Open record · Sources you can check

SEND TO
TRUMP.

The Bolsonaro cases: what Brazilian courts and police documented

Mr. President, below are court rulings, police indictments and public records involving members of the Bolsonaro family, plus a numerical check of the 2026 runoff. An indictment is not a conviction. Status labels and dates are current as of the “Last verified” line on each card.

Public vote · live

Should the U.S. government send the Bolsonaros back to face Brazilian justice?

—

people said yes

Unofficial public opinion counter, not a legal petition. One vote per browser. Any extradition decision belongs to courts and governments under the U.S.–Brazil treaty.

Post on XTruth SocialWhatsAppFacebook
Election fact check · 2026Checked October 28, 2026 · Sources below

Two extra hours.
Not enough votes to change the winner.

Lula won because he received more valid votes nationwide: 51.79% to Flávio Bolsonaro’s 48.21%, according to G1’s reporting of TSE results. The number of votes recorded after 5 p.m. was far smaller than the winning margin. That comparison tests a numerical claim — it does not explain voters’ motivations.

G1 · result & revised late-vote count
01 / National result · Valid votes
Lula · PT51.79% / 64,256,232 votes
Flávio Bolsonaro · PL48.21% / 59,826,041 votes
Margin (Lula − Flávio)4,430,191 votes

Totals as reported by BBC and Valor citing TSE. G1 · result & revised late-vote count

02 / Winning margin vs. votes after 5 p.m. Brasília time
Lula’s reported lead4,430,191 votes
Votes after 5 p.m. · TSE / Comprova34,393 votes

Less than 0.8% of the winning margin. The lead was about 128 times larger than the reported late-vote count.

Same linear scale for both bars, starting at zero. G1 reports 34,330 after correcting its earlier count; TSE’s indexed publication and Comprova report 34,393. The reports differ by 63 votes. This comparison uses the institutional count, which is also the larger of these two figures. Neither count comes close to the rounded winning margin. G1 · result & revised late-vote count · Projeto Comprova · fact check, October 28 · TSE · official after-5-p.m. tally

Both campaigns asked for time

Lula’s campaign cited transport problems, initially in affected municipalities, then requested a nationwide extension. Flávio’s campaign also asked the TSE for more time, citing rain, flooding, road closures and power outages in parts of the South and Southeast.

Both requested an extension, but the geographic scope and reasons were not identical. That is not proof that Flávio endorsed the final nationwide STF order.

Do the math yourself

34,393 votes were recorded after 5 p.m. Nobody knows how they split, because the ballot is secret. Move the slider to choose any split and see what happens to Lula's lead if all late votes are removed.

Late votes to Lula: 34,393 · to Flávio: 0

Lula's lead after removing all late votes:

4,395,798 votes

Winner changes? No

Totals as reported by BBC and Valor citing TSE. For simplicity, the calculator treats all 34,393 late votes as valid votes for one of the two candidates. Votes after 5 p.m. include voters already in line before closing, so they are not all caused by the extension. This tests a numerical claim only; it does not measure voters who could not vote.

TSE · official after-5-p.m. tallyG1 · result & revised late-vote count
Claim / evidence

“The extra hours produced Lula’s victory.”
The reported late-vote count is mathematically too small to overturn the reported margin by removing those votes. This does not measure voters who could not vote or prove why people chose a candidate.

“Only Lula’s side asked for more time.”
Contradicted by reporting that Flávio’s campaign also petitioned the TSE. Different local requests should not be presented as identical national requests.

“The numbers settle every legal objection.”
They do not. BBC reports debate over the unprecedented order. Its legality, court jurisdiction and any alleged harm to voting rights are separate questions that require legal evidence, not just a chart.

Evidence & limits

Sources include Portuguese-language journalism and institutional publications. The TSE and STF notices were consulted directly. This page has not independently audited ballot records or petition documents. The after-5-p.m. count is not necessarily the number of votes enabled solely by the extension: voters already in line may vote after normal closing time. The STF notice confirms the order applied to sections still open, not reopening already closed ballot boxes.

Myth or fact?

Test what you've heard. Every answer links to the source.

1 of 8

“The extra voting hours produced Lula's victory.”

Answers reflect the public record as of Oct. 28, 2026. An indictment is not a conviction, and an archived case is not an acquittal.

