The Disbelief of Luis Nassif: Mainardi’s Samba Italiano

//i113.photobucket.com/albums/n216/cbrayton/Stuff/heartymainarty.jpg?t=1203764662” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.
Mainardi of Veja writes: “My seven Italian informants continue to send me documents referring to the industrial espionage case against Telecom Italia, led by Italian prosecutor Fabio Napoleone. As soon as the documents arrive here, I send them off to the Brazilian courts. And I grandly declare as follows: If Brazil has any chance of making it, it is through the rule of law. Have we seen the last of the Telecom Italia affair? Hmmmm, hmmm. No, there’s more. I just got a new package.”

Ti ricordi, gioconda,
Di quella sera in guarujá
Quando il mare ti portava via
E me chiamaste
Aiuto, marcello!
La tua gioconda a paura di quest’onda

–Adoniran Barbosa, “Samba Italiano”

O bookmark de Mainardi: “Mainardi’s bookmark.”

Veteran Brazilian business journalist (and reputed cavaquinho virtuoso) Luis Nassif has been writing a series of articles on the habitual use of rumor, innuendo, and phony “dossiers” at Veja magazine, allegedly in the undisclosed service of interested parties to balls-out Hobbesian business disputes worthy of chief Nixonian dirty trickster Donald Segretti (J.D., UC Berkeley, 1966).

Slightly controversial Bahia-born, MIT-trained venture capitalist Daniel Valente Dantas — not to be confused with the soap-opera actor Daniel Dantas — is defending himself against criminal and civil cases in Brazil and elsewhere by contending that (1) Telecom Italia framed him for the bugging of journalists and senior government officials (of both the current government and the last one) in the so-called “Kroll affair,” and (2) that he is the victim of political persecution by corrupt government officials in Brazil.

Veja ran a dossier prepared at Dantas’ behest in May 2006 purporting to show that Brazilian government officials (including two former heads of the federal police, one of them now an opposition senator for São Paulo) controlled bribe-stuffed offshore bank accounts.

Nassif continues:

Terminei o capítulo anterior narrando a tentativa de chantagem de Diogo Mainardi, em seu podcast semanal na Veja. Nele, o colunista afirmava dispor de informações que comprometeriam jornalistas, mas não as divulgava. Apenas ameaçava quem se metesse com ele.

I concluded the last chapter by recounting a blackmail attempt by Veja columnist Diogo Mainardi in his weekly podcast for the magazine. In the podcast, he claimed to have information that would compromise [unnamed] journalists, but he did not make it public. He merely threatened to do so if they messed with him.

Na semana seguinte (atual edição da revista), Mainardi avançaria alguns pontos em sua chantagem[.] Na quinta, em novo podcast que reiterava as ameaças. Ora, se possuía as informações, por que não as divulgava?

The following week (the current edition of the magazine), Mainardi would move forward on a few points. On Thursday, in a new podcast which repeated the threats. But hey, if he has this information, why doesn’t he publish it?

Três pontos chamavam a atenção:

Three points are worth noting:

Ponto 1 – Dizia que graças ao fato de ter morado na Itália tinha muitas fontes italianas. “Meus sete informantes italianos continuam a me mandar documentos referentes ao processo por espionagem contra a Telecom Italia, conduzido pelo Procurador da República Fabio Napoleone”. Informação falsa.

(1) He said that thanks to the fact that he has lived in Italy he has a lot of Italian sources. “My seven Italian informants continue to send me documents referring to the industrial espionage case against Telecom Italia, led by the prosecutor Napoleone.” This is not true.

Para ouvir, clique aqui

To listen, click here:

I would rather pierce my eardrums with rusty nails.

Um pequeno detalhe liquidava com sua versão: o post-it do arquivo PDF (chamado de bookmark, anotação que se coloca na barra do documento).

A small detail undermines this claim: A post-it note in the PDF file (called a “bookmark,” an annotation that is placed in a sidebar to the document.)

