It is up to the Senate the entitlement of the acts of the President and his impeachment is a legal-political role perfect.

The word "WILL NOT BLOW TER" is the last gasp of people linked to the old ideology of Marxism , mind reader, are a democracy and move to a sentence is that paper containing the final decision of a political judges, when the commission was established on administrative acts of President Dilma, not an opinion but a house where the laws are analyzed and made. The ComissãoEspecial Survey have effect decisions ex nunc and ex tunc.

The academic explanation is simple: ex tunc, which means in Latin "since" means that a particular decision on fact in the past, has effects "from the date of the fact in the past." Already ex nunc, which means in Latin "from now" means that the effects of the decision are not valid from the date of occurrence of the event discussed, but only from the date of the decision.

So to say that it is a rhetorical coup ex tunc or not?
That is, if the Senate says it's not blow this issue an opinion ex nunc or not?President Dilma did or did not "tax pedaling", 10 decrees, she decided to do it.

Today the CPI will give the opinion whether or not and became ex tunc and ex nunc making a perfectly policy law.

The executive is elected and often called " president " and is not responsible for the legislature and can not, under normal circumstances, dissolve parliament. The legislature may have the right, in extreme cases, to dismiss the executive, often through an impeachment process. However, these layoffs are seen as so rare that not contradict the core principles of this type of political system that, under normal circumstances, means that the legislature can not dismiss the Executive.

Executive power is sole, ie, members of the  Cabinet  are appointed at the discretion of the President and must carry out the policies of the executive and legislature. 

Among the elementary functions of the legislature is to scrutinize the executive, voting laws on  budgets  and, in specific situations, to judge certain people, such as the President or the members themselves of the meeting.

They claim that the President Cunha hatred welcomed the complaint made ​​by lawyers HélioPereira Bicudo andJanaina Conception Paschoal  and Miguel Reale .

 The President Cunha left out this part of the complaint, the president in power and by the political party to which the President is affiliated, was triggered Lava Operation Jet, which in each of its various stages reap people close to the President , deconstructing the aura of competent and unblemished professional, created by marketers very well paid.

Indeed, the mask of competence was first scratched the episode involving the purchase of the refinery in Pasadena by Petrobras. For all angles by which to analyze impossible not to recognize that the business even at the time, was revealed extremely harmful to Brazil. Reportedly, the losses were more than seven hundred million reais.

This is a subjective right which is characterized by being an attribute of the person in the case of the President and it makes its subject powers holders, obligations and powers established by law and this legally protects her will, if she failed several times his fellow party as José Dirceu and others to their will and not the nation.

  In other words, the subjective right is a power or dominion of man's will, legally protected. It is its own capacity and competence of others and within the law impeachment.

CPI will have to judge what has been done since 1988 ex tunc to date and no longer make the ex-nunc acts creating a new law that is within their competence, in a democracy is thus made ​​errors, corrected in time that is good for the rule of law with former presidents no longer valid and void and order a new law, which was made ​​will be deemed superseded by other presidents, why the trial is ex nunc of a improbatórios act that are in the Constitutionand the LDO , now it is considered that there was no crime continue such acts i made ​​in 2000, should be considered canceled, with ex tunc effect, means aa purchase Passedena should be considered undone? There was no corruption?

 But if the sentence indicate ex nunc effects, the purchase should be considered made in 2000, but must be undone from the consent of the President on the date of its decision. She therefore knew an intentional act to the public coffers and it is up to compensation s interest that impinge on compensation for crime, for example.

 There are few circumstances among those who make up the present state of human knowledge, more contrary to what one might expect, or delay state more important in that speculation on the most important issues still lingers, the little progress that has been made in the controversial decision respecting the criterion of right and wrong.

Claiming "SWAT" as was the government that Rousseff was a guerrilla, history has given the moral foundations of "communism" who preach today there are useful or opportunistic innocent.

The military made ex nunc acts against the same (communist sayings), the rest, what is know those countries that have adopted the state as all controller is already ex tunc against a greater evil as shown by history.

Now it is simply a speculative thought, it has occupied the most gifted intellects, and divided them into sects who want to be the pantheons and schools for young people , exercising a vigorous war against "coup" that avoided Brazil towards juggernaut " proletarian dictatorship" other codenames.

Yes, there were abuses that have been made, but the question is whether such a view "communist" had installed in the country would today Democracy and worth remembering, the world has changed.

Today it is no longer useful the sophistry of the Military Dictatorship in the motto "WILL NOT HAVE BLOW".

The fact that the confusion and uncertainty of "communists" of which President Lady emit disagreement similar to the past.

The facts and subjective acts of its management and Calamari companion as were they the champions of democracy and forgotten that millions took to the streets for Amnesty, Direct-ever and reliability of the conclusions of her and her fellow "left" who claim supporters of a minority and rhetoric and an apparent anomaly, the explanation of which is that the doctrines they wanted to install in the country, but what we saw was widespread corruption.

Thus the Senate are called to put the drops on the evidence and the deputies have established CPI to Cunha remains await its conclusions this is the role of legality, transparency, ex nunc should be the principles of Rule of Law Society and if it were not so, then yes we would be in a Dictatorship, so the axiom "WILL nOT HAVE bLOW" is mere rhetoric and precarious, or whose conclusions want to model the hit "1964" than it was even with errors, hit the future like it or not the "coup of the Communists."

So it is up to the Senate the subjective right of the acts of the President and this is a legal-political role.Generally much less obviously authoritative.