The record

01
Jair Bolsonaro · coup plot

Plot to overturn the 2022 election

Status: Convicted — STF First Panel, Sept. 11, 2025 (AP 2668); sentence 27 years and 3 months, initial closed regime. Ordinary appeals exhausted and sentence enforcement ordered Nov. 25, 2025. As of Oct. 2026 he is serving the sentence under humanitarian house arrest for health reasons. A separate criminal-review petition challenging the conviction was pending before the STF as of late October 2026.

What the record shows

Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court convicted former President Jair Bolsonaro of leading an armed criminal organization and of crimes including attempted violent abolition of the democratic rule of law and coup d’état, tied to efforts to remain in power after the 2022 election loss. The court fixed a prison term of 27 years and 3 months. Public STF notices and contemporary reporting cite Federal Police material, documents recovered from allies, and plea testimony from former aide-de-camp Lt. Col. Mauro Cid among the evidence discussed at trial.

What the defense says

Bolsonaro’s lawyers said they received the ruling with respect but “profound disagreement and indignation,” denied that he acted against the democratic rule of law or took part in a coup plot or the January 8 events, called the sentence “absurdly excessive and disproportionate,” and said they would pursue all available appeals, including internationally. They also argued the case should have been tried by a lower court or the full Court.

Sources

Last verified: Oct. 28, 2026

02
Jair Bolsonaro · Saudi jewels

The Saudi jewels

Status: Federal Police indictment — July 2024 (peculato / embezzlement, money laundering, criminal association). As of March–October 2026 the Prosecutor General’s Office had asked to archive the criminal inquiry, citing a legislative gap on gifts to presidents; Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered a further PGR review before deciding. Separately, Receita Federal has pursued customs/fiscal steps regarding the items. No criminal conviction on this case as of this verification.

Saudi jewels · police account

  1. High-value gifts

    Saudi Arabia & related items

  2. U.S. sales

    According to investigators

  3. Partial buybacks

    After the case became public

No criminal conviction in this case. The PGR requested archiving; further review was ordered.

↗ Agência Brasil — PF report delivered to STF (July 5, 2024)

What the record shows

In July 2024 the Federal Police formally indicated Bolsonaro and others after investigating alleged diversion and sale of high-value gifts received from Saudi Arabia (and related items) that investigators said belonged to the Brazilian state. Police said some items were taken abroad and sold in the United States, then partly bought back after the case became public. An indictment is a police conclusion; charging and trial require prosecutors and the court.

What the defense says

Bolsonaro has denied wrongdoing. At the time of the indictment his lawyer said he had not yet reviewed the PF report and would not comment immediately. Later filings have contested fiscal notices and deadlines; the defense position in the criminal track has been that there is no clear legal basis for personal criminal liability over the gifts (aligned with the PGR’s later archive request argument).

Sources

Last verified: Oct. 28, 2026

03
Jair Bolsonaro · COVID vaccine records

Falsified COVID vaccination records

Status: Federal Police indictment — March 2024. Investigation against Jair Bolsonaro archived by the STF on March 28, 2025, after the Prosecutor General concluded there was insufficient independent evidence beyond Mauro Cid’s plea deal to charge Bolsonaro. Related probes involving other people without Supreme Court forum have continued in lower courts.

What the record shows

In March 2024 the Federal Police indicated Bolsonaro and others for allegedly inserting false COVID-19 vaccination data into the public health system for him and associates. Investigators said false entries appeared in the system and were later removed; contemporary reporting linked the episode to travel rules that then required vaccination for entry to the United States. In March 2025 Justice Alexandre de Moraes archived the STF track against Bolsonaro and federal deputy Gutemberg Reis, accepting the PGR’s view that Brazilian law does not allow charges based solely on a cooperator’s statements without corroboration.

What the defense says

Bolsonaro denied wrongdoing, said he had not taken the vaccine, and described the probe as selective. After the archive decision, the public record is that prosecutors did not proceed against him on this allegation at the STF.

Sources

Last verified: Oct. 28, 2026

04
Flávio Bolsonaro · “rachadinha”

The “rachadinha” salary-kickback allegations

Status: Charged by Rio prosecutors in November 2020 (embezzlement, money laundering, criminal organization and related counts). Higher courts later annulled key evidence (STJ secrecy-break rulings; STF majority of Coaf financial-intelligence reports). In May 2022 Rio’s court rejected/archived the criminal complaint after prosecutors themselves sought dismissal because the supporting evidence had been invalidated. No conviction and no acquittal on the merits. Civil follow-ups and later reopen requests have been reported; as of this check there is no active criminal conviction.