//i113.photobucket.com/albums/n216/cbrayton/Stuff/Postit-large.jpg?t=1203765531” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

122 – Wiretaps: De Marco and Angra Partners

Como se sabe, o arquivo PDF pode ser editado, mas as alterações ficam registradas. No caso do relatório, alguém pegou partes do inquérito (que é sigiloso), scaneou e imprimiu.

As we know, a PDF file can be edited, but the alterations are marked. In the case of this report, someone has taken parts of the case (which is sealed and confidential), scanned it and printed it.

I think this point probably needs a more detailed technical explanation. It is not very sexy as a “smoking gun” moment, even if one does take Mr. Nassif’s point.

I mean, do you understand the professional edition of Adobe Acrobat? I have been using it for years, and I confess I do not, not perfectly.

I tend to use Evince to read these files, and open source PDF and Postscript tools when I need to jigger with them. But it is true that it has annotation tools.

Fez mais. Anotou os comentários dos principais trechos com a ferramenta. Depois, eliminou todos os bookmarks, mas esqueceu um: aquele que indicava, na página 122, “Grampos – De Marco e Angra Partners”, no mais puro português do Brasil. Nas “Propriedades do Documento” havia as informações de que ele fora criado em 21 de janeiro de 2008 e modificado em 22 de janeiro – antes da data que Mainardi informava tê-lo recebido.

There’s more. They used the tool to add comments to the main passages. Then they erased all the bookmarks, but forgot one: One that reads, on p. 122, “Wiretaps: De Marco and Angra Partners,” in pure Brazilian Portuguese. Under “document properties” there is the information that the document was created on January 21, 2008 and modified on January 22 — before the date Mainardi reports having received it.

É evidente que não era nenhuma das “sete fontes italianas” que enviara a documentação para Mainardi, mas uma fonte brasileira. Por que a insistência em mentir sobre a origem da fonte?

Obviously, it was not one of the “seven Italian sources” that sent this document to Mainardi, but rather a Brazilian source. Why would Mainardi insist on lying about the origin of his source?

I suppose an Italian might learn Portuguese.

Our dear Nona, for example, who is 95, is a living dictionary of the whacky Italo-Tupi idiom celebrated in Adoniran Barbosa’s classic “Samba Italiano.”

Gioconda, pitina mia,
Vai brincar alí no mareí no fundo,
Mas atencione co os tubarone, ouvisto
Capito meu san benedito.

It’s a comic mix of Italian and Portuguese (brincar), with Brazilian cultural references (São Benedito: cras hodie!) All of which is, of course, beside the point.

It looks to me like somebody took a hard copy of the excerpt from whatever document this is — which has a lot of heavy, messy manual markings and highlightings in it — and scanned it into a PDF file, then used a PDF to annotate the thing.


Mainardi on Globo’s late-night Jô Xô repeats the unsubstantiated rumor that senior government officials have bribe-stuffed offshore bank accounts — defending the exercise in logic-chopping gibberish with a gibbering tautology.

Por que todas as indicações são de que sua fonte é Daniel Dantas – o mesmo Dantas que, quando foi desmascarado o dossiê falso sobre as contas fantasmas, Mainardi foi incumbido de acudir (clique aqui).

Because all indications are that his source is Daniel Dantas — the same Dantas whom Mainardi was assigned to rescue when his phony dossier on the ghost accounts was unmasked.

Pior: os grampos eram em cima de adversários de Dantas. Logo, as vítimas eram os adversários de Dantas, não o banqueiro. Quem encaminhou o arquivo para Mainardi deixou escapar não apenas o post-it como a informação. Mainardi obviamente nem leu o cartapácio: limitou-se a se deixar cavalgar.

What is worse: The wiretaps were used against adversaries of Dantas, which means that the victims were, not Dantas, but his enemies. Whoever sent this file to Mainardi slipped up not only by leaving the “post-it” in but also in the information provided. Mainardi has obviously not even read this [weighty tome]. He has merely let himself be “ridden.”

New vocabulary word of the day: cartapácio.

sm 1 Carta grande. 2 Coleção de manuscritos em forma de livro. 3 Livro de lembranças ou apontamentos; canhenho. 4 Calhamaço, alfarrábio.

