What the federal justice cannot do, the
[00:22:42] federal police cannot work against the judiciary.
[00:22:45] To instrumentalize
[00:22:48] people to
[00:22:50] sustain positions against the judiciary,
[00:22:52] just this sending of this
[00:22:55] anonymous document
[00:22:58] is already an example
[00:23:01] significant of these deviations practiced by the federal police
[00:23:05] and for this reason we understood
[00:23:06] and if I remember correctly, your
[00:23:10] Excellency went to the presidential palace to say that they were
[00:23:14] responsible for this, because he allowed the federal police crisis
[00:23:17] with the supreme court to occur.
[00:23:20] No one ever imagined the federal police defying a minister of the Supreme Federal Court
[00:23:24] and that was what was happening, without prejudice
[00:23:27] to them instrumentalizing positions to
[00:23:31] degrade the court, everything started
[00:23:34] there and we understood that we should
[00:23:38] take a stand to stop this, as Minister
[00:23:41] Gilmar expressed himself before the
[00:23:44] presidential palace, your Excellency said this, it was
[00:23:47] your fault for not stopping this crisis. of the federal police
[00:23:51] against the minister, your Excellency has been a minister for more
[00:23:54] than 20 years, I have been a minister for
[00:23:57] 16 years, I have never seen the federal police defy a minister of the Supreme
[00:24:01] Court, we understood that that represented an anomaly
[00:24:04] and would contaminate all judgments
[00:24:08] regarding serious facts reported, even
[00:24:12] more so, a proper agency
[00:24:15] was created there that would dedicate itself to
[00:24:18] wiretapping while minister. federal court, so what we
[00:24:22] did, out of our own conviction, not challengeable by any
[00:24:25] minister, there is no man in this world who will challenge
[00:24:29] my independence, I, as president of the panel, at the request of the
[00:24:33] rapporteur,
[00:24:36] I scheduled the process, what
[00:24:40] happened? We had this
[00:24:43] conviction in the panel, what happened? Who, who
[00:24:46] cast the first vote? I saw him asking for a... view to stop
[00:24:50] the judgment, if we had this objective, it was
[00:24:54] evidently that we should maintain the coherence of our
[00:24:57] decision and that is what happened,
[00:25:00] exactly because, recalling Minister Gilmamente's stance that he would never
[00:25:03] accept the federal
[00:25:07] police defying him and he did not admit it, I was already in the
[00:25:10] court when your Excellency crossed
[00:25:13] here the Avenue and went there to ask for the resignation
[00:25:17] of a director of the Federal Police.
[00:25:21] You remember the director there, right? Wasn't
[00:25:24] that what he asked for from those who had the right
[00:25:26] to do so? He decided in the right way, but
[00:25:30] wait a moment, let me just conclude then
[00:25:33] you don't have to tie anyone up to do this you have to have
[00:25:37] judicial responsibility you continue to follow
[00:25:40] this historic trial in the supreme federal court within
[00:25:44] the ora news with Pedro Salgado thank you for listening see
[00:25:48] you later.
[00:25:55] Hello, good afternoon to you who are live here with us on Record News
[00:25:58] following the STF session that analyzes the report
[00:26:02] of the federal police on the relationship between Minister
[00:26:05] Alexandre de Moraes and Daniel Vorcaro. Hora News will take a
[00:26:08] quick break and soon will return in full with this
[00:26:12] session. See you soon!
[00:26:26] On Alerta Brasil, you follow the main news to start the
[00:26:30] day well informed.
[00:26:38] From Monday to Friday here on Record
[00:26:41] News. Now let's talk about Red Silver,
[00:26:44] a pan that doesn't need oil and doesn't stick. Take a look
[00:26:48] at these images. Red Silver Pans are the solution for your
[00:26:52] daily life, because they make all kinds of food in a healthier
[00:26:55] way without using any type of oil. Coated with
[00:26:59] ultra resistant non-stick material that doesn't stick.