Salary kickbacks · prosecutors’ allegation

  1. Public salaries

    State-assembly staff

  2. Alleged kickbacks

    Queiroz described as operator

  3. Evidence annulled

    Complaint dropped; no merits judgment

No conviction and no acquittal on the merits. The diagram represents the allegation and subsequent procedural outcome.

↗ STF — Coaf reports ruled illegal (Nov. 30, 2021)

What the record shows

Rio de Janeiro prosecutors alleged that staff in Flávio Bolsonaro’s former state-assembly office returned part of their public salaries, with aide Fabrício Queiroz described as an operator. A Coaf financial-intelligence report flagged about R$1.2 million in atypical transactions in Queiroz’s account (2016–early 2017), which helped trigger wider scrutiny. Courts later held that major pieces of the evidence package were obtained improperly; the criminal case against Flávio was then dropped without a judgment on whether the alleged scheme happened.

What the defense says

Flávio has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, said investigations found no irregularity against him, and argued that using “charged” in the present tense misleads because the complaint was archived. He has framed the case as political persecution. Queiroz has denied criminality and said collections funded subcontracted campaign/office work.

Sources

Last verified: Oct. 28, 2026

05
Bolsonaro family · cash real estate (press investigation)

Real estate paid in cash (public registries)

Status: Press investigation based on public property records — UOL, August 2022. Not a court conviction. At least 25 of the properties reviewed had separately been objects of prosecutor inquiries (including rachadinha-related probes), according to UOL.

Property records · UOL investigation

One symbol = one property reviewed

At least 51

Paid totally or partly in cash

107

Properties transacted

R$13.5 million

About · recorded cash payments

Cash payment is legal. These press findings are not a court finding of laundering.

↗ UOL investigation (Portuguese)

What the record shows

A seven-month UOL investigation of notarial and registry documents reported that Jair Bolsonaro and close relatives transacted 107 properties from the 1990s onward, and that at least 51 were paid totally or partly in cash (“moeda corrente nacional”), totaling about R$13.5 million in cash payments as recorded (about R$25.6 million inflation-adjusted at the time of publication). UOL said it reviewed 1,105 pages across 270 registry documents. Cash payment is legal; large cash real-estate deals are often treated by authorities as atypical for anti-money-laundering monitoring — that is a compliance context, not a finding that these specific purchases were proven laundering in court.

What the defense says

Asked about the reporting, then-President Bolsonaro dismissed the outlet’s credibility, asked what the problem was with buying property in cash, and said relatives’ deals were theirs. He invited investigation.

Sources

Last verified: Oct. 28, 2026

06
Eduardo Bolsonaro · coercion / foreign pressure

Lobbying for foreign pressure on Brazil’s courts

Status: Charged by the Prosecutor General Sept. 22, 2025; STF First Panel accepted the charge Nov. 2025. Convicted June 16, 2026 (AP 2782) — 4 years and 2 months, initial semi-open regime, plus fine; ineligibility and loss of Federal Police clerk post ordered. Judgment became final (trânsito em julgado) on Oct. 3, 2026; arrest warrant ordered. He remains in the United States.

What the record shows

Prosecutors alleged that, while living in the United States, Eduardo Bolsonaro sought U.S. sanctions, visa measures and trade tariffs aimed at Brazilian justices and institutions in order to influence the criminal case against his father. The STF First Panel unanimously convicted him of coercion in the course of a judicial proceeding (Criminal Code art. 344), finding a continued course of conduct. The court’s public notices and the PGR’s case description rely on his public statements, social-media posts and other evidence gathered under court-authorized measures.

What the defense says

Eduardo said he does not recognize the conviction, called the process null, and said he had not been properly cited/notified while abroad. He describes himself as politically persecuted. The Federal Public Defender’s Office, which represented him at trial, argued he was engaged in political dialogue and had no power to decide U.S. foreign policy. He has said his goal was amnesty legislation, not his father’s acquittal.

Sources

Last verified: Oct. 28, 2026

07
Flávio & Eduardo Bolsonaro · film financing

The “Dark Horse” film and the bank money

Status: Under investigation — no charges filed and no conviction as of this verification. An STF inquiry into the film’s financing opened in July 2026 at the Federal Police’s request (relator Justice André Mendonça); President Justice Edson Fachin ordered part of the records unsealed on Sept. 10–11, 2026.