1. Long letter. 2. Collection of manuscripts in book form. 3. Book of appointments or memoranda; notebook. 4. [synonyms]

A calhamaço is, metaphorically, a fat, ugly woman. An alfarrábio is, among other things,

Obra muito extensa, sem correspondente importância.

A very long work without importance corresponding to its length.

I have written memos like that in my time. For which I apologize.

“Ridden” is lingo for a journalist who merely “channels” what sources say to him or her, without independently checking it.

It’s similar to what I tend to call “reputation laundering.”

The byline of the columnist, who adds nothing to what has been leaked to him or her, conceals the fact that the source is an undisclosed interested party.

When Intel placed a “fake news” video news release with a Fox News program a couple of years ago, for example — the news program ran it as its own work, overdubbing the voice of its own “reporter” reading the advertiser-produced script, without attribution to the source — it identified one of the sources interviewed as an “anthropologist” rather than as “an anthropologist on the Intel payroll.”

This is a form of blunt dishonesty similar to plagiarism. It is perhaps best and most succinctly described as “fake news.”

(O arquivo pode ser encontrado no seguinte link, indicado na coluna dele, na última Veja (clique aqui). Para evitar alguma mudança no documento original, baixei o arquivo e o coloquei em outro endereço (clique aqui).)

(The file can be found at the following link from Mainardi’s column in the last edition of Veja [link]. To avoid any changes to the original document, I downloaded it and mirrored it at another URL [link].)

Version control is very, very important.

I am currently trying to get a potential client of mine to grok this point.

Ponto 2 – “Assim que os documentos chegam aqui em casa, eu os encaminho à magistratura brasileira.. Se o Brasil tem uma saída, só pode ser através das leis”. A troco de que um jornalista ou para-jornalista recebe informações e, em vez de divulgá-las, as encaminha ao judiciário? Isso é papel de advogado. Tenho algumas hipóteses que analisarei no próximo capítulo.

Second point: “As soon as the documents arrive here at home, I send them to the Brazilian courts. If there is any way forward for Brazil, it will only come from the rule of law.” In exchange for what does a journalist or parajournalist get information and, instead of publishing them, send them to the judiciary? That is the job of a lawyer. I have some theories on this point that I will set forth in the next chapter.

Ponto 3 – Mencionava o fato do empresário Luiz Roberto Demarco ter recebido US$ 1 milhão. E dava detalhes da conta que mantinha em Miami, em nome de um sócio, e que teria recebido US$ 100 mil.

Third point: He mentioned the fact that [former Dantas associate] Luiz Roberto Demarco received US$1 million. And he gave details of an account he maintains in Miami in the name of an associate who reportedly received US$100,000.

Lembrava as relações de Demarco com fundos e imprensa. Sugere, obviamente, que parte desse dinheiro veio para a imprensa. Mas não ousava uma acusação, nomes, detalhes, nada. Também será analisado no próximo capítulo.

He recalled Demarco’s ties to the pension funds and the media. He is suggesting, obviously, that part of this money went to journalists. But he did not dare to accuse anyone, names, details, nothing. I will take that up in the next chapter as well.

Finalmente, dizia que o nome do Presidente da República tinha sido mencionado no inquérito.

Finally, he says that the name of the president of Brazil had come up in the case.

Guarde essas informações, por enquanto. Para melhor facilitar o entendimento, antes de avançar na análise vamos a uma pequena coleção de episódios jornalísticos, para explicar didaticamente – como estudo de caso – como ocorre a manipulação da notícia no mundo das disputas jurídico-empresariais.

Hang on to this information for the time being. To make things clearer, before going on to analyze it, let’s look at a small collection of journalistic case studies in order to see how manipulation of the news works in legal disputes involving businesses.

Imprensa e Judiciário

The press and the judiciary

Um dos pontos principais do manual de guerrilha nas disputas corporativas, é o uso das notícias como ferramenta auxiliar – seja para “assassinar reputações” ou “plantar” matérias para influenciar (ou fornecer álibis) para as sentenças dos juízes.