[00:27:02] Food slides and no residue is released, they are
[00:27:06] sophisticated, light, strong and have an
[00:27:09] elegant design, the perfect combination
[00:27:12] for your kitchen, folks, it doesn't need oil, doesn't stick
[00:27:15] and goes on all stoves today there's a
[00:27:18] promotion, the standard kit with four pans plus four
[00:27:22] lids like this one costs only 12 installments of R$
[00:27:25] 62.25
[00:27:28] with free shipping and for just R$ 10 more per installment,
[00:27:31] just... R$ 72.25
[00:27:35] you get the Family kit which includes
[00:27:37] a baking pan and this 28 cm pan with
[00:27:41] lid and you also get this set of five
[00:27:44] stainless steel knives with red silver coating and
[00:27:48] precise cutting as a gift. Used for 30 days, didn't like it, you
[00:27:51] get 100% of your money back. Buy now using
[00:27:55] this QR code here below or access
[00:27:57] redsilver.com.br/tv.
[00:28:01] If you prefer, buy. via whatsapp 11
[00:28:04] 97661 8704 I'll
[00:28:07] repeat 11 97661
[00:28:10] 8704.
[00:28:16] Orbia Carrão is the launch of Diálogo right next to the Futura Estação
[00:28:20] Guilherme George, land with more than 6,100 m2, two
[00:28:23] independent towers, spacious apartments from 79 to
[00:28:27] 137 m2, leisure with more than 30 items and
[00:28:30] take advantage of launch conditions with... monthly payments from R$ 2,700,
[00:28:34] visit the decorated apartment on Avenida Osvaldo Gomes Barreto 155 in Vila Carrão,
[00:28:38] access dialogo.com.br.
[00:28:42] I never know how my day will end, so it needs to start in the
[00:28:45] best way, a tapioca from terrinha, healthy, practical
[00:28:49] to make, very tasty. My family and I don't
[00:28:52] go a day without terrinha tapioca, it's good for breakfast,
[00:28:56] for an afternoon snack, with olive oil, banana and honey,
[00:29:00] red fruits, mmm. Tapioca da
[00:29:03] Terrinha, much more practicality without neglecting
[00:29:06] health, available in the main supermarkets,
[00:29:10] try it.
[00:29:12] Now let's talk about Red Silver, a pan that doesn't need
[00:29:15] oil and doesn't stick. Take a look at these images. Red Silver
[00:29:19] Pans are the solution for your daily life, because they make all
[00:29:23] kinds of food in a healthier way and without using any type of
[00:29:27] oil. Coated with ultra resistant non-stick
[00:29:30] material that doesn't stick. Promotes. food slides
[00:29:33] and no residue is released, they are sophisticated, light,
[00:29:37] strong and have an elegant design, the
[00:29:41] perfect combination for your kitchen, folks,
[00:29:43] it doesn't need oil, doesn't stick and goes on all
[00:29:46] stoves today there's a promotion, the standard
[00:29:50] kit with four pans plus four lids like this one
[00:29:53] costs only 12 installments of R$
[00:29:55] 62.25
[00:29:57] with free shipping and for just R$ 10 more per installment,
[00:30:01] just 12. of R$ 72.25
[00:30:04] you get the Family kit which includes
[00:30:07] a baking pan and this 28 cm pan with
[00:30:10] lid and you also get this set of five
[00:30:14] stainless steel knives with red silver coating and
[00:30:17] precise cutting, used for 30 days, didn't like it,
[00:30:21] you get 100% of your money back, buy now
[00:30:25] using this QR code here below or access
[00:30:27] redsilver.com.br/tv,
[00:30:31] if you prefer, buy via whatsapp 11
[00:30:33] 9761 8704 I'll
[00:30:36] repeat 11 97661
[00:30:40] 8704 from Monday to Friday at 10
[00:30:44] PM, here you stay well
[00:30:47] informed about all subjects, technology advances
[00:30:50] more and more, the challenge is not just to live longer
[00:30:54] but to ensure quality of life in this extra
[00:30:57] time, know everything that is happening in Brazil and in the
[00:31:01] world in one place. Several Brazilian actors are having their careers take off
[00:31:05] on the international scene in a way.