What the record shows

Flávio Bolsonaro confirmed that he asked banker Daniel Vorcaro — then controller of Banco Master — for money to help produce “Dark Horse,” a U.S.-produced biopic of Jair Bolsonaro. A production contract obtained by Intercept Brasil and confirmed by TV Globo lists Eduardo Bolsonaro and deputy Mário Frias as executive producers, a role with budget and financial-management responsibilities, contradicting Eduardo’s earlier public denial. Unsealed PF/PGR documents estimate the negotiation with Vorcaro at at least US$24 million (reported as roughly R$122–134 million), with at least US$10.6 million (about R$61 million) paid between February and May 2025 in six transfers, sent to a Texas-based fund administered by a lawyer close to Eduardo, according to investigators. The PF describes Flávio as Vorcaro’s direct interlocutor and Eduardo as manager of the funds raised in the United States; it investigates money laundering, currency evasion, corruption and criminal organization. An audio in which Flávio demands the payments and calls Vorcaro “brother” was sent the day before Vorcaro’s arrest in November 2025. Intercept also reported the production was filmed in Brazil without meeting any Ancine registration or labor requirements.

What the defense says

Flávio denied being close to Vorcaro, said “there is nothing wrong in relation to the film,” and asked for the inquiry to be made fully public, saying publication would only confirm what he has always said. Eduardo first denied any management role, then admitted signing the executive-producer contract, said he invested about US$50,000 of his own money (later returned) and denied receiving funds from Vorcaro. The production company denied receiving money from the banker.

Sources

Last verified: Oct. 28, 2026

08
Flávio Bolsonaro · Banco Master / Vorcaro

Legislative action and the Banco Master scandal

Status: Under investigation — described by the Prosecutor General’s Office as very preliminary. No charges filed and no conviction as of this verification.

What the record shows

In November 2025 Brazil’s Central Bank liquidated Banco Master and the Federal Police arrested its controller, Daniel Vorcaro, in Operation Compliance Zero, in an inquiry into the sale of credit portfolios and securities investigators say had no backing. Unsealed PGR documents show prosecutors asked for an inventory of every legislative proposal presented or endorsed by Flávio Bolsonaro and deputy Mário Frias that could interest Banco Master or Vorcaro, to examine whether their parliamentary activity could be linked, as cause and effect, to the film deal; the PGR highlighted the financing’s high volume with no expectation of a comparable financial return. (The same scandal also involves figures on other sides of politics, including reports about Justice Alexandre de Moraes; that part does not concern the Bolsonaro record.)

What the defense says

Flávio said he has “nothing to hide,” called for total transparency of the investigation, and urged the STF to make the material fully public before the October election.

Sources

Last verified: Oct. 28, 2026

Dark Horse / Vorcaro

Where did the money go?

The reporting identifies a financing negotiation, bank transfers and a named fund in Texas. It does not establish the final use of every dollar. The stages below are not separate amounts to add together.

Reported amounts · US dollars
Negotiated financingUS$24 million
Reported transfersAt least US$10.6 million
Named reported recipientUS$2 million

Same scale, starting at zero. Negotiated financing is not money received. Transfers are a reported minimum; the US$2 million is a portion of those transfers, not an additional amount. These bars do not measure unspent or missing money.

  1. 01 / Negotiated financing

    US$24 million

    Vorcaro → proposed film financing

    Reported negotiation

    CNN reports that messages describe a US$24 million financing negotiation between Flávio Bolsonaro and Daniel Vorcaro for Dark Horse. A negotiated amount is not an amount received or spent.

    CNN Brasil
  2. 02 / Reported transfers

    At least US$10.6 million

    Six bank transfers · February–May 2025

    Documents cited by CNN

    CNN reports that documents show at least US$10.6 million paid in six transfers for the project. The article does not provide a complete recipient-by-recipient ledger or an audited account of subsequent spending.

    CNN Brasil
  3. 03 / Named reported recipient

    US$2 million

    Havengate Development Fund LP · Texas

    Reported part of the transfers

    CNN reports that US$2 million of the money sent by Vorcaro was reportedly transferred to this Texas fund. Paulo Calixto, a lawyer for Eduardo Bolsonaro, is identified as one of its legal representatives. This is a reported portion of the money, not another US$2 million to add to the total, and not proof of a personal payment to Eduardo.

    CNN Brasil

Final destination: not fully established

A transfer to a fund is not proof of spending on the film, personal expenses or a crime. The cited reporting does not trace every onward payment, identify every final beneficiary or establish how much was ultimately spent on production.

~US$13 million

Realized budget · producer’s account

Not an independent spending audit

This claimed budget is not added to the transfers above. It does not match each payment to an invoice.