One of the first principles in the handbook of corporate guerrilla warfare is the use of news items as a force multiplier — whether as a weapon of “character assassination” or to “plant” articles to influence the decisions of judges, or provide alibis for the parties.

Episódio 1: o caso Lauro Jardim

Episode 1: The Case of Lauro Jardim

Em agosto de 2000, por exemplo, os advogados dos fundos de pensão, liderados pelo ex-presidente da CVM (Comissão de Valores Mobiliários) Francisco da Costa e Silva, conseguiram realizar uma Assembléia Geral Extraordinária (AGE) do CVC-Opportunity – o fundo que controlava a Brasil Telecom. Foi a primeira vez que isso ocorreu, apesar de parte relevante do capital do CVC ser dos fundos.

In August 2000, for example, attorneys for the pension funds, led by Costa e Silva, the former head of the CVM, Brazil’s securities regulator, managed to hold a special shareholders’ meeting (AGE) of CVC-Opportunity, which controlled Brasil Telecom. It was the first such meeting every held, even though a signficiant portion of the shares in CVC were held by the funds.

Under local law, an extraordinary meeting can be convened at the request of shareholders representing [x]% of the equity in the company.

Com o controle da AGE, os fundos indicaram o advogado Fernando Albino para presidi-la. Albino autorizou que Costa e Silva retirasse as atas e documentos do CVC, para que pudesse xeroca-los. No dia seguinte, os documentos foram devolvidos, tudo de acordo com a lei e com as decisões da AGE.

In control of the AGE, the funds nominated attorney Albino to preside. Albino authorized Costa e Silva to obtain the minutes and documents from CVC so he could xerox them. On the following day, the documents were returned, all according to the law and the resolutions passed by the AGE.

A resposta de Dantas foi imediata, através da revista Veja.

Dantas’ reply was immediate, and came through Veja magazine.

Trombadas e trombadinhas

[Colorful expression; let us just guesstimate this as “mountains and molehills” for the time being, provisionally]

‘São cada vez menos elegantes as ações de certos advogados em defesa de seus clientes. Na semana passada, depois de uma tensa reunião entre os fundos de pensão e o banco Opportunity – que andam se estapeando em público há meses –, Francisco da Costa e Silva, advogado da Previ e ex-presidente da CVM, surrupiou a ata do encontro e se mandou. Supõe-se que ele saiba que o que fez é proibido pela legislação.”

“Certain lawyers are resorting to ever more elegant tactics in their defense of clients, [Veja writes]. Last week, after a tense meeting between the pension funds and the Opportunity Bank — which have been trading blows in public for months now — Costa e Silva, the former CVM president who represents Previ, snuck off with the meeting minutes. It is to be supposed he knew that what he did was against the law.”

A nota saiu na edição de 16 de agosto de 2000 [sic] (clique aqui). Seção: Radar. Colunista: Lauro Jardim, o mesmo jornalista que aproximou o quarteto de Veja de Dantas.

That item ran on August 16, 2000 [sic] (click here), in the Radar section. Columnist: Lauro Jardim, the same journalist who introduced Dantas to the Four Horsemen of Veja.

Copydesk: Check that date. I think there has been a fat-finger typo there.

“Four Horsemen” is my creative contribution, of course; Nassif refers to them merely as the “quartet.”

Costa e Silva precisou enviar e-mail para cada um de seus clientes, para reduzir o estrago provocado pela nota. Mandou uma carta de esclarecimentos para a Veja – que não foi publicada.

Costa e Silva had to send an e-mail to each and every one of his clients to control the damage done by that item. He sent a letter with corrections to Veja — which was never published.

Episódio 2: o caso Attuch-Rocha Mattos

Episode 2: The Attuch-Rocha Mattos Case

Uma segunda manipulação da imprensa consiste na articulação entre diversos jornalistas, para dar foro de verdade a qualquer boato e, com isso, álibi para uma sentença favorável de algum juiz. Um jornalista divulga o primeiro boato ou notícia, verdadeira ou não, obtida por meios legais ou ilegais. Depois, outros jornalistas cooptados promovem a repercussão, garantindo o álibi para a sentença ou despacho do juiz. Esse modelo foi utilizado várias vezes no decorrer do último ano.

A second manipulation of the news consisted of a concerted campaign by a number of journalists to give prominent play to any and every rumor, whether founded or not, and with this, to provide an alibi to cover a favorable ruling by a given judge. A journalist runs the first news or rumor, obtained legally or illegally. Coopted journalists who are in on the scheme promote continuing coverage and prominent placement for the story, creating an alibi for the judge’s sentence or ruling. This model was used a number of times in the last year.

Em 8 de maio de 2002, despacho do notório juiz João Carlos da Rocha Mattos, da Quarta Vara Criminal de São Paulo para o Delegado Ariovaldo Peixoto dos Anjos, Superintendente da Policia Federal em São Paulo determina o seguinte:

O May 8, 2002, a order by the notorious Judge Rocha Mattos of the Fourth Criminal Bar of São Paulo, addressed to the superintendent of the federal police for São Paulo, Peixoto dos Anjos, determined as follows:

“Senhor superintendente,

Superintendent:

Pelo presente, encaminho a Vossa Senhoria, em anexo, matérias veiculadas nas edições 242, de 17.04.2002 e 244, de 01.05.2002, da revista “IstoÉ Dinheiro”, ambos os episódios (ilegível) o controle (ilegível) das empresas de telefonia celular Telemig Celular e Tele Amazônia, com menção inclusive a altos funcionários do Banco do Brasil e do Fundo de Pensão Previ, decorrentes de gravações de diálogos telefônicos mantidos entre as partes interessadas, envolvendo, em especial, o presidente da empresa canadense TIW, Bruno Ducharme”.

“By these presents[, the judge writes to the PF superintendent,] I forward to you, attached, the articles published in Istoé Dinheiro magazine No. 242 (April 17, 200) and No. 244 (May 1, 2002), both episodes [illegible] the [illegible] control of cellular telephone firms Telemig and Tele Amazônia, even mentioning senior officials of the Bank of Brazil and the Previ pension fund, based on recordings of telephone conversations among the interested parties, involved, in particular, the president of the Canadian firm TIW, Bruno Ducharme. ”

Matérias jornalísticas semelhantes às mencionadas foram publicadas em outros órgãos de imprensa e, ao menos em princípio, constitui indício de credibilidade dos graves acontecimentos veiculados nas gravações das conversas telefônicas, se não se sabe se teriam ou não sido obtidas licitamente (…)” (clique aqui).

“Reports similar to the ones mentioned above, [the judge continues,] ran in other publications, and in principle at least, lend credibility to the serious matters contained in the wiretap transripts, although we do not know whether they were obtained legally or illegally …” [link]

A matéria, em questão, era de Leonardo Attuch. Houve repercussão em alguns outros órgãos de mídia, o suficiente para garantir o álibi para o despacho do juiz.

The article in question was by Leonardo Attuch. The story was picked up and amplified by other news agencies to a sufficient degree that it provided the judge’s ruling with an alibi.

Rocha Mattos tornou-se, anos depois, um dos símbolos máximos da corrupção do Judiciário em São Paulo. Está preso até hoje.

In later years, Rocha Mattos would become one of the major symbols of judicial corruption in São Paulo. He is currently in jail.

This as a result of the Operation Anaconda judicial corruption investigation, which has given rise to others, such as Themis and Hurricane.

Basically, selling favorable judicial decisions at very unreasonable prices to people whose ability to afford such prices stems from their involvement in extremely sociopathic behavior.

This is some wild and woolly shit, I am telling you.

Episódio 3: o caso Janaína Leite

Episode 3: The Janaína Leite Case

Esse caso é relevante por estar inserido na atual onda midiática de Dantas. Antes de contar, algumas explicações para facilitar o entendimento de atos e respectivas conseqüências.

This case is highly relevant to the current wave of media related to Dantas. Before I narrate it, let me explain a few things so you can better understand what happened and what the consequences were.