↗ G1 / TV Globo
Intermediaries and the production company
CNN reported GOUP’s denial of direct funding from Banco Master or Vorcaro-linked companies, followed by Mário Frias’s acknowledgment of a payment through Entre Investimentos e Participações. In a May 19 interview with TV Globo, GOUP owner Karina Ferreira da Gama said all funds received by GOUP came from the U.S. fund administered by Paulo Calixto. G1 reports that investigators identified Entre, linked to Vorcaro, as the source of the film’s funds. These are reported links, not a complete account-by-account reconstruction.
Spending claimed: about US$13 million
In that interview, Karina said the film’s realized budget was about US$13 million and that Vorcaro supplied more than 90% of the money that made it possible. She described production payroll and professional costs and said the film still needed post-production funding. This is the producer’s account, not an independent audit or proof matching each bank transfer to invoices; the US$13 million must not be added to the transfer figures above.
Eduardo’s U.S. expenses: a suspicion, not a finding
CNN describes a suspicion that part of the funds may have covered Eduardo Bolsonaro’s expenses in the United States. It reports that Federal Police opened a line of investigation into whether the money funded the film or whether the production concealed transfers. This does not establish that Eduardo received or spent the money.
What the defense says
Flávio said the money he requested was “100% invested in the film” and that Vorcaro’s investment anticipated a commercial return. He denied that Eduardo managed the funds or received money from the private fund used to finance the production.

Source: CNN Brasil — the Flávio–Vorcaro case in 6 points (Portuguese)

Production account: G1 / TV Globo — production owner’s account (May 19, 2026; Portuguese)

Source consulted: Oct. 29, 2026. This trail summarizes reporting; no bank statements or complete spending audit were independently examined for this section.

Status

Where things stand.

  • Jair Bolsonaro is serving his sentence under house arrest in Brazil.
  • Eduardo Bolsonaro lives in the United States. His conviction became final on Oct. 3, 2026, and an arrest warrant was ordered in Brazil.
  • The United States and Brazil have a bilateral extradition treaty. Any extradition decision belongs to courts and governments under that treaty.

Take action · 60 seconds

Help this reach Trump.

The more people share the record, the harder it is to ignore. Post it, tag the official accounts, and send it through the public channels below. Be respectful — facts persuade, insults don't.

1. Post and tag

Post on XPost on Truth SocialSend on WhatsAppShare on FacebookShare on Reddit

2. Copy a message

Short post

@realDonaldTrump @WhiteHouse Before hosting the Bolsonaros, read the court rulings, police reports and public records — with sources: https://sendtotrump.lovable.app

Reply / comment

Mr. President, this is not persecution — it is due process. Brazil's courts convicted Jair Bolsonaro, Eduardo's conviction is final, and Flávio is under investigation in the Banco Master case. Every claim here links to a checkable source: https://sendtotrump.lovable.app

Letter · Subject: Please review the documented record on the Bolsonaro family

Dear President Trump, I respectfully ask you and your staff to review the documented court and police records on the Bolsonaro family before offering them support in the United States. Jair Bolsonaro was convicted by Brazil's Supreme Court, Eduardo Bolsonaro's conviction is final, and Flávio Bolsonaro is under investigation. The United States and Brazil have an extradition treaty, and these decisions belong to the courts. The full record, with sources, is here: https://sendtotrump.lovable.app Thank you for your time.

3. Send it to official channels

Send one message per channel. Repeated or abusive messages can be filtered as spam and hurt the cause.

What this page is — and is not

This page summarizes public decisions and investigations. It does not settle every legal debate, does not replace reading the underlying documents, and does not claim that every allegation ends in a conviction. Where a case was archived, annulled or remains pending, that status is stated. Share the sources; do not share slogans.

How this page was made

We list only (1) decisions or notices from Brazilian courts and prosecutors (STF, TSE, PGR/MPF, state prosecutors where relevant), (2) Federal Police conclusions reported by those institutions or by major newsrooms citing the report, and (3) named investigative reporting backed by registry documents or official tallies.

Each card states the procedural status (convicted, indicted, charged then annulled, press finding, archived). We include outcomes that favor the defense when that is the public record (archivings, annulled evidence, rejected charges).

We do not use Wikipedia or search-result pages as sources. International links are specific articles, not outlet homepages.

Election numbers are attributed to TSE publications and named outlets; late-vote counts and the “remove every late vote” scenario test a mathematical claim only — the ballot is secret.

Last full source check: October 28, 2026 (America/Sao_Paulo).