Primeiro, entenda qual é o objetivo jurídico do Opportunity quando articula sua rede de colaboradores em torno do inquérito sobre a Telecom Itália, que corre na justiça italiana. A partir daí ficará mais fácil compreender os movimentos de Diogo Mainardi e de outros jornalistas que trabalham de forma articulada em torno do tema.

First, you need to understand what Opportunity’s legal objective is when it activates its network of [stooges] with respect to the Telecom Italia case in Italy. Once you do that, it will be easier to understand what Mainardi and other journalists who are working in a coordinated manner on the topic are up to.

Houve duas investigações sobre Dantas: uma legal, conduzida pelo Ministério Público e pela Policia Federal, com grampos, quebras de sigilo, tudo ao amparo da lei.

There were two investigations of Dantas. The first was legal, run by the federal prosecutor and the federal police, using wiretaps, court-ordered access to private records, all within the law.

Paralelamente, aqui no Brasil, houve investigações da Telecom Itália – na gestão do cappo Marco Tronchetti Provera, no começo adversário, depois aliado de Dantas. Foram investigações ilegais, criminosas, sem autorização judicial.

At the same time, here in Brazil, there were investigations of the man by Telecom Italia, during the administration of Tronchetti Provera, who began as an adversary and later became an ally of Dantas. These were illegal and criminal, without judicial authorization.

É importante não entender a Telecom Itália como uma empresa com continuidade de ação. A empresa passou por vários controladores nos últimos anos. Todos os episódios relatados se referem à era Provera (que já foi afastado do seu comando), que começou combatendo Dantas e terminou se aliando a ele.

It is important not to think of Telecom Italia as a firm that acts coherently and consistently. It has changed hands several times in recent years. All the episodes just referred to go back to the administration of Provera (who has since been stripped of control), who began as a Dantas adversary and ended up allying himself with the Bahian banker.

O que os advogados de Dantas buscam é a chamada “contaminação do inquérito” – isto é, trazer para o inquérito da PF o inquérito da Telecom Itália e as vinculações brasileiras. Fazendo isso, Dantas se livra. Qualquer juiz considerará que o inquérito se baseou em práticas ilegais. Daí o termo “contaminação”: as ilegalidades da Telecom Itália no Brasil (sob Tronchetti Provera) comprometerão os trabalhos legais da Policia Federal e do MP, porque estarão ambos reunidos no mesmo inquérito. E tudo terminará em pizza.

What Dantas’ lawyers seek to establish is, as they say, to “taint the investigation” — that is, to bring the Telecom Italia affair into [confuse it with] the legal investigation by the Brazilian feds. If he can do this, Dantas might get off. Any judge would consider the investigation based on illegal conduct. Thus the term “taint” or “contamination”: The illegal activities of TI in Brazil would undermine the legitimate work of the MP and feds, because both would be seen as the same case. And everything would end, as they say, in pizza.

“Fruit of the poison tree” is, I think, the concept at work here. “Tainted evidence.”

… end in pizza: Ends in fear, uncertainty and doubt that permits no firm conclusions to be drawn, so that everyone gets off scot free and nothing is revealed. It comes from the bitter observation, “at the end of the [inconclusive] case, the prosecution and the defense went out together for pizza [to celebrate the backroom deal.] Something like that. Pizza is an inspired bit of Brazilian jargon for murky backroom deals.

Insisto: anote bem essas observações, porque ficará mais fácil entender os caminhos que Diogo Mainardi passou a trilhar.

I say it again: Note these observations well, because they will make it easier to understand what Diogo Mainardi is up to.

No julgamento de 12/12/2006, a Segunda Turma do Tribunal Federal Regional da 3a Região, acompanhou o voto da relatora – desembargadora Cecília Mello – e exigiu a incorporação do inquérito italiano ao inquérito brasileiro contra o Opportunity.

In the proceedings held on December 12, 2006, the Second Chamber of the Third Regional Federal Court upheld the opinion of the reporting justice — Cecília Mello — and ordered that the Italian investigation be joined to the Brazilian investigation into Opportunity.

No seu voto, a relatora sustenta que o argumento dos advogados do Opportunity é que o inquérito da PF teve origem em prova ilícita, gravação de uma conversa entre Ângelo Jannone (chefe dos arapongas italianos) e Tiago Verdial (o português que tinha trabalhado na Kroll).

In her opinion, Mello says that what Opportunity is arguing is that the federal investigation orginates from evidence obtained illegally: a recorded phone conversation between Ângelo Jannone (chief of the Italian spies) and Itago Verdial (the Portuguese man who had worked for Kroll.)

A desembargadora levou em conta reportagens jornalísticas que, segundo a desembargadora, noticiam “fatos gravíssimos”.

The judge took into account journalistic articles that, in her view, related “very serious facts.”

As reportagens são de Janaína Leite, da “Folha” de São Paulo, repórter que ganhou espaço no jornal no longo período, na grande noite que acompanhou a agonia e falecimento do grande reformador do jornal Otávio Frias de Oliveira.

The reporting in question was by Janaína Leite of the Folha de S. Paulo, a reporter whose star rose at the paper on that night when she reported on the final agony and death of the paper’s great reformer, Otávio Frias de Oliveira.

Até então, a área de telefonia e esses embates corporativos eram cobertos por Elvira Lobato – de longe a mais preparada e isenta repórter investigativa da área. De repente, o tema passa para a instância de Janaína Leite.

Until that time, the telecom industry and these corporate quarrels were covered by Elvira Lobato — by far the most informed and objective investigative reporter in the field. Suddenly, the beat was passed to Janaína Leite.

I can honestly say I came to the same conclusion about Ms. Lobato before I even knew who she was (I have been reading her excellent little book lately).

This just from reading a report of hers and checking to see how many of the Five Ws were covered, and in how much depth.

Result: All of them, deeper than the Marianas Trench.

Here at NMM, we call this the “infodensity test” (IDT), which — coupled with a measurement of how much subsequently turns out to have been gabbling bullshit [the “prognostication failure rate” or PFR] — provides a rough guide to whether you should pay someone to tell you what is what or not.

A matéria mencionada pela desembargadora é de 21 de setembro de 2006 (clique aqui), e diz o seguinte:

The article mentioned by the judge ran on September 21, 2006 (click here) and states as follows:

Segundo a Folha apurou junto a pessoas que colaboram nas investigações italianas, não está descartada a possibilidade de ramificações do caso acabarem no Brasil, onde a Telecom Italia participa de duas operadoras: a fixa Brasil Telecom e a móvel TIM Brasil.

The Folha has learned from persons involved in the Italian investigations that possible ramifications in Brazil, where TI has a stake in BrT and TIM Brasil, have not been discarded in the case.

Reparem no modelo de atuação:

Observe how it works:

1. A repórter Janaína Leite publica uma matéria dizendo que há probabilidade das investigações sobre a Telecom Itália terem ramificações no Brasil. Diz que a “Folha” apurou.

1. Reporter Janaína Leite publishes an article saying it is likely the TI investigation in Italy will have ramifications in Brazil. She says that the Folha “learned” this.

There is a line in the editorial manual about using this phrase — segundo a Folha apurou — to indicate the product of original reporting that no one else has. It is the designated “scoop” phrase, in a word: We found this out, and corroborated this, on our own, and no one else has it.

2. Com base nessa matéria, os advogados do Opportunity pedem que os inquéritos italianos sejam anexados aos da PF. Com isso conseguiriam “contaminar” o inquérito brasileiro.

Based on this article, Opportunity lawyers ask that the Italian investigations be joined to the federal investigation. In this way, they would succeed in “tainting” the Brazilian investigation.

3. A desembargadora Cecília Mello aprova o pedido, citando como elemento os “fatos gravíssimos” que constam da matéria de Janaína

3. Cecília Mello approves the petition, citing the “grave facts” reported in Janaína’s article.

4. Na semana passada, a Justiça (de Primeira Instância) tomou o depoimento de Rodrigo Andrade, que trabalha para o Opportunity. Pressionado a revelar seus contatos na imprensa, inclusive sob ameaça de prisão, Rodrigo informou que era Janaína Leite.

4. Last week, the court (the court of first instance) took the deposition of Rodrigo Andrade, who works for Opportunity. Pressured to reveal his contacts in the press, on pain of arrest, Rodrigo said his contact was Janaína Leite.

Ouch. Add to wall of shame, along with Christofoletti. This is why I do buy the Folha.

Não apenas Janaína, mas outros membros da rede se incorporaram à trama. A orquestração era clara.

Not just Janaína, but other members of the network joined in the plot. The orchestration was glaringly obvious.

No dia 11 de outubro de 2006, Diogo Mainardi publicava a coluna “Notícias da Itália”, com o seguinte intertítulo (clique aqui ou clique aqui):

On October 11, 2006, Mainardi published the column headined “News from Italy,” with the following [teaser]:

“O caso estourou duas semanas atrás. Os promotores públicos milaneses descobriram que a Telecom Italia tinha um esquema de pagamentos ilegais a autoridades brasileiras. O lulismo realmente ganhou o mundo. Em sua forma mais autêntica: o dinheiro sujo”

“The case exploded two weeks ago. The Milan prosecutors had discovered that Telecom Italia had a scheme of illegal payments to Brazilian officials. Lulism really did “gain the whole world. In its most authentic form: dirty money.”

Na edição da “IstoÉ Dinheiro” de 4 de outubro de 2006 (da mesma semana), o enviado especial a Milão, Leonardo Attuch, bateu na mesma tecla (clique aqui).

In the October 4, 2006 edition of IstoÉ Dinheiro, special Milan correspondent Leonardo Attuch [insisted on the same point]:

On Attuch, see also

“Caso Kroll: foi armação? Investigação na Itália aponta que políticos e policiais podem ter recebido dinheiro para deflagrar ação contra o grupo Opportunity”.

“The Kroll case: Was it a frame-up? Investigation in Italy indicates that politicians and policemen received money to act against Opportunity Group.”

A única diferença é que, para disfarçar sua atuação, Mainardi sempre trata de incluir Lula na história. Poderia lançar um segundo livro, “Lula, Meu Álibi”.

The only difference is that in order to disguise what he is doing, Mainardi always tries to involve the president of Brazil in the story. He should release a new book titled Lula is my alibi.

Attuch nunca teve esses cuidados.

Attuch has never taken any such precautions.

Hoje em dia, Janaína não mais trabalha na “Folha”. Os demais jornalistas e parajornalista continuam atuantes em seus respectivos órgãos de imprensa.

Janaína no longer works at the Folha. The other journalists and the parajournalist continue working for their respective publications.

A blogger since 2007 and author of Arrastão, Janaína describes herself as

Teimosa de plantão, atua hoje como consultora. Ao longo dos últimos dez anos trabalhou como repórter em São Paulo e Brasília. Passou por alguns dos veículos mais importantes do país (Folha de S.Paulo, Época e Gazeta Mercantil, entre outros).

… [a] hard-nosed beat reporter [who] now works as a consultant. Over the last ten years, worked as a reporter in São Paulo and Brasília. Has worked for some of most important news publications in Brazil (Folha, Época and the Gazeta Mercantil, among others.)

Esse modelo de articulação advogados-jornalistas ocorreu em todo esse período e continua a ocorrer, mas com novos personagens se incorporando ao círculo.

[Nassif goes on:] This lawyer-journalist nexus has been used throughout the current period and continues to be used, but with new characters added to the cast.

Como o capítulo está longo, deixaremos os detalhes para o próximo.

As this chapter is getting long, let’s leave the details until next time.

Uma dúvida fica no ar. Com todo a movimentação em cima do tema, com a série provocando repercussões no meio jornalístico, empresarial e na própria Abril, por que Mainardi insistiu no assunto, com a sutileza de um “prego sobre vinil”? Tenho hipóteses. A resposta quem tem é ele – e suas fontes.

There is one question left hanging, though. With all the to-do on this topic, and with this series of mine getting play in journalistic and business circles and at the Editora Abril, why does Mainardi continue to insist on it, with all the subtlety of “taking a nail to the vinyl”? I have my theories, but the answer lies with him — and his sources.

Whoever those sources may be